Ask Dr. Drew - Tom Renz: COVID Coverup Lawsuit & Pandemic Origin Research Update w/ Dr. Kelly Victory – Ask Dr. Drew – Episode 253

Episode Date: August 26, 2023

Attorney Tom Renz returns with Dr. Kelly Victory to discuss his billion-dollar pandemic cover-up lawsuit and evidence that he’s uncovered after 3 years of research into the origin of COVID-19. “How many would have been saved if what was known about SARS-COV2 was truly and accurately reported from the beginning?” says Renz. Thomas Renz is an attorney from Ohio. Find out more at https://renz-law.com and follow him at https://twitter.com/RenzTom 「 SPONSORED BY 」 Find out more about the companies that make this show possible and get special discounts on amazing products at https://drdrew.com/sponsors • COZY EARTH - Say goodbye to hot, restless nights with soft, temperature-regulating bedding from Cozy Earth. Susan and Drew love Cozy Earth's sheets made with super-soft viscose from bamboo! Use code DREW at checkout to save 40% at https://drdrew.com/cozy • GENUCEL - Using a proprietary base formulated by a pharmacist, Genucel has created skincare that can dramatically improve the appearance of facial redness and under-eye puffiness. Genucel uses clinical levels of botanical extracts in their cruelty-free, natural, made-in-the-USA line of products. Get an extra discount with promo code DREW at https://genucel.com/drew • PRIMAL LIFE - Dr. Drew recommends Primal Life's 100% natural dental products to improve your mouth. Get a sparkling smile by using natural teeth whitener without harsh chemicals. For a limited time, get 60% off at https://drdrew.com/primal • PALEOVALLEY - "Paleovalley has a wide variety of extraordinary products that are both healthful and delicious,” says Dr. Drew. "I am a huge fan of this brand and know you'll love it too!” Get 15% off your first order at https://drdrew.com/paleovalley • THE WELLNESS COMPANY - Counteract harmful spike proteins with TWC's Signature Series Spike Support Formula containing nattokinase and selenium. Learn more about TWC's supplements at https://twc.health/drew 「 MEDICAL NOTE 」 The CDC states that COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and reduce your risk of severe illness. You should always consult your personal physician before making any decisions about your health.  「 ABOUT the SHOW 」 Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Kaleb Nation (https://kalebnation.com) and Susan Pinsky (https://twitter.com/firstladyoflove). This show is for entertainment and/or informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. 「 WITH DR. KELLY VICTORY 」 Dr. Kelly Victory MD is a board-certified trauma and emergency specialist with over 30 years of clinical experience. She served as CMO for Whole Health Management, delivering on-site healthcare services for Fortune 500 companies. She holds a BS from Duke University and her MD from the University of North Carolina. Follow her at https://earlycovidcare.org and https://twitter.com/DrKellyVictory. 「 ABOUT DR. DREW 」 For over 30 years, Dr. Drew has answered questions and offered guidance to millions through popular shows like Celebrity Rehab (VH1), Dr. Drew On Call (HLN), Teen Mom OG (MTV), and the iconic radio show Loveline. Now, Dr. Drew is opening his phone lines to the world by streaming LIVE from his home studio. Watch all of Dr. Drew's latest shows at https://drdrew.tv Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome for a special Monday episode. This is the show we promised you from last week. Tom Renz very kindly agreed to adjust his schedule. We had a major outage last week that we are now going to present the show that we were anxious to present to you last week. We've been very excited at Tom Renz's return. Tom has a very large lawsuit regarding pandemic cover-up. He has uncovered evidence after three years of research into the origins of COVID-19,

and he's going to present that all to us today. He's going to show us a timeline. He's going to present to us as though we are a judge sitting up on the dais waiting in judgment of the case. He's going to show us his evidence. Of course, he's an attorney. You can follow him at Renz-Law.com. Also on Twitter, Tom Renz, R-E-N-Z. And his sub stack, of course, is Tom Renz as well. Twitter is Tom Renz. And we will see you with bizarre. The psychopath started this. He was an alcoholic because of social media and pornography, PTSD, love addiction,

fentanyl and heroin, ridiculous. I'm a doctor for. Say, where the hell do you think I learned that? I'm just saying, you go to treatment before you kill people. I am a clinician. I observe things about these chemicals. Let's just deal with what's real. We used to get these calls on Loveline all the time.

Educate adolescents and to prevent and to treat. If you have trouble, you can't stop, and you want to help stop it, I can help. I got a lot to say. I got a lot more to say. There are three steps to great looking, glowing complexion in the summer. Of course, apply sunscreen, stay hydrated, and use the amazing skincare products from our friends at GenuCell. Most retinol creams are not recommended for sunlight, but GenuCell's Ultra Retinol uses a powerful plant extract retinol. It's an alternative called Bacuchiol, which helps the skin stay hydrated,

smooths out fine lines without harsh side effects, and it is safe to use outside under your sunscreen. GenuCell works so well, you can see the results in this unplanned live moment on our show when the Redness Repair Cream repaired my skin in just minutes right before your eyes. And Susan and I love GenuCell so much, we created our affordable bundles at up to 72% off of our favorite products at GenuCell.com slash Drew. And just for the summer, every subscription includes a customized summer spa gift box, absolutely free. I know I'm a snob about the products I use on my face. Everybody knows it. Every time I go to the dermatologist's office, they're just rows and

rows of different creams. And then when I get to the counter, they're overpriced. All kinds of products that you can all find at GenuCell.com. See what's in our bundles. Get ready to show off your summertime skin. Go to GenuCell.com slash Drew. That's G-E-N-U-C-E-L.com slash D-R-E-W GenuCell.com slash Drew. And remember to use the code Drew at checkout for extra savings. Temperatures are soaring across the country, but do not lose sleep over the record-breaking heat say goodbye to hot restless nights with soft breathable temperature regulating bedding from cozy earth susan and i love them we were so excited to tell you about them in fact we have them on our bed right now and the cozy earth sheets made such a difference we got back from our trip and but like

delighted to have these sheets they're made from super soft viscous from bamboo that helps regulate temperatures and keeps us comfortable all night long plus a durable machine washable come with a 10-year warranty against defects it's no surprise that cozy earth's brands has been featured on oprah's favorite things for five years in a row. They are now one of my favorite things too. I want you to try these out for yourself. I am excited about a special deal that Cozy Earth is offering on our show today. My audience can save 40% on Cozy Earth bedding today. Just go to CozyEarth.com, enter our promo code Drew at checkout, and you will save 40% right now. Try them for 100 nights. If you don't sleep cooler and love them, send it back for a full refund.

That is C O Z Y E A R T H.com promo code D R E W. All right. As I said, I think I misspoke on Tom Renz Twitter. It's Renz Tom, R-E-N-Z Tom. His website, though, is Renz-law.com. TomRenz.com also. He also has a sub-sack of Tom Renz. And I also neglected to remind everyone that Ed Dowd, a very popular guest in the show, is going to stop by at the end of the show and, amongst other things, give us a report from Hawaii, where he lives. And he is a numbers guy.

He's a financial analyst and he likes looking at numbers. And it'd be interesting to get a real report from on, on the ground there. And I'm also hoping he listens to Tom Renz, some of Tom Renz argument here tomorrow, Jimmy Falla, who is Susan's latest preoccupation, as well as Mackie from the Greg Gutfeld show.

We have a V. Bank Manakee. I like Shuley too. She is the Danish researcher that pointed out that 5% of the batches of vaccine was responsible for over 90% of the adverse reactions. Chris Ruffo on Thursday, and then we'll give you Mark Changese coming in the following week. All right, let's get right now to Tom Renz so we can present his material to us. Tom, welcome back. Thanks for having me, Doc. I appreciate it very much.

