Ask Dr. Drew - Tulsi Gabbard Declassifies 120 Biolabs (40+ In Ukraine) The Media Told Us Didn't Exist – Ask Dr. Drew – Ep 632

Episode Date: June 17, 2026

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified records of US government funding for more than 120 biolabs across over 30 countries, including more than 40 in Ukraine handling dangerous pathogens like anthrax, plague, and Ebola – facts the media spent years dismissing as conspiracy theories. In 2022, USA Today called the US-funded Ukraine bioweapon lab claims “false,” CBC labeled them a “QAnon conspiracy theory” and NBC News framed the story as “misinformation” that US officials “vehemently denied” — the same labs Gabbard’s office now says were real all along. Dr. Drew is joined by Emmy-winning producer and author Rob Rosen to examine why what gets left out of the news can distort the truth as much as what gets said. Rosen, author of “Crimes of Omission,” argues that media bias is driven less by what reporters say than by what they choose to omit. He and Dr. Drew tie the Gabbard disclosures to Senator Rand Paul’s committee findings on US funding tied to SARS-CoV-2 research and Senator Ron Johnson’s work on what health agencies knew about vaccine safety signals, and asks why almost none of it reaches the evening news. Political theorist Dr. Ralph Schoellhammer of the Mathias Corvinus Collegium in Budapest breaks down the unrest in Belfast, the fight over flags during the World Cup, and the deepening fractures inside Europe over migration policy. 2023 CNN Hero Yasmine Arrington Brooks discusses her nonprofit work supporting the children of incarcerated parents. Rob Rosen is an Emmy-winning producer, director, and author. He created and directed the limited series ‘The Infomercials That Sold Us’ starring Dennis Miller, as well as the true-crime series ‘Reasonable Doubt’. He is the author of “Crimes of Omission: Distorted Justice: The Media’s War on Truth.” Follow at https://x.com/RobRosen14⠀Dr. Ralph Schoellhammer is the Head of the Center for Applied History and International Relations Theory at the Mathias Corvinus Collegium in Budapest. His research focuses on political theory and international relations, with emphasis on how culture, values, and ideologies influence state behavior. He hosts the 1020 podcast and Hammer Time on YouTube. Follow at https://x.com/Raphfel Yasmine Arrington Brooks is the Founder and Executive Director of ScholarCHIPS, Inc., a nonprofit providing college scholarships, mentoring, and mental health support to children of incarcerated parents. Follow at https://x.com/Yazziespeaks 「 SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS 」 • FATTY15 – The future of essential fatty acids is here! Strengthen your cells against age-related breakdown with Fatty15. Get 15% off a 90-day Starter Kit Subscription at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://drdrew.com/fatty15⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • 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 「 ABOUT THE SHOW 」 This show is for entertainment and/or informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Executive Producers • Kaleb Nation - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://kalebnation.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ • Susan Pinsky - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/firstladyoflove⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Content Producer • Emily Barsh - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/emilytvproducer⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

And we've got a lot to get into today. In a few minutes, I'll be talking to Ralph Schollhammer. He is from the, I'm going to try to get this all right. Well, he's from the head of the Center for Applied History and International Relations at the Matthias Corvinus Collegium in Budapest. He's going to talk about the interplay of culture and political theory and international relations, values. Whoops, I'm getting a little feedback here. And before I do that, though, we're going to talk to Rob Rosen, author of Crimes of Omission, Distorted Justice, the Media's War on Truth, which is something we talk about a lot here.

And I can't wait to get into that with him. Rob is done just about everything. He's directed limited series, the infomercials that sold us. That was on Fox Nation. He created a true crime series, reasonable doubt. And he had is another very long running television program that when he gets in here, I'm going to. going to tell Susan about because she'll freak out, I think. So stay tuned. We've got a lot to Dr. Rob out as well after this. Our laws as it pertain to substances are draconian and bizarre.

The psychopaths start this. He was an alcoholic because of social media and pornography, PTSD, love addiction. Fentanyl and heroin. Ridiculous. I'm a doctor for a second. Where the hell 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. But just deal with. It looks real. We used to get these calls on Loveline all the time. Educate adolescents and to prevent and to treat. 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. Visit BetMGM Casino and check out the newest exclusive. The Price is Right Fortune Pick. BetMGM and Game Sense remind you to play responsibly. 19 plus to wager.

Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connects Ontario at 1-866. 531, 2,600 to speak to an advisor. Free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with Eye Gaming, Ontario. All right, everybody, please welcome Rob Rosen to the program.

Rob, thank you for being here. No sound. What's happening there? Caleb, is that on Rob's end or is that on ours? Is that on my end or is that on your end? There we go. We got you now. We got you now.

We got you now. We're here. It's all good. Thank you for having me up. So I did not, one of your credits I did not discuss before you. you got in here, I wanted to share with Susan, who's produces this show with Caleb, and she's sitting over in the producer's share, and Emily. And Emily Barr, she's our booking producer and producer.

Rob was the executive producer, and I think you guys are still, well, maybe you're not doing this show anymore, but it must have just run out. But he's the executive producer, Susan, of The Dead Files. Oh. Do we have fans over here? Which literally, literally. literally while we were in Europe, every freaking night, we were watching the travel channel. We were on a cruise.

They had BBC, they had CNNI, they had Fox News, and they had travel channel. And so every night was the old dead files. And I'm friends with Cindy Kesa. So, yes. Oh, okay. Yeah, Cindy's great. Thank you for producing the best show I've ever seen about psychic media. Best show I've ever seen.

Oh, my God. The way that you format it is so good. It's historical. It's in the moment of the psychic, and then the people live it, and the way you pull it all together. It looks so good. I want to. Thank you so much. I'd love to.

We had an amazing 15-season run, and all 200, I don't know, 25 episodes live on max. So you can have your own marathon again if you want to. You can just watch them all. Well, Cindy's been a friend of ours for a long time, and when she started doing it, it was really fun for us. So, and she did a great job. It was so good on the cruise because Drew would go to sleep, and I would just watch it until I fell asleep two hours later.

And it was the older ones. It was the older ones. It was the older ones. But let's get into our stuff here today. Let's talk first about Crimes of a Mission. I think that's a really interesting topic, because I don't think people understand. how the news is produced. And I heard someone just this morning talking about how if a, you know, let's say there

was a mass shooter. If the mass shooter is a, you know, a young white male, that's going to get prominently described in the news. If it's any other profile, it's just going to be omitted. And at least if it's shown at all, it will be just not even commented on. It's kind of interesting because I was watching an episode of. Bill Maher. It must have been like a year ago, and Anne Coulter was on, and there had been a mass shooting. And she said very provocatively on the panel, he's not white. This person is not white.

And Bill Maher is like, how would you possibly know that? And she's like, because the news hasn't told us what ethnicity he is. And it's interesting because when I first got into the business, I started in news in San Diego in 1991. At that time, the script was reversed. You probably would have had a bias towards only giving descriptors of race if it was somewhat of color at that time. And it was just starting to change in the 90s. But of course, news never knows how to find the right balance. And instead of just course correcting and only revealing it when it's important to the story or always revealing it, they had to go to one extreme and then to another.

How does that happen? Because I look at who, you know, the sort of segment producers or the producers of a, let's a half hour of a local news broadcast. They don't seem biased, and yet they sort of get into the kind of group think, or maybe it's the news director that's biased. I'm always amazed. Let me tell you, for instance, during COVID,

I had a program locally with Alex Michelson, who's now on CNN. And the producer was like, oh, my God, all the ICU beds are full. Oh, my God. And I went, wait a minute. You're looking at the L.A. County data. That is county hospital beds that are.

by the way, understaffed, let's look at what the private hospitals have wide open. So why would you report, why would you just run to the data that is frankly wrong? And if I hadn't been there, that would have been the news headline of the night. So I think that there is very much a group think culture in newsrooms. And I did dozens of interviews. And of course, I've lived it over the last few decades of working in these newsrooms. And the interesting dynamic, and I suppose that. a lot of businesses have this sort of a culture where there's it's not written down but there's an

unspoken culture within the business so if you're at fox news and every morning there's a meeting and the news directors there and a lot of very ambitious reporters and young producers want to get noticed and you want to pitch a story well at fox news if you're going to raise your hand and say I've got a great idea for a story the UN just released a report about the disproportionate impact that climate change has on people of color. Well, you know, you're probably not going to get too far ahead at Fox News pitching that kind of a story, and people know that. And if you were over at ABC News and you want to say, you know what, the hysteria over COVID doesn't seem to make sense. There's this thing called the Great Barrington Declaration that was just signed. There are a lot of

