Outing Himself: Jefferson Morley on Jim Fetzer and Sandy Hook

Jim Fetzer

From time to time, Deep State operatives simply cannot resist speaking out in ways that reveal who they are and what they are really about. The case of Jefferson Morley, who recently posted about my Sandy Hook lawsuit on a blog he calls JFKFACTS, is a case in point. Facts, of course, differ from opinions insofar as opinions can be true or false and held on flimsy or non-existent evidence, while facts are understood to be assertions that are both true and verified. Hence, the familiar saying, we are all entitled to our own opinions but are not entitled to our own facts.

Morely regards himself an investigative journalist, who digs beneath the surface of stories to ferret out the facts, for which he has received intermittent praise. I have been less of a fan of Morley, based upon my own research about some of his RFK reporting published in an article, “RFK: Outing the CIA at the Ambassador” (30 September 2015), where I laid out the case–one fact after another–that he and his colleague David Talbot had committed an elementary fallacy in attempting to debunk the identification of three CIA officials at the Ambassador Hotel the evening Bobby was shot.

The fallacy, special pleading, occurs when you cite only evidence favorable to your side and ignore the rest. (It has sometimes been called selection and elimination: select the evidence that supports your side and eliminate the rest!) It violates the fundamental precept of scientific reasoning specifically and of critical thinking generally, specifically, that conclusions must be based upon all of the available relevant evidence. Special pleading is widely embraced by politicians, editorial writers and used-car salesmen. It is not the common practice among investigative journalists.

Here is the totality of what Jefferson Morley has published on his blog about the $450,000 in damages awarded by a Madison jury during the trial that followed Circuit Court Judge Frank Remington’s Summary Judgment ruling that I and my colleague, Mike Palecek, were liable for having defamed Leonard Pozner, who has become the face of Sandy Hook for his extraordinary efforts to take down reports from citizen journalists about Sandy Hook, including (by his own account) 1,555 YouTube videos and “tens of thousands of content items” from the Internet:

Now you might think that Jefferson Morley and I have actually met, but that is not the case. He is complaining about my research concerning him and David Talbot, which I have linked above. The only citation he provides is to a story in The New York Times (16 October 2019), “Sandy Hook father Is Awarded $450,000 in Defamation Case”, where The Times (which I cite as “The Langley Newsletter”) has been exposed as a disinformation venue for the CIA. Investigative journalists, presumably, dig into stories like this to expose the facts. But not Jefferson Morley.

According to its author, Emily S. Bueb, Jim Fetzer and Mike Palecek authored a book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, claiming that Leonard Pozner faked the death certificate of his son, Noah:

On Tuesday, a jury in Dane County determined the amount that Leonard Pozner, whose son, Noah, was the youngest of the 26 victims killed in the massacre, should be awarded after a judge ruled that the book’s authors, James Fetzer and Mike Palecek, had defamed Mr. Pozner. In their book, Mr. Fetzer and Mr. Palecek claim that Mr. Pozner faked his son’s death certificate as part of a hoax staged by the government to take guns away from Americans.

These claims have been widely published, so if frequency of repetition is a measure of truth, they must be true. Emily, alas, is no more of an investigative journalist than Jefferson Morley, because the book is not authored but edited and neither Mike nor I claimed that Leonard Pozner faked the death certificate for Noah but only that the death certificate is a fabrication. We did not claim that he faked it, but we do both endorse that it was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control, for which we present extensive and detailed evidence. She got that part right.

One might have thought that an investigative journalist would at least review the most basic documents in the case, such as the Complaint, the transcript of the Oral Hearing at which the Summary Judgement was rendered in favor of the Plaintiff (in spite of the authenticity of the death certificate being in dispute), and other basic evidence, but not Jefferson Morley. Clearly, his mind was made up and he did not want to be bothered with facts. If someone qualifies as “unhinged” when they show utter disregard for evidence, then that would be Jefferson Morley, not me.

One of the most effective ways to assess the credibility of unknown sources, even those who pose as “investigative journalists”, is to find out what they have had to say about subjects about which you yourself know the score. For him to have come after me about Sandy Hook was a blunder, because he doesn’t know anything at all about the case, yet he doubles down. Notice that Morley responds to a question about what really happened with the claim, “I looked into Sandy Hook. There is zero evidence to support Fetzer’s libelous and vile claims”. But that’s simply absurd.