So we are judge and jury and we're going to turn the case over to you. Yeah, and so for everybody listening, let me tell you what we did here. So I was talking to Kelly and we said, hey, Kelly, you know, you and I have talked about this a few times. Maybe we should present some of the evidence that we've had. Present it kind of as though we're talking to a judge or to a jury and let the audience decide whether or not what we have to say is accurate. So Dr. Drew, being the kind guy that he was,

and Kelly being the wonderful lady she is, decided to let me come back and to do this. And so with that said, let me share with you, and I actually just like if I were going in front of a judge, I've got notes. You know, I've got the whole thing here. And so I want to share with you first. I will try not to be like a judge and

interrupt you too much. You can interrupt as much as you want. You're the boss, sir. All right. So possible. Well, second charge to Susan. But anyways, so what we want to do here is a lot of people, I know particularly Dr. Drew and your audience, you know, no one in the planet is going to call you a right-wing conspiracy theorist. You've been very even about things. You've been very much someone who's looked at the science. And so a lot of your audience may or may not have seen some of the things that I have. And the reason for that is because early on, that's all I was called, was a right-wing conspiracy theorist.

But what I would like to do is I'd like to share with you some of what we have. Now, mind you, this is a small portion. We don't have the weeks and weeks to do a full trial. And the amount of data I have is monumental, but I thought these were some key pieces that we've picked from the beginning that were crucial in understanding what's happened with COVID. And I thought that if we could share these with people, especially as we see Joe Biden reportedly looking at lockdowns again and looking at bringing masks back and these other things, I thought this was really relevant because this is a political question. And the idea that we can't question this because trust the science, well, that's pretty self-serving when the science is being lied about. And that's what's occurred here. So let me make the case that you've been lied to.

And when we're done, I'd ask two things. I'd ask you, first of all, did anything that I showed you appear to be a liar and accurate? And second of all, if what I showed you is accurate, that means the other side's lying. And so when you trust a liar, should we trust them now? Should we trust them in these other things? Or should we start asking more questions? And I'm not asking for to be mad or to, you know, beat their chest. I'm asking for people to start asking questions because that's what I think the appropriate response is. Well, it's interesting, Tom. I was just thinking about this material, this kind of phenomenon this weekend

when I was watching meteorologists after meteorologists fear-mongering and engaging in panic porn. And I thought, wow, the press has gotten to the point where they can't even report the weather they can't report anything without without going into panic mode or high degrees of emotion that is unwarranted i went on tiktok and i was watching again multiple meteorologists and i thought god these guys sound just like the virologist during the heat of the epidemic. It's like, yeah, there are things that can happen. Things could happen.

But think in terms of probabilities and risk-reward of what you're saying. There was the end of the world, Armageddon, blah, blah, blah. And finally, I found one meteorologist who went, look, we had this hurricane that came here in Los Angeles, so-called. And he said, look, you guys get Pacific storms every year. The last two weeks, this is going to be a nothing burger. This is just another, like your Pacific storm. There's going to be maybe some winds. Look out for that.

But the problem is going to be in the desert where they're going to get a year's worth of rain in a day and they're going to have floods. And so the desert needs to prepare for this, which they did. And things turned out fine. So just the point being that you you really everybody start being very skeptical about everything you hear in the press and i'm suspecting after we're done with tom from the government as well yeah well and i'm you know it's almost like you set me up but i don't think you've seen this yet. Well, let me start out with slide number one.

So slide number one, if Caleb can pull that up. So this is something that I just sent you guys. And I sent it the last minute. I had forgotten to send this early on. And what you're looking at is the NBSS. This was a letter that came out back dated March 24th, 2020. So March 24th. Now this letter says that they're introducing a new ICD code. An ICD code is a code that they use. Every disease on the planet gets a code. And the reason it gets a code is so that they can study

it, they can track it, they can, what it's doing, this disease caused this result. It's a way of keeping track of our statistics related to health. The world introduced two ICD codes for COVID. First was U071. And internationally, U071 meant that you had a confirmed COVID case. U072 meant you had a probable COVID case. Now, globally, that's a really important thing. And you have to remember when COVID first came out, if you recall, there weren't a whole lot of tests. They couldn't tell whether you had it or not. A lot of this was, well, you got these symptoms, but the symptoms were almost identical to the flu.

So it was very hard as a medical practitioner to distinguish. In fact, I actually have the pathology laid out that describes the criteria of the flu and compared it to COVID. And there was really, it was almost indistinguishable, save one symptom. And I don't recall what that was. But the thing is, is when we look at this, the United States didn't use a U07.2 code. We didn't do probable. If you look down, it says, what is the new code? And it says U07.1, right? And it says that, and right below it, it says who has provided a second code for clinical

or epidemiological diagnosis where laboratory confirmation is inconclusive or not available. We didn't do that, okay? We just used the 7-1, right? And if you scroll down- Are we going back now, Tom? Are we going back now and recoding some of these things? Isn't that sort of a new thing lately? That's why you keep hearing that numbers are different than we thought. Oh, not quite what we you know that kind of thing yeah so some places are some aren't but guess what the money for the u071 codes has already been paid out i'm pretty sure that's not coming back right um and more importantly the damage from everybody being declared a conclusive covid death was already done so and I'm going to get to that

in a second, but understand this. If you look under at the same document, you'll see under will COVID be the underlying cause of death, right? It says the underlying cause depends on what and where conditions are reported in the death certificate. So if you look at a death certificate, you'll see that there's a list of things that contribute to death. However, the rules for coding and selection of underlying cause are expected to result in COVID-19 being the underlying cause more often than not. They changed this specifically to ensure that if you were found to have COVID or to be with COVID at death, then you would be coded as a COVID

death. This had the effect of increasing the number of people that were called COVID deaths. And if you scroll down further, what you'll find is you'll find things like if the death certificate reports terms such as probable COVID-19 or likely COVID-19, these terms will be assigned to the new ICD code, which is the confirmed COVID code, right? So they did that. They also went so far as to say that essentially, if you think there's COVID involved and you don't include it on the death certificate, we're going to come and ask you why, but if you don't, we're not going to, right? This document is one of the most important documents in the whole COVID pandemic. And I want to remind you, March 24th, 2020,

right at the beginning of this, right? Now, the next thing we hear is COVID is the cause of death of everything. You guys may or may not remember, there were stories where, you know, I believe there's one story about a guy who died in a motorcycle wreck and they said it's a COVID death. The leader for the health department for the state of Illinois admitted, if you die with COVID, you're called a COVID death. So, yeah, does this make sense, right? Well, it doesn't. When we look at the next document that I'm providing you, you'll see, and that study, that document is a study from Dr. Ioannidis. Dr. Ioannidis is a

Stanford-educated epidemiologist. He's a professor, and he's's literally he and Harvey Risch are viewed as the top two epidemiologists on the planet dr. Ioannidis is the guy who when everybody you know sees him review something they're like okay I don't want to argue with him he doesn't make mistakes and if we could show that next one the next one shows that Dr. Ioannidis, and this was back on, let me double check the date, July 14th of 2020, found that the case fatality rate in this for COVID was not the huge numbers that they were suggesting to us, right? It wasn't even close. In fact, Dr. Ioannidis was widely panned at the time because he said, we've looked at this and the median case fatality rate is about 0.27, or infection fatality rate. Now, infection fatality rate means that if you get this, how many of you die?