esteemed doctors and voices that we trust, like Dr. Drew, that are saying maybe there's a different method. You don't want to do that either. So I think that there is an entrenched culture. And it's not so much that it's nakedly biased because it, I mean, it is, right? If you go into NBC News or CNN, it will be diverse as far as gender. It'll be diverse as far as ethnicity. But most of the people there are actually the same. They are, went to very good universities. Most of them identify as liberal, like by 30 to 1. And most of them, you know, they live in blue cities and blue bubbles and they shop at co-ops and they have gluten allergies and they go, you know, to spend class. And, you know, there's a certain type of person. And in the book, I do talk to a lot of the

old timers who said it was a different profession. That first wave of journalists and television, most of them, you know, Walter Cronkite never even finished college. Most of them were high school grads who are blue-collar people. They called truth to power. They hit the pavement. And they didn't have to imagine what their audience was concerned about. They were the audience. It wasn't a lead white-collar profession at that point.

Right. And now we have CBS sort of shifting. Very Weiss is in there trying to, it seems to me, maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like she's just trying to reestablish, you know, or at least flatten some of the bias. Just try to, she's not eliminating it, obviously. She's just trying to make things a little more objectively. Well, look, I feel like the truth itself has been under assault for a long time.

Post-structuralism was specific about truth not mattering, truth not existing. And if the truth doesn't exist, well, then journalism doesn't exist really either. You're just an opinion section. But I feel like truth is sort of reasserting itself. Am I correct? I think Barry Weiss is trying to do that, and I'm rooting for her, but there's so much institutional rod at a place like that. So look at what happened with Scott Pelly, who I'm just going to say it.

I probably shouldn't, but I just never really took to him. He seemed very stuffy and self-important to me, and I kind of made a little comment about that in the book. But having said that, he decides that he is going to have his big normal array moment in the middle of a meeting, and he is going to call them all out. and say that they have no business being there, and they're destroying the institution. And I've talked to several news directors who I had spoken to for this book

and said, what would you have done in that situation? I mean, you can't tell me you would have not let this person go. I mean, this is insubordination in your newsroom. You're going to lose control and lose the, you know, people are not going to respect you if you just let this go. And they all agreed with that. So I think that when, look, the media, especially the elite legacy media

sees themselves as a vanguard of democracy. They are the last stand between all of us and an autocracy or as represented by Donald Trump. It's the last stand between fascism and the end of democracy and our final election is what they have told themselves.

And so they've given themselves a permission structure to go from being objective journalists who, as Walter Cronkite said, our job is to hold a mirror up to society, but now they want to be part of the outcomes. And that's very dangerous.

When you're going from, and Drew, I would think in your profession too, right, for lack of better shorthand, I think that the woke virus did create something where truth, which is supposed to be the North Star of Science, became compromised when people have tried to do studies on gender or different issues that are controversial. 100%. 100%.

In the editorial process, I don't know that the scientists themselves were so much adulterated as what was published under what circumstances there's publishing. I've run into some of that now in trying to get stuff published and then getting retracted

because they get a lot of crap for it. So it's... What I'm saying... You know Vinay Prasad? Are you familiar with him? He was at the FDA for a minute. It's V-I-N-A-Y-Prasad. He's a very talented oncologist.

And I used to listen to his podcast 10 years ago because he was one of these people that could penetrate medical literature and analyze it very systematically and accurately. So I learned to rely on him to help me understand what was reasonably legitimate sort of conclusions based on medical literature. He just published a thing today.

I'm going to see if I can find the headline really quickly, but it was essentially, I'm not going to, oh, here it is. It's a new paper in the Journal of American Medical Association, Internal Medicine, JAMA IM. His headline is, a new JAMA IM paper on COVID-Chots contains a preposterous result that invalidates the entire paper. And that's exactly right in that we have lost the ability to do good science. I was discussing with someone today, he was saying that, oh, AI is going to be so great for biotech. I thought, you know, it's going to be good for biotech, but information technology does not replace good science. And the fact that we're not training people to do science is so deeply concerned. They don't even know if they're seeing good science or not.

This is something Brett Weinstein has been saying on the Dark Horse podcast for quite some time. is that this is all gobbledy coop and it's certainly, you know, in the infinite complexity that biology is, it's not going to help humans if we just push through all this material that is not based in good experimental representation. It may look good from the AI standpoint, the data may play, but if the experiments are poorly constructed, if the assumptions are