The book actually has 13 contributors, including 6 Ph.D. professors, where we established that the school had been closed by 2008, that there were no students there and that it had been a FEMA drill–strictly speaking, a mass casualty exercise involving children–presented as mass murder to promote gun control. We even have the manual, which I included as Appendix A. It was a two-day event, with a rehearsal on the 13th, going live on the 14th (of December 2012). Events on the ground confirmed the elements of a FEMA drill, one after another, following FEMA protocols.

Indeed, another of our contributors, Paul Person, who, as a school administrator himself, has supervised drills of this kind, reached out to his contacts in the Obama Department of Eduction, all of whom confirmed that it had been a drill, that no children had been harmed and that it had been done to promote gun control. Even the FBI (in its Consolidated Crime Report for 2012) stated that the number of murders in Newtown that year–where Sandy Hook is a subdivision–was zero. Jefferson Morley knows none of these things because he never bothered to read the book.

If we take a poseur to be someone who feigns to be someone they are not, then Jefferson Morley qualifies as a Sandy Hook poseur. I am reminded in this context of Alex Jones, who knows a great deal about Sandy Hook but has been on all sides of the issues, claiming (at one point) that it was a fake and nobody died but (at another) that it was real and kids died. I was floored when, during his video deposition in the case filed against him in Connecticut, he said he had never read the book, which demonstrates, as in the case of Morley, that he was never serious about Sandy Hook.

Having been backed into a corner for having made indefensible claims, Jefferson Morley, the investigative journalist, even resorts to supporting violations of the First Amendment, which one would have thought to be sacred, not just to investigative journalists specifically, but to journalists generally and, indeed, to the American people. Without freedom of speech and freedom of the press, we the people are severely constrained in discovering the truth, even about matters of enormous significance, which is why independent journalists are so important today.

His allegations against me were insubstantial and unwarranted from the beginning. Notice that he does not cite anything I have written or published but only a provably false report from a mainstream media source, widely acknowledged to be a conduit for disinformation on behalf the CIA. As I have observed on multiple occasions, it has become the common practice among agents of the Deep State for one to cite another as though they were independent sources. It looks to me as though this is an example thereof, where neither source turns out to be credible.

While I welcome critics and thrive on criticism–we cannot learn from those who agree with us!–I ask for specificity: What have I claimed and why have I claimed it (with regard to issues about which I may be mistaken) and how do you know you are right and I am wrong? After all, it would be rather surprising for someone who has received many awards, honors and other forms for recognition for his research and scholarship should suddenly abandon the standards for which he has been recognized and embrace shoddy research. And, indeed, subsequent research has confirmed our original findings.

Indeed, since my first foray into the treacherous territory of sorting out politically controversial events to ascertain what really happened (which entails separating authentic from fabricated evidence), I have specialized in bringing together the best experts on different aspects of each case in order to create a repository–an historical record–for the benefit of the American public, which is entitled to know its own history. Perhaps the most stunning proof that we have been right–again and again–is that amazon.com has now banned six books that I have edited for moonrockbooks.com. Jefferson Morley has discredited himself.


PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS, Who Remembers The Sandy Hook School Shootings?

CARL HERMAN, The Sandy Hook “Show Trial”: Judge Violates Right For Jury to Determine Disputed Facts

KEVIN BARRETT, The Legal Lynching of a Truth Seeker”: Jim Fetzer’s Stalinist-Style Show Trial


MICHAEL RIVERO, What Really Happened: Jim Fetzer interviewed on the Sandy Hook Trial


KURT NIMMO, Sandy Hook and The Murder of the First Amendment

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus on the Duluth Campus of the University of Minnesota and co-founder of moonrockbooks.com.



Please follow and like us:

28 thoughts on “Outing Himself: Jefferson Morley on Jim Fetzer and Sandy Hook”

  1. I don’t know where to put this, so I’ll place it with the top article as I believe it’s important enough and maybe there are sympathizers. I’m one of those weird folks who have neither a cell phone or a TV….and any time I mention that, I get some really off the wall looks….Anyhow, here’s a great article from PCR…he finally gave in and got a cell…I NEVER will….stubborn ol’ cuss that I be.