And it was 0.27. Now, since then, he's certainly been proven to be likely correct, because we found that in most of the population, COVID creates almost zero risk of death. In fact, unless you're 75, 80 years old with a bunch of comorbidities, COVID's never been all that dangerous unless you went to the hospital, but I don't know if we're going to have time to get into that. So we see Ionatus comes up with this by July of 2020, but we're still at July of 2020. We're all going to die, masks, COVID's killing us, everything's a disaster. So we're all hearing

this, right? Now, the question is, why when you have a disease with a 0.27 case fatality rate, why in God's name would you change death certificates to try and boost the numbers and scare the hell out of everybody? Well, this goes to Dr. Drew, exactly what you were saying early on at the beginning of the show. So if we look at the next series of slides, okay, if we look at the, this is a presentation by Dr. Glenn Nowak, and this was done in 2003 before trade Association. And this was about the flu vaccine. And what I'm going to do is I'm going to do something a little bit tricky here. I'm going to read you this, but every time they say the word influenza, I'm going to change it to the word

COVID. And I want you to tell me whether any of this rings true for you or seems to make any sense. Now, this was given to a trade association. This guy worked as a communications for national immunization program. You see the CDC signed on at the bottom, DHHS. This was, how do you increase demand for the flu vaccine? That's what this was, right? So let's go to the next slide. And that should be the goal. And, you know, he says, recipe for success. And he wants to broaden understanding and thinking about flu vaccine communication and increasing coverage, right? So understand that this gentleman's job is not to talk about safety, not to talk about informed consent. It's to increase coverage, right? So he's starting

from the premise that the flu vaccine is a good thing. And I'm not trying to argue over the flu vaccine here. What I am trying to do is show you the tactics and ask you whether or not you think the tactics used or discussed in this all the way back in 2003 might have been used in COVID. All right, so if we go to the next slide, that should be the recipe, right? Okay, so I'm looking over at my slides and my notes as well, and this is the recipe that fosters higher interest in demand for the flu vaccine, which, yeah, so we're going to say for the COVID vaccine. So number one, COVID's arrival coincides with the immunization season. Well, they've been pushing that for the whole

thing, but you know, when it comes, it comes. Dominant strain and or initial cases of the disease are, and this is important, associated with severe illness or outcomes, occur among people for who COVID is not generally perceived to be serious complications. Remember, whenever they could find a sick kid, that got billing all over in the media, right? Remember, oh, a 35-year-old died today from COVID. Every time it was someone under 80, you heard about it in the news. And the local news did this across the board in the country. We had reports. We checked this all over the country this was happening.

And a lot of this was happening, last one, in cities and communities with significant media outlets. Remember New York? Remember the mass graves that turned out to not be mass graves from COVID, but rather where they bury the homeless people? You know, these things were all happening in places like that. So if we go to the next slide, we see that this recipe continues and the medical experts and public health authorities state concern and alarm and quote, predict dire outcomes and urge COVID vaccination. Did any of that happen with COVID? I would pose to you that it may have.

Okay, so two and three result in what? Significant media interest and attention and framing of the flu season in terms that motivate behavior. It's very severe. It's more severe. It's deadly. Did we hear any of that with COVID? Do you recall any of that? Do you recall in Ohio, we had Governor Mike DeWine and his fireside chats every single day.

This many people died. Stay home. Don't do this. We're all going to die. Okay. So we go to the next slide and we see the continuation. We see continued reports from health officials and media that COVID is causing severe illness and are affecting lots of people, helping foster the perception that many people are susceptible to a bad case of COVID. Visible, tangible examples of the serious illness, right?

Pictures of kids, families, people getting vaccinated, right? The first to motivate, the latter to reinforce. You see in the psychology here, understand that this is National Institutes of Health, CDC. This was put together by people who are professionals in manipulating and understanding motivations. They absolutely know how to motivate people. This wasn't put together by accident. This was based on hard science. The hard science was not about COVID. The hard science was the psychology motivating you around COVID. They knew how to scare you. So going back to this, we go back to references to and discussions of pandemic influenza, continued reference to the importance of vaccination.

Was there a news story that came out for two years that wasn't about COVID? Not one. Next page. On the next page, we go to the implications of the recipe. A large component of consumer demand for flu vaccination is contingent upon things we can't control. Vaccination demand, particularly among people who don't routinely receive the annual COVID vaccine, is related to heightened concern, anxiety, and worry. Well, why would they be changing the ways that you get death counts? Why would they be trying to discredit guys like Dr. Yanidis,

one of the most respected epidemiologists on the planet? Well, they need to foster, as this says, a perception or sense that many people are falling ill, a perception or sense that many people are experiencing bad illness, a perception or sense of vulnerability, fear, to contracting and experiencing the bad illness. I still see people wearing masks, even though they're useless. That's Paige.

Here we get into the channel tom can i can i can i stop a big break here because i want to bring kelly into this conversation as well so uh as we get into the challenge you know it's interesting to me that i i'm not at all surprised by seeing this i i think what you're seeing there is the beginning of and maybe you're going to show us this later uh the beginning of a orthodoxy that gets put in place by the time we have the 2019 that we all call pandemic inc which is the war games around pandemic policy and how to respond to a pandemic that was followed line and verse during covid but i think you the what you're pointing out is some of their tactics had begun 17 years earlier which is kind of interesting because that means a whole generation was literally trained on those

tactics and a whole discipline was out there not questioning it, but again, using it as orthodoxy. Would you agree with that? And then we'll bring Kelly in here. Well, not only would I agree with it, but if you run a search on Google Scholar for scholarly articles related to fear and public health, you'll see that this has been researched and done and mastered since going back to, I believe, in the 70s, 60s, I found some articles. Oh, my God. This stuff is going way back. This is an intentional manipulation of the population of this country

with the desired goal of forcing them into a vaccine that I will show you in a few minutes they knew was neither safe nor effective. Well, we've had a lot of that evidence being presented here but the the other thing that kills me is the the i i'm not surprised that this nonsense started in the 70s because it was a different media environment then then a public health official would have a chance once a day or once a week to get up there publicly and it might even have made sense to be a little more dire with your language. But in the days of social media and YouTube and 24-hour news cycles, it's absurd.

It's disgusting. And it's no longer a little white lie to try to help people. It is deception and manipulation. And it's overtly so so so people have got to push back on that we're going to get to this in just a second it's tom renz we'll go ahead tom make your comment we'll bring kelly here go ahead especially in light of the fact that they were censoring true information that i was bringing out at the time and i can't wait to share that yeah it's one of the reasons by the way i want a doubt here and at the end because hawaii had some horrible data that they've been holding back on as though again this is goes

i'm having ptsd thinking about it because it's back to the covet era you can't handle the truth you can't handle the truth all of it all the time there should be fresh air and sunshine all the time especially from our government all, be right back after a little break and bring Kelly in here. I suspect you've seen Susan and I gushing over Paleo Valley products. We love the taste and how well they fit into a paleo-based nutrition regimen.

They're delicious and we use them for travel all the time. But there's more. We are huge fans as well of Paleo Valley's grass-fed bone broth protein. It comes in three flavors, unflavored, vanilla, and chocolate. It's a powder you can add to really anything. We add it to coffee literally every day.

Smoothies, baked dishes, just hot water dissolves really easily. The bone broth protein is made with 100% grass-fed and finished bones that are free from pesticides or antibiotics and are slow simmered to extract as much collagen as possible. As we age, collagen breaks down. That's what wrinkles are.

And research shows that there are significant benefits to adding a collagen source in your diet. I don't think it's too much to say. It's changed our lives. And Susan is now reporting that after drinking the bone broth for a few weeks, her hair is stronger and longer and nails are stronger too. Try it for yourself. You can order at drdrew.com slash paleovalley and use

drdrew at checkout to save an additional 15%. I want to share with you a teeth whitening system that goes beyond merely enhancing your smile. Primal Life Organics real white teeth whitening system offers convenience and rapid results without harsh chemicals. Light, blue light for whitening, red light for gum and oral hygiene. And you can just do both if you wish. Works naturally, promoting gum healing, tooth remineralization, gives you a brighter and a healthier smile. Again, no peroxide involved. Consistent usage yields remarkable results. Take this opportunity to transform your smile and at the same time, optimize your oral

health. Aim for five times a week for the best outcomes. Discover more about this remarkable teeth whitening system and other products at drdrew.com slash primal today. That again is drdrew.com slash P-R-I-M-A-L. Be sure to use that link for 60% off. D-R-D-R-A-W dot com slash P-r-i-m-a-l. Do it today for 60% off. A lot of you have been asking for more information about how to counter the adverse effects of the spike protein from COVID infections and the COVID vaccine. The spike protein is not your friend, let's just say that. So I'm glad we have the wellness company Spike Support Formula as a sponsor, especially since renowned internist and cardiologist dr peter mccullough who's also chief scientific officer of the wellness company is one of its champions

there's very intriguing research around natokinase which might be a way to take on the spike protein listen to this so start if you would with talking about natokinase how you got to that and where you see its application so with the viral infection or the vaccines, the spike protein stays within the body and it's found in the heart, the brain, the vital organs, and it's causing problems. The Japanese have been using this for heart and vascular disease now for 20 years. It's safe. It is a form of a mild blood thinner that it dissolves the spike protein nearly completely. Spike support formula is the only product on the market

containing natokinase, dandelion root, and a host of other antioxidants, all showing promise in helping you protect yourself and your family. To order this unique, specially formulated supplement, go to drdrew.com slash TWC. That is drdrew.com slash TWC. Use code DREW at checkout for 10% off today. Some platforms have banned

the discussion of controversial topics. If this episode ends here, the rest of the show is available at drdrew.tv. There's nothing in medicine that doesn't boil down to a risk-benefit calculation. It is the mandate, public health, to consider the impact of any particular mitigation scheme on the entire population. This is uncharted territory, Drew. And we will hand the case over to Dr. Kelly Victory. Hey, Tom, welcome back.

Great to see you as always. I am not going to throw you off your presentation. I want you to continue. I'm just going to summarize very, very quickly for anybody who might be joining us, the three things that we've covered so far. Number one, you talked about and showed the evidence of purposeful amplification of falsification of the death numbers from COVID. I've said from the very beginning, one of my first taglines was, the virus is real, the statistics are not. And you've shown evidence that they purposefully were amplifying the death numbers. Number two, you referenced Dr. John Ioannidis, a world-renowned epidemiologist who published in July of 2020 evidence that this virus was nowhere near as deadly as they were saying.

But I would submit to you that was published in July. We knew clinically the evidence March, April, May when he was collecting that data. We knew clinically that that was the case. Children simply were not being admitted to the hospital. And anybody who says otherwise was lying. That was a lie. And Dr. John Ioannidis, when he published that report in July of 2020, well before vaccines were even available, we knew that this did not affect the vast majority of people with severe outcomes. And now thirdly, you are on to, I think, a critical piece, which is showing the evidence

of training for decades, of training people in public health to do something that is unconscionable, which is a recipe to instill fear, to manipulate behavior, to sell product, not to protect public health. I am trained in public health, and I'm here to tell you there is no such thing or shouldn't be such a thing as a recipe to instill fear. Fear is the last thing that we want to do to motivate behavior. We want to educate people. So let's start with where you are in this, or, you know, pick back up where you were before the break with regard to the

evidence of training people to instill fear. Yeah. And I'm going to, yeah, well, and that's where we are is the challenge. And I'm going to go, I'm going to pick up the pace here because I have so much evidence and there's a lot to do. So we have the influenza immunization communication challenges, right? And what they did here is they break people down into segments and say, segment one is easy to convince about the value about offensive vaccine. Segments two and three are skeptical. And, you know, if you want to get this done,

you've got to achieve and maintain public and media interest. In this case, they were talking about the flu, but in COVID as a cause of death, especially something with such a low case fatality rate, well, how do you do that, right? And so if we go to the next page, you can see they can talk about this, right? They say, if you want to sell vaccines, you have to, success is measured by right there. Higher demand for the vaccine stems from media stories and information that create high motivating, or that create motivating, i.e. high levels of concern and anxiety about the flu or COVID. Inducing worry, raised anxiety and concern in people brings forth a number of issues and presents dilemmas for healthcare professionals.

Yeah, I don't know, maybe ethics. Just call me silly. Next page. But the belief that you can inform and warn people and get them to take appropriate actions and precautions without respect to a health threat or risk without any actually making them anxious or concerned, this is not possible. Rather, this is like breaking up with your boyfriend without hurting his feelings. It can't be done. Insert laugh there. Next page. This is it, right? This is it. How do you do it? You create fear. You create anxiety.

You tell them they've got to do it. And that's exactly what they did. So let's go to the next slide. It's so weird for me, Tom. I got to say, I said this during COVID and I'm reliving it and revivifying it now in your presentation, which is we learned during the HIV epidemic how to motivate people to change, very difficult to change behaviors. And we were explicit for a decade that fear was unethical. It was inappropriate. It didn't work. And what we needed to do was we actually had a recipe then, which was you find a relatable source, somebody like you,

you find, use a little humor and music and you show consequences, a story, a narrative about choices. That's it. that's it that's that's what got people to change especially young people which is what whose behavior they were trying to change back in those days no one ever contemplated anything like this now we did a little bit in retrospect uh fauci did want to do some fear-mongering on the younger folks remember the whole you know if you have sex with one person you have sex with everybody they ever had sex with. And, you know, everybody's equally at risk. There's all similar stuff to the COVID thing. You know, if one's not safe and nobody's safe, that all got invented during COVID, but it kind of worked. I mean, excuse me, during HIV,

but it kind of worked then because we had a proper discipline in public health, which was about story and culture and education, as Kelly said, to get people to move their behavior the way they should. Fear was like never, ever contemplated. So go ahead. I'm sorry. But that's what they did. And that's what they've done now. And they've mastered it. And so they wanted to scare us and they wanted to scare us into buying and using these vaccines.

I mean, there's no question about this. By the way, we've since have found that unless you actually believe that Moderna had the exact genetic sequence patented for this disease back in 2015, 2016, whenever that patent came out. Unless you believe that they coincidentally did that and then somehow, you know, remembered to pull that out and develop the vaccine in like three days, this vaccine's been developed for a long time. So I'd post you and I'm not going to get into order. David Martin told us that piece. David Martin gave us that data.

So we've heard this before. Well, and we've got a lawsuit against EcoHealth Alliance for creating this up in New York. Patty Finn's litigating it for me. I developed it. It took me about eight months. It's a huge case. But we can come back and do the case on the origin any time, and I can do the case en masse and everything else. But with regards to the vaccines, they took all the steps to scare you into taking them, right?

So now we skip, of course, to this next presentation. Now, this is the Cyber Plans for Monitoring COVID Vaccine Safety and Effectiveness. That's the title. And I want you to note, most importantly, October 22, 2020, this document was presented prior to the authorization of any COVID vaccines. Okay? Any of them. There were none available at this point. Let's go to the next slide. So what this slide is, is this slide is talking about the post-licensure vaccine monitoring, right? And there were two mechanisms they were going to use. They were going to use passive and active surveillance,

but the active surveillance was coming from two spots, the FDA BEST program and the FDA CMS partnership, okay? So if we go to the next slide, that's really important. So this slide is discussing the BEST system, and these are the partners. Now, I want to ask you guys something. Have any of you seen any of the statistics from the safety monitoring from any of these partners made public? Because I haven't. I haven't seen anything.