  2. Thank you Dachsie for catching my spelling error. I greatly appreciate it. I never caught it when I proof read it. You are correct Dachsie. I mean’t Newtown. Sorry to everyone for my mistake!

  3. IMHO, Jim is absolutely correct, it WAS a blunder for him to come after you.
    And my further opinion is that the guy is a fake… and like others… both belong to trillion dollar budgets to control the narrative.

    As much as Jim Fetzer is passionate about the truth, I have never seen or heard him unhinged.
    He is a great Family Father, a wonderful Father Bear, a great friend and a wonderful human being!

  4. One thing that I don’t think has been brought up about the FBI report. If you look at a map of Connecticut and Newtown , neither the Lanza home nor the school were in the Newtown city limits. Both addresses were in Sandy Hook Village, so in the FBI chart that lists all the towns/cities in CT, Sandy Hook Village is not going to be listed.

    1. No. Sandy Hook is a subdivision of Newtown. You are simply mistaken. Very odd. The FBI has reports for every city in every state. If Sandy Hook were not a part of Newtown, there would have to be a separate entry for Sandy Hook. But there isn’t one because it’s not. I don’t get your making this post.

      1. Sandy Hook is not a subdivision of Newtown, it’s a Village outside the Newtown city limits. the local Newtown cops would not have jurisdiction there, that’s why the state police came in and took control. It was in their jurisdiction. So when it’s time to do the crime reports, first the state does theirs. The murders are in the state totals in the CT 2012 crime report, the FBI uses that data to make its report. Since the state police had jurisdiction, the Newtown cops did not report the 27 murders, the state police did.


      2. Yes they would, but they would be part of the state totals, not in the table that only shows each city/town in CT.

        In Table 5 of the FBI it shows each state and the crime numbers. In CT it shows 108 murders in “Metropolitan Statistical Area”. That 108 would be the total that is in Table 8, the murders reported by the local cops.

        The total murders in CT in 2012 was 146, that means there were 38 murders not reported by local cops, but reported by other police dept’s such as the state police.


      3. Nice illustration of how defenders of the “official narrative” work to debunk each proof and contradict massive evidence demonstrating it was a FEMA “mass casualty exercise involving children”. I can’t wait to hear what JJ has to say about that. All too familiar.

      4. What other explanation do you have for the difference in the murder numbers? The Table 8 you have in your blog only lists the murders reported by the local each city/town, it does not list any murder reported by the state police or any county cops.

      5. JJ, tell us about yourself. What do you do? What is your take on Sandy Hook? 20 kids and 6 adults died? Thanks.

      6. I ‘m 62 and retired.

        Based on the evidence I have seen, I think they were killed by Lanza. there is a difference between internet evidence and evidence that could be used in court to prove something. In earlier comments the Super Bowl kids were brought up, that would be internet evidence. You could not go into court and just say you think those kids at the Super Bowl look like the Sandy Hook victims, you’d have to prove it.

        Why do you think there is a 38 murder difference between Tables 5 & 8 in the FBI report?

      7. I’ll save you the time. I never have worked for any Government agency, nor am I connected in any way to a Sandy Hook parent.

        How do you explain the 38 murder difference in the murders listed in Table 8 of the FBI report and the total murders in the Table 5 of the report?

      8. And if you did, I would not expect you to admit it. I don’t try to explain it. Or, to be more precise, there are many ways to obfuscate and cover up. But it says no murders in Newtown in 2012, which appears to be exactly right. Thanks for showing up, but there are fanciful stories for everything about Sandy Hook, which is far beyond debate, given everything we know. Check out the book. Watch the videos. You have given a couple of bad arguments. Now you are being evasive about your background and identity. We don’t have time to feed the trolls, but we appreciate you stopping by.

      9. Among the various jurisdictions in the Town of Newtown CT, it also includes a borough. The highlighted geography in the map shown above, depicts this borough. It is not classified as a City. The Town of Newton has no City. The jurisdiction of the Town of Newton Police Dept covers the Town of Newton.