Yeah, yeah. So they're collecting this data from all of these different partners, and none of it's been made available. The only thing publicly available is VAERSERS which has been legally determined to be unreliable I can't use VAERS as evidence in court it's not reliable but this program this would provide very reliable data now let me go on to the next slide and explain more about this right So this safety surveillance program and planning was near real-time surveillance or rapid cycle analysis, right? And at the bottom, I want to bring up again the CMS. They plan on using CMS data. The reason that's important is I'm hoping we get to the CMS data that I've got

in this presentation. The next slide is the most important slide there. These are the possible adverse event outcomes that they were monitoring for before the vaccine came out. Pneumonitis, myelitis, all of these different things. Myocarditis, you know, the strokes, deaths, heart attacks, all these different things. Why were these, if these were here, why weren't they listed as potential side effects? If these were possible, these were listed in October of 2020 as things that they were going to monitor for. You don't monitor for it if you don't think it's going to happen. So why in the hell weren't these on the side effects sheet? Why weren't they given to you? When you get this shot, you may or may not experience pregnancy and birth outcomes altered, death, acute deliminating diseases, thrombocytopenia. Why wasn't that listed? Did anyone see any of these listed on any of the potential outcome sheets, the informed consent

sheets that you were given? The answer is no, you weren't. Okay. So in October of 2020, the FDA expected that these things were going to happen, but they didn't tell you. They told you pain and soreness at the injection site, maybe some mild flu-like symptoms. It's safe and effective. But they were monitoring for this. Why? Why do you think they were monitoring if there was no problem? They lied, folks. They lied. They lied about it. Tom, I want to add a layer of information here for you that you may or may not know. We talked to a doctor named Freeman, F-R-A-I-M-E-N, and he was looking at opening up some of this data.

And he went down and he showed the FDA that they had misreported some of their data and their endpoints were off. And it was a very, very, very good study he did. And he went down there. They were impressed enough by him that they actually met with him. And Kelly, if you remember, the one thing he found out was going down there, he said, how do you decide you're looking for all these adverse events? When you find one of these adverse events, how do you decide whether or not it has something

to do with the vaccine? And their response was, we got a guy. We got a guy that goes down there and just decides whether or not, and literally an impossible feat, an impossible feat. Some dude at the FDA is doing on a daily basis. So please drill into that when you can. Oh, yeah. Well, I'm going to show you some numbers related to this.

OK, so we got to get there first. But I want you all to remember that these are the things they were looking for. Right. These are the things that they expected. And these were the things that they didn't tell you about. So if we go move forward here to the next slide, you can see that these best initiative, vaccine monitoring, transparency, you know, all this stuff that they were going to do. Have you seen any of that transparency? Have you seen any of this stuff? Has any of this stuff been made available to anyone? And the answer is no. Now, why? We're at 2023. This came out in 2020. This

stuff has now been in place for two plus years. Where's the data? Why can't we see it? If it's safe and effective, what have you got to hide? You don't hide things unless there's something to hide, do you? Or do you? Okay, so let's go to the next slide here. We're going to move on to the next. By the way, this is important again. I wanted to bring this in. CDC, Medicare, Medicaid, and Veterans Affairs. These are the places that they're getting this data.

It rocks out. This stuff is data that they have hard data on. So this isn't guesswork. This is stuff because when you get it, when you, the CDC gets receipts, right? You go to the hospital and you get whatever happened. Medicare, Medicaid gets a bill. They pay the bill, but the CDC gets to look at the receipts. So does Medicare, Medicaid. They have a big database. Same for Veterans Affairs. So they've got this data data that's the point of this slide next one so this next slide is critical right this is project Salas project Salas is one of the most important things that we found in this whole thing. Project SALIS is, well, it was a program

that was done between the Department of Defense, the JAAC, which is the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center and Eumetrics. And what you see in this is Project SALIS was looking for things about breakthrough hospitalizations and all of these different things. Now, the date on Project Salus was September 28th, 2021. The thing that I want you to hear about that date is at that time, Anthony Fauci was on a tour around the country telling everybody that the hospitals are full of unvaccinated people. Everybody in the hospitals in there because they didn't get vaccines. They're all dying because they didn't get vaccines.

And, you know, if you just get your vaccines, you'd be safe. Now, this document came out at that time. I have actually recordings of this guy talking about this. And as you can see, this is a document that he would have had on his desk okay so go to the next document here's where you see okay so CMS CDC again project cell so the DoD was also monitoring CMS data but you've got the CDC right here right the CDC had this data. This was part of their project. So for Fauci to run around and say he didn't know, well, that's a bit of a stretch.

But what does Project SALIS say? Well, let's go to the next page. The first thing it tells us is a breakthrough infections. A COVID diagnosis has to be more than two weeks after a second dose. So after full dosage, right? So if you got Pfizer and Moderna and you got COVID after the first one, or you got it right away afterwards, which is COVID by the way, is a common side effect of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine, you get it. It's very common to have COVID symptoms right afterwards, which is normal, I mean to be expected, but until two weeks after the second or full dosage, you weren't considered a

breakthrough. So that means this number is going to be probably a little lower than what it otherwise be. If we go to the next page, you'll see on the right side, in the population, this is a Medicare, Medicaid population, 65 and older. You'll see that it says 71% of COVID cases were in fully vaccinated individuals, 71%. Now, Anthony Fauci was telling us that everybody in the hospital was unvaccinated. He was a liar. He had this data. He was outright lying to you, just like everybody else was in our federal government. But remember, if they don't sow fear, they're not going to sell COVID vaccines, right? We had the presentation that shows the only way to sell

vaccines is to scare the hell out of people. Next slide, please. In this slide, we see on the right side that in that same population, the hospitalization, 60% of hospitalizations were in vaccinated individuals. So if you were in the hospital, you were probably one of the 60% of the people who were fully vaccinated. And if you were just getting sick with COVID, you're probably one of seven. So what this shows is that the vaccine wasn't actually doing anything to protect you from getting COVID. We knew this early on, but yet they lied about this. And in fact, since then, we found out in testimony before the European Union that Pfizer never even ran a study to determine whether COVID blocked the transmission, the transmission was blocked by the COVID vaccines.

They never even studied it. There was never a basis to say that this will stop the transmission. Yet that's all we heard. You got to get your vaccine so you don't get grandma sick, right? Okay. And the critical thing here, I would say, and I'm hoping that everyone's good that I'm not stating the obvious. The critical thing here is this isn't Tom Renz's data. here, I would say, and I'm hoping that everyone's good that I'm not stating the obvious. The

critical thing here is this isn't Tom Renz's data. This was their data. You've just gotten a hold of because of FOIA requests or FOIA demands and through other sources. This is their data that they were hiding, that they have been hiding, that they had in September of This is their data, not yours, not mine. This was readily available to Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx and everybody else who stood up there on the podium every day lying to you and selling fear. Yeah. Yeah. This was an outright lie. There was no basis of truth on this. They knew it, right? They knew it. All right. So why does, let's pull this together, right? So this is, let's next slide. This is a presentation that I did. And I believe that the date on this presentation was, was it, oh boy, I want to say June of 2022.

I want to say June-ish, but it was around there. So we got a whistleblower. That whistleblower had access to the CMS data. Now, remember, the last two documents I showed you, the government documents, FDA document, and the Project SALIS document, said that they were monitoring CMS data. Now, they haven't shown us the CMS data, but they said they were monitoring it. And the weekly report that you just saw from Project SALIS indicates they were monitoring it. So Fauci's been lying, saying that he didn't know, but there is no question they had this data. They knew this. So they were monitoring CMS. And I opened

this up and I want to remind you, and here's a quote from March 30th, 2021, Rolinski declared on national, our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick. And that's not just in the clinical trials. It's also in the real world data. And then we got another quote from Fauci up there, both lies about this. They knew this wasn't stopping the transmission. They knew when Pfizer and Moderna and these guys submitted their stuff that they didn't even study the transmission. They knew that, yet they lied. When do you trust a liar? Do you remember what I said at the beginning? I want you guys to walk away and ask yourself, when should you trust these guys? Do you trust them about the vaccines? Do you trust them about the next lockdown? What do you trust these people about? When do you trust a liar? Okay, next slide. This says that this data all comes from CMS and that we've got

whistleblowers. And by the way, we've submitted this to a court, so we stand behind it. And if I was lying, I'd have been perjuring myself before the court, which I would lose my license for. So I was not lying. I assure you, we've done some homework on this. Next document. Here I reference Project SALIS, and you see the title on the left, that's the title for it with the date, and on the right from Project SALIS talking about the fact that they use CMS data. Next, you'll see that Medicare statistics, Medicare covers 18.1%, so 59.4 million people. So that's how many people this was based on. These statistics were based on that on national level. Next slide. Okay. This is it, right? This is back in May, June-ish, right? By that point in time, from the CMS data, we had 47,465 people that had died within two weeks of getting the COVID vaccines.

Two weeks, folks, two weeks. So unless you believe there were 48,000 people that died that quickly within getting this, doesn't this suggest that there's something we should look at? Doesn't this suggest that maybe there's some questions to be asked? Maybe there's a signal. So in statistics, we talk about a signal, right? You say something looks out of place, you call that a signal, right? And typically, you would start investigating. Now, I won't tell you that all 47,500 of these people died from the COVID vaccine. That is not my point. My point is, is that when 47,500 people die within 14 days of getting a vaccine, well, that's a pretty high

number to be a coincidence, isn't it? Statistically, that's a very significant number. Okay. So now, going to next, this goes back to that FDA presentation. And if we go next, you can see. Remember, the FDA was going to monitor CMS data near real-time analysis, and that's how they were going to get this. Next slide. They were going to look for the side effects. These are what they thought would happen.

Next slide. What we did is my whistleblower went through and looked at these things and said, okay, how many patients who didn't have these as issues before getting vaccinated developed them or died within 28 days of getting the vaccination in a given state. So we've got New York first. And you can see within 28 days of getting vaccinated, you have this number of anaphylaxis, 99, 154 is going back to a very, very, very early time. I mean, this is months, right? This is something that, you know, we're not talking about this being something that happened that, you know, we just pulled last week. We're talking about by early summer, late spring of 2021 2021 we're already seeing this many and just in New York now the next slide this

is just in Missouri just in Missouri so a smaller state fewer people but again substantial numbers you'll notice the 2322 dead within 28 days why why didn't we look into this why didn't we search us next we have what state did we have next Ohio my state you'll see forty eight hundred forty 848 hundred deaths within 28 days with the safe and effective vaccine. But no reason to look at it, folks. No reason to look at it. And why is it that I had to have a whistleblower present this data? Why did a whistleblower have to come forward? Why wasn't this data made available to the public?

Well, because fear works two ways, right? Fear of COVID will get you vaccinated. Fear of the vaccine will get you not vaccinated. So we go to the next slide. We've got, what state do we got here? Maine, because we had another lawsuit in Maine. A lot fewer, lower numbers, but there's very few people in Maine. Next slide, I believe, was California. California, you got some big numbers because it's a huge state. And it goes on and on. We've got Texas.

We've got Kentucky. We've got a couple more. But in each one of these states, you see this breakdown. Now, the CDC, the FDA said that these were the numbers they were going to monitor for in real time, and they were going to share these. They're going to be transparent. They wanted to make sure people could see why weren't these numbers shared? If these were things that they were looking for, if these were adverse events and outcomes that they thought might happen, why weren't they shared? What are the numbers now? I mean, I could go back and see if the

whistleblower could pull the data again for updates and we could see how consistent it is. But let me ask you, why is it that now, 2023, nobody's talking about this? I broke this in early 2021 or 2022. Why? Why? Why is that so it's kind of where the question kelly and i have been asking for quite some time and again uh if you know vaccines are always you know any medical intervention always has a risk what i've been screaming about forever is how do i understand the risk reward of a given intervention unless i understand what the outcomes have been from a risk standpoint? The actual reward in terms of preventing death, say it's a 25-year-old, approaches zero. So if the risk is much above zero, I'm not sure I can recommend that to a 25-year-old.

So I don't understand what they expect us to do kelly without the data right well so a couple things first of all uh you're right and the entire basis uh drew of a mandate for vaccinations for you to be forced to do something that you would otherwise not choose to do is predicated on proving or knowing that it stops transmission. As Thomas rightly pointed out, these vaccines were never even tested to see if they stopped transmission. They knew that it wasn't tested to see. And we know now, there's irrefutably that they do not stop transmission. So there was never a basis for a mandate of any sort for you to be asked to do something that you wouldn't otherwise choose to do for yourself. Then the whole issue of informed consent.

Tom showed that slide on the presentation that said they were going to be transparent. They were going to make this data publicly available. And they gave the website. It was bestsomething.org, the website where this was going to be posted, yet it has never been posted there. It's never been made available and they're going kicking and screaming and requiring FOIA requests to even get a hold of these documents. So left to their own devices, they would have spent 75 years releasing any of it. And most people would go to their graves without this ever being released.

So catch us up quickly in a minute or so we've got left here, Tom. Where is this lawsuit? What is the state of the lawsuit that you are bringing with regards to all of this really damning evidence? Well, we have a number of lawsuits, and this is pulled from several of them. They're all moving along. And let me offer this as a thought. So this is literally 2% of what we can show you. I mean, we have so much. I can do this on masks. I can do this on PCR tests. I can show you document after document, government documents. And, you know, what I wanted to do here was hit some of the very broad questions, right? To show you the motivation,

the fear, the this, the that, what they were doing, and then back up. Here's their motive to scare people, to sell vaccines. And then here's what they knew and how they continued the lie. But I think that there's so much more, right? The lockdowns, there's so much more in the death counts. There's so much more on the epidemiology of this, of all these different aspects of this. What I want to suggest to you is, yeah, there you go. Peter Daszak, need the hype. They knew this.

It was part of the plan. This was very well planned. And what I want to suggest to you is just this. I didn't come in thinking that in an hour I could show you guys all the evidence. I'll come back as many times as you want on any specific topic related to COVID or the vaccines that you want, because I've made the cases on all of them. What I wanted to do was to show your audience that may or may not have seen some of what I developed and that I found and that I dug out since 2020 when I was told I was a conspiracy

theorist. I wanted to show them the government's documents that backed up what I had to say. I wanted to show them what I had, and I did it for the purpose, one purpose, to begin a dialogue because I'm still censored on Twitter. I'm still censored on Twitter. I'm still censored on Facebook. I'm still censored in the mainstream media. They still call me a conspiracy theorist. What did I show you that struck you as conspiracy theory? Did I show you anything that I didn't back up? Did I show anyone anything that sounded conspiratorial? There was a conspiracy, a conspiracy to lie to the American public, to induce fear, and to get people to take unsafe and ineffective vaccines that should never have been on the market. We've since, and I just put a sub stack out this weekend, talking about the fact

that we now can show that they intentionally defrauded the people of the world because we now show, and in that sub stack, it's inarguable, I show that they knew that the mRNA vaccines were never mRNA vaccines. The mRNA, as you guys know as doctors, is messenger RNA. These have never been messenger RNA. They've always been mod RNA, meaning modified laboratory-created RNA, where the nucleotides were engineered in the laboratory and used to replace the nucleotides in your body. These mod RNA vaccines were never mRNA. They were falsely marketed. They were they were fear was drummed up to get you to take them. And this entire thing was what I would call and what I would deem the greatest