      10. “The Town of Newton has no City. The jurisdiction of the Town of Newton Police Dept covers the Town of Newton.”

        Be careful to not use “Newton” when you mean “Newtown.”

      11. Sandy Hook, Connecticut
        From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
        Jump to navigation
        Jump to search
        Sandy Hook, Connecticut
        Sandy Hook post office and dam, from a postcard sent in 1914
        Sandy Hook post office and dam, from a postcard sent in 1914
        Country United States
        U.S. state Connecticut
        County Fairfield
        Metropolitan area Bridgeport-Stamford
        Town Newtown
        Time zone UTC−5 (EST)
        • Summer (DST) UTC−4 (EDT)
        ZIP code
        Area code(s) 203/475

        Sandy Hook is a village in the town of Newtown, Connecticut. Sandy Hook was founded in 1711.



        Dr. Fetzer is correct but JJSmith is sincere but just not completely informed.

        Sandy Hook VILLAGE is an unincorporated area within the incorporated town of Newtown.

  5. Jim has not been allowed to give his evidence to his satisfaction. I am not sure what Jim can do. If the legal system is not going to listen to you, it is very difficult.

  6. I must agree with Dr. Fetzer, that both Morley and those he cited are inaccurate. The very first thing Morley says or quotes is that the focus of the lawsuit was about the book “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook…” This leads one to think that the event of Sandy Hook was on trial and that the judge and jury proved Sandy Hook happened just as it was reported in 2012. Nothing could be further from the truth. The lawsuit focused on four sentences all very much alike, three were written in one chapter of the book and one in a blog. The mass media cartel and their minions continue to act as if this lawsuit proved the narrative they have been asserting upon the people since 2012. The Plaintiff even has the audacity to claim that Dr. Fetzer was using this lawsuit as a platform to further claim that Sandy Hook did not happen, yet it was not Dr. Fetzer that plastered this stuff all over America and beyond. It was Pozner and his attorneys and the MMC that have used this lawsuit to prove that their narrative is real.
    But this does not work for someone that has looked into the facts of Sandy Hook. No one can show me, an architect, why the school was in horrible condition and why the school parking lot, which was in bad shape, but very recently re-striped had no ADA required accessible parking. This is against the law! Why should I believe a shooting at Sandy Hook excuses a school for not having Handicapped parking? Is the state of Connecticut not in the United States or what?
    And just because somebody reports that 20 children were killed and 6 adults at Sandy Hook why do we not see pictures or the 600 plus other students being evacuated. And why do we see only 20 or so kids being evacuated. If we can see 20 we should be able to see 600. The police dash cams at the time of the evacuation do not show any kids being evacuated. What is all this?
    There are many people who had rather call the watchmen on the tower a jerk, creep, liar, obnoxious, libelous, odious, etc., rather than face the truth and stand for the truth and help us all get out from under tyranny.
    The question we should all be asking is this: “Why did Mr. Pozner sue Dr. Fetzer over an incomplete death certificate?” This Summary Judgment will be overturned if law exists in Wisconsin because an incomplete death certificate is a fake death certificate and cannot be used to probate a will or prove the death of someone. Now even if this copy for which Dr. Fetzer was sued was in the process of becoming a completed death certificate, it was not complete at the time Dr. Fetzer said it was fake. Dr. Fetzer was correct and truth is an absolute defense to libel.
    A most revealing fact is that this lawsuit can do nothing to prove the narrative of Sandy Hook but it is being used to do so by many false narrative zealots. So the lies just keep coming. But a nation cannot survive on a steady diet of lies. At some point it all comes to a sudden collapse to the severe detriment of those that served the slop for decades thinking they could get away with it forever.

  7. Internet published photos of the Superbowl kids-choir reveal some very startling evidence. Since the SH perps used old photos of the kids that were allegedly killed, the kids in that choir are the SAME ones in those old photos….only they are 4 or five years older of course. The SH choir at the Superbowl ARE the ”dead” kids. Can it get any more sick?

  8. It’s been my experience that when a blogger uses personal attacks, 99 times out of 100 that person is a shill or some kind of agent. Those involved in serious debate and or discussion have absolutely no reason to use that ‘strategy’. It serves no purpose and solves nothing.

  9. I was thinking back to the Sandy Hook survivor kids playing at the Super Bowl. Who the hell wants to be reminded of a tragedy during the game? It’s the premier bread and circus event of the year. Why the need to include the kids singing? It tells me the Powers That Be simply could not pass up the opportunity to cement the event deep in our souls. I tried to research the timeline of planning Super Bowls and surprised to see almost no useful links on the first page. I did find the guy that was/is the master controller. In the article they mentioned he plans the next three super bowls simultaneously and that the next 4 or 5 sites are chosen in advance. The planning and logistics involved are staggering. Changing anything in the program just a month or two in advance would be the ultimate monkey wrench jammed into the gears of a fine oiled machine.

    I would love to know how many days after the Sandy Hook “event” it was decided by all 32 owners to include the kids choir singing? Was it two weeks later? Three weeks? Or were there already plans to have a kids choir singing a long time before the event? What part of the program was removed to allow the kids appearance? How much time did these kids have to rehearse? They performed extremely well considering they just experienced the most traumatizing event of their young lives.

    These are questions very few Americans are willing to ponder

    1. I dug up the Sandy Hook super bowl appearance. One thing I failed to notice is that there were 26 kids in the choir, one for each alleged victim, no doubt. I was also interested to see how much time they performed. In this clip it consumed 3:22 … at the 3:23 mark, it switches to the military cover guard performance. Nothing to see here! The actual time spent singing was a little under 3:22 since there was a short camera pan to the kids before they started.


      From the day of the event to the choir appearance there was just 51 days to decide to change the Super Bowl, contact 26 parents, get their permission, rehearse and arrange for at least a 100 extra people to travel. It’s possible for sure, but how likely would it be to have any of this finished before New Years Day 18 days after the event? Not much serious business in conducted over the Holidays. That would leave 34 days tops to get the kids singing at the Super Bowl. Let’s just say this event happened for real. Do you picture 26 families being ready to even talk about this with dirt still fresh on the graves?

    2. The “Sandy Hook” children singing at the Super Bowl was planned by our social engineers.

      The idea is to have the tens of thousands of the large viewing audience at this major American sporting event associate in their minds the good-hearted, football-loving, patriotic Americans’ steadfast “never forgetting” and honoring of our dear American school children who survived this most horrendous school massacre with the “God Love and Apple Pie” strength and courage of the true American spirit.

      America’s finest Skinnerian operant conditioning. God help anyone not going along with that happy Super Bowl presentation.

      Wolfgang Halbig was asking very good questions of the Sandy Hook School Board five years ago about this event but none of the officials seemed to know anything about it. The standard procedures for consent of such a big field trip were never on the meeting agendas and no records could be obtained via FOIA requests.


    3. Wheeling out these kids was a big imposition, a big thing, being thrust upon people. Sensitive people would sense that their reaction had to be the “right reaction.” Even totally unclued in average American would know that something was being pushed on them without their permission. They thought they would be coming to an entertaining big football even with all the usual halftime type performances and then right in the middle of that, their emotions were played upon and they all knew they could not speak out and say, what the heck is this ? That is how freedom of expression begins. It is dropped on people when they cannot get away or cannot speak out. Their personal character is being tested and they cannot say what they are thinking to their friends with them. They must try to follow the subtle rules of this game.

  10. There is zero evidence that Morley has ever ”looked into” anything concerning Sandy Hook. The only libelous and vile items are the remarks made by Morley. His ad hominem name-calling concerning Prof. Fetzer render all of his words valueless.

  11. ” Notice that Morley responds to a question about what really happened with the claim, “I looked into Sandy Hook. There is zero evidence to support Fetzer’s libelous and vile claims”. ”

    An “investigative journalist” would have made his statement as…

    “I looked into Sandy Hook. There is zero evidence to support Fetzer’s claims”.

    His original statement that he had “looked into Sandy Hook” and that “there is” “zero evidence”
    are enough fabrications for one sentence without inappropriately packing in two bias-laden adjectives.

    Objectivity is apparently not Mr. Morley’s strong suit.


Leave a Reply