fraud in human history. I want people to ask questions. I want to open a dialogue. I would love to talk to Rand Paul, Jim Jordan, and all the Republicans who keep telling me that they want to have hearings, but won't ask these hard questions. I would like to talk to the Democrats who tell me that they care about the people in health care and they want universal health care. Well, why would I want universal health care if they're all lying to me? I want you to give me an opportunity to lay out this. I want you to explain to me where you guys lied, where you didn't, why you lied. And I would love for someone to give me an answer to some of this, but they won't. They won't even talk to me because you can't argue with their paperwork. And that's what I bring. No, I think this is really, I know we want to switch over. We want to bring, wrap this up, but I will tell you, we are in a very, very dangerous

environment here. I can tell you as somebody who has spent a career in health, that in the danger isn't simply the ongoing danger of the fear mongering. It's not the ongoing danger, which certainly exists from these vaccines that should have been off the market. It isn't the danger from the very, very scary, uh, new variant of COVID called BS 24 seven. Um, that, uh, you know, is staring us in the face, Be very afraid. That one assaults your intelligence. I'm prepared. I'm staying. Exactly. There you go. But really, the biggest fear from my perspective is that people have lost complete and total confidence, total trust, understandably so, legitimately in our public health. And when the next thing comes along,

and there will be a next actual thing, there will be an actual threat, an actual crisis, where we need people not only in this country, but around the world to pay heed, and nobody is going to give any attention to people who they don't trust. And so that, to me, puts us in a real bind. And I think we may want to bring Tom back. If any mask mandates come up, he can make his case on the mask front because I fear that's on the horizon somewhere, which is just reprehensible.

But Tom, thank you so much. We're going to keep him on for the next segment. Let's bring Ed in then. He'll be there. He'll be listening if he has something to say. Okay, thank you so much. We're going to keep him on for the next segment. Let's bring Ed in then. He'll be there. He'll be listening if he has something to say. Okay, thank you, Tom. Ed Dow, we're going to bring him in at this point. There he is.

We're familiar with that shot of Ed in his Hawaiian home. We thought we might bring you in to talk about what you're hearing on the ground there in Hawaii, for starters. Do you have any report for us? Yeah, it's so tragic, and the news continues to get more grim in terms of the body count. Early on, we had heard lots of things in terms of body count from first responders. The number was between 500 and 1,000, and they were slow rolling out,

only naming those they had identified as the number of dead. And then the heat started to come on this weekend. They were being asked specific questions about number of children missing, and they couldn't put a number on it. And so finally, the governor of Hawaii went on Face the Nation and kind of dropped the knowledge that over a thousand people are missing 114 dead declared and a lot of them are going to be children so the news is slowly getting out that this was an epic disaster of epic proportions and it's looking to me like um everything that could have gone wrong went wrong a lot of uh local government failure uh we have the electric utilities, unfortunately the power was out in the morning, but then somehow magically went back on

when the Lahaina fire hit, or they didn't de-charge the lines. I'm not an expert on that, but there was power in the transmission lines when they went down. They declared a fire on the bypass, which is the highway above Lahaina town, and they closed it down.

And then they said they contained the fire early in the morning and kind of gave an all clear signal around noon. That fire, it turned out, wasn't contained. The hydrants didn't work, according to first responder firemen. And there was also an issue with water being released by the Department of Land and Natural Resources. They didn't want

to release water. So that was when it was released, it was too late. There was also issues of escape route problems. There's been stories that Front Street, the main street that burned away, was blocked by police. They were just taking orders. But again, it's unclear. There's eyewitnesses that are saying it was. And then it just, those are the six things that are just, oh, the final thing, the warning system that we have here for tsunamis, which isn't just used for tsunamis as stated on the website, never went off. And initially the governor claimed

he was probably fed bad information that they didn't work well that's everybody on Maui knows that's probably not true because they test these alarm systems the first Monday of every month and they and it went off in Lahaina on the first Monday of the month in August so that as it turned out we have an official who decided not to sound the alarm Because he was afraid people would run the higher ground into the fire And that was his decision and then he stood by that decision doesn't regret it and then he resigned due to health reasons So it's it's tragic and then there was an issue with getting help into Lahaina I was involved in an effort to get a moving truck full of generators and

goods, baby formula, food, baby wipes, water, and we got in, but we had to use all of our powers of who we know to get in there, and we did. I've never seen anything so inept in my whole life. Yeah. And it makes me wonder, because our government seems so focused on everything other than governing, that's the one thing I've been saying about Los Angeles and California. It's like the basic functions of government. That's why I feel great about living in Pasadena, which has excellent government. The city facilities and city services are excellent.

In Los Angeles, none. Not none, but not functioning. There's really no focus on there being delivered properly or efficiently or in new ways. They'd rather just work on road diets and 15 minute cities and things that just make no sense whatsoever. Yeah, there's a lot of speculation here in Maui about 15 minute cities and the conspiracy theories and whatnot.

I'm just sticking to the facts. The response was an epic disaster. And it seemed like to those of us who live here that there was a cover-up in process and a slow roll of information but the governor I think saw how disastrous this was saw what was going on and I think he kind of threw the local Maui government under the bus on face the nation by letting the number out our mayor has come out with similar numbers today so it's so bad that I think there's going to be a lot of people pointing fingers pretty soon.

They try to keep it quiet, but you can't keep this quiet. Yeah. That was my question. And I've been hearing a lot of reports that there's been a media sort of blackout or brownout at a minimum, that they really have not been allowing reporters to get in there. They've been holding people at bay from actually being on scene and reporting this. Is that legitimate or is that fear-mongering? The local media has complained that they've had none of their questions answered. There was a reporter who was on Steve Bannon's War, who was harassed while live on air. They found him and stalked him. So there seems to be something going on with the media and the inability to get answers. But I think after the governor went on Face the Nation, I think things are changing.

The president's here today blocking traffic, but more information is going to come out. It, why haven't we seen parents of the lost children? That that's a kind of a mystery to me. You think they'd be screaming to high heaven? Do you have any idea about that, Ed? Uh, I'm guessing some of the parents died with the children and or they're screaming, but there's still no cell tower service in Lahaina. And a lot of them, they don't want to leave their land for fear they'll be evicted permanently. So there's a lot of information not still getting out.

Can I ask a question? There's been a lot of rumor mill, and one of the things that I see from my fellow conspiracy theorists is that a lot of this had to do with the idea of the land grab, this, that, and other, and I don't think there's any evidence to show that there was anything intentional. But that said, one of the things that I saw was some photographs, and it seems that the nicer neighborhoods were pretty well protected, whereas some of the not so affluent neighborhoods were in worse shape. Is that conspiracy theory? Is that rumor? Or have you seen a difference? I mean, does it look like some of it was protected? Or is that just rumor? Because I'd love to see that rumor go away if it it's just a rumor. That, that, that, as far as I can tell as a rumor, there was some, uh,

some, uh, multiple million dollar properties that disappeared. Uh, so that's, that's not a hundred percent. Um, you know, more, more, more importantly, it's not so much that this was done for a land grab, but I'm concerned that they're going to use it for a land grab, the opportunity. And there's some books written by Naomi Klein and somebody else on what's called disaster capitalism. When something happens, the forces of government and private corporations band together to make money. And that's what I think we need to fight here on Maui. And I put out a tweet saying, Maui is the line in the sand on disaster capitalism, which is well documented. You know, you look at Haiti, what goes on in Haiti and a lot of these a lot of these things turn into scams and land grabs.

So we're going to make sure that doesn't happen here, hopefully. Breathtaking. Wow. Thank you. Is there anything did you hear any of Tom's presentation by any chance? I did. I know Tom. Tom's a warrior and he's done some great work. And it's true. He's indicting them with their own documents.

And that's a lot of what, the reason they wanted to hide the clinical trial for 75 years, and we posted it on our website, is, you know, the safety, the adverse, severe adverse events were so bad, there was a signal in the trial that should have ended the trial. And we can link the magnitude of those events to the magnitude we're seeing in the real world. So this, just indict them with their own documents. That's's the thing here is that we don't we don't need to make this up it's they have documents detailing all this you just proposed something very interesting which was taking the data in their documents and showing it out in the real world as reflective of that same uh level of concern are you doing that Is that one of your next projects? Well, we already, we already did that. We highlighted it might've, it might've gotten lost in the noise.

It's, it's already, it's already posted an analysis of the MRNA clinical trials. And we, we, we, we only had a two and a half or three months of clinical data. So we had to model out, you know, what the adverse events would look like over time. And it was the same order of magnitude as what we saw in the disability data in the U.S. So it was close enough to suggest that they should have known in the clinical trials that there was a safety signal, full stop. I'm starting to see also more actuarial and death insurance, life insurance data starting

to trickle into the mainstream. Is that you guys or is that stuff you're seeing? What am I seeing there? Can you explain that? Yeah, so Pierre Corey and someone else got into USA Today, an article on the Society of Actuaries. They purposely left out the V word so they could get it in the mainstream, but they just wanted the issue of excess deaths to get into the public. So that's the, you know, that's a clever, you know me, I have my thesis, but I've been trying to do that for a while.

I've been successful somewhat, but I think that's what needs to be done. We need to at least point out this is occurring and then we can debate why it's occurring. But that was a clever way of getting it in the mainstream without actually naming the cog. I think Kelly will agree with me. I know, Ed, you referenced Tom as a warrior, but we both feel you're both warriors. And you've been such a great source of information as this onion gets peeled down further and further. And it's just going in one direction and one direction alone all the way through and so um certainly my level of understanding of what we've been up

against has vastly uh improved uh and it's folks like you that are helping us uh really get at the truth. Oh, thank you. Yeah, and I think the thing, as I say, I think the important thing, go ahead, Doug. I just want to say today we dropped a report on the NHS, that's the National Health Service in the UK. We've already talked about absence rates. Yeah, basically, it just confirms, it's more of the same, but what people need to understand is it's causing real shortages in healthcare service right now. And the comments coming in underneath that report are ratifying what we're seeing. This is becoming a serious real world problem.

Forget why it happened. It needs to be acknowledged and it's not being reported on at all. Well, if I can- Go ahead, Tom. being reported on at all. Well, if I can, Ed has done such remarkable work pulling together some of the privatized data. And, you know, I mean, Ed's just, his credibility is mind-blowing. He does such good work on this. Yeah, we pulled out, but one of the things that we see is no one in the government wants to go on record under oath dealing with this. I mean, go back to 20, what was it, 2022, early 2022, when I did the DMED data. You know, I stood before a sitting senator and alleged that our DOD knew that they were

killing their soldiers. And do you realize that outside of a single line that they said to a single fact checker, that our Department of Defense has never actually responded under oath once to an allegation backed up by data from their servers that they were murdering their own soldiers with these vaccines and knew it. To this date, two years later, year and a half later, whatever it is, we have yet, you know, if I accuse you of murder, I would think you would at least want to say, no, I didn't do that. But not one word under oath.

All we got was a single statement to a fact checker saying, oops, there was a glitch. And I didn't have time to get into that today, but there's so much more. It's very concerning that whatever forces are creating that are creating some sort of uncanny silence by various figures particularly those that have been on the offensive they they won't go all the way it seems like and it makes me worried that there's some espionage counter espionage things we don't know things we can't know i i don't know it's very concerning well remember all of this when you. When you go into, when you look at what's coming, because it is coming, okay? We're at the end of August now,

and the next thing is coming. We're already hearing that they're going to reinstitute mask mandates and travel limitations. They're going to double down on this. So remember everything that Ed has presented over this past year. Remember everything that Tom is showing just here, just on this one component with regard to the vaccines. And I have no doubt, because I know what Tom's sitting on, that he has unassailable evidence that they knew that the masks were bullshit, that they knew that social distancing was bullshit. They knew that the masks were bullshit, that they knew that social distancing was bullshit. They knew that the lockdowns would create tremendous hardship. They knew that schools never needed to close. They knew all of this, and we have the evidence that they did. So remember

that as we come into this next, as I said, the next very scary variant called BS247 because it is coming and Anthony Fauci or whoever else wants to sell you this is getting ready. So just pay heed. If I can, I want to do, I would feel unethical if I didn't take one opportunity, this opportunity to say one other thing. So I have a screenshot on my sub stack that I posted last week about the mod RNA from Pfizer, them stating that they are looking at their investigational flu and shingles vaccines this winter will have mod RNA in them. The same mod RNA that I believe is causing the side effects in the COVID vaccines. Instead of sticking with flu and shingles vaccines that they've had for however many years, they're changing them to now include this mod RNA component. Now, why would you break something

if it isn't broken? It doesn't need fixed. What's the deal? But I want to strongly, strongly caution anyone. If it has mRNA, mod RNA, or any other RNA in it, they have not been proven to be safe. They have not been proven to be effective. All that we have proven is that we've been lied to in every single instance. And so if you want to trust a liar with your life, go get it. If you don't, I would recommend that you think about it. Sage advice. I think that about says it, absolutely. Anything else, Ed, before we all wrap this up?

One thing I left out about the new NHS data is that's monthly frequency as opposed to the other two data sets, the UK, ONS, and USBLS. So we're able to get more granular. And what we found was that these absences are not seasonal. They're throughout the whole year. So it doesn't suggest respiratory illnesses that are, you know, seasonally get people more sick are to blame so it's some other cause you know what i think yeah all right guys uh we will be back kelly you'll be here on wednesday is that correct yep yep i'm here on wednesday for a regular show thank you again thanks for accommodating our uh both of you analogy glitch for you know thanks much. And we will no doubt, I apologize already because I feel like we're going to be pounding on or knocking on both your doors on a regular basis.

So thank you for all you've done to help our audience come to terms with all this material. So thank you. No worries. I look forward to being on next time. Terrific. Thanks. And tomorrow, thanks Kelly. And tomorrow we have. You're not depressed now. You're not done. Terrific. All right, guys. And tomorrow, thanks, Kelly. And tomorrow, we have.

You're not depressed now. You're not depressed? You are? No, if you're not depressed now. But, you know, it's all just more of the same. But we've added a, there's one little comedic component here of the BSs 24 7 that will take will carry me through to the next day that that the new variant of bs.24.7 is uh is on its way to us um and uh we have uh jimmy faila tomorrow and it's oh yes it's the danish researcher kelly when we get in on wednesday

right and then chris rufo on thursdays and then you guys see the rest of the week there. All right, we'll see you all. Hey Kelly, stay on the line. We want to ask you a question. We'll get off. Tomorrow at three o'clock otherwise and Kelly on Wednesday at three o'clock. We'll see you all then. Sounds good. Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Caleb Nation and Susan Pinsky. As a reminder, the discussions here are not a substitute for medical care, diagnosis, or treatment. This show is intended for educational and informational purposes only. I am a licensed physician, but I am not a replacement for your personal doctor, and I am not practicing medicine here. Always remember that our understanding of medicine and science is constantly evolving. Though my opinion is based on the information that

is available to me today, some of the contents of this show could be outdated in the future. Be sure to check with trusted resources in case any of the information has been updated since this was published. If you or someone you know is in immediate danger, don't call me, call 911. If you're feeling hopeless or suicidal, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-8255. You can find more of my recommended organizations and helpful resources at drdrew.com slash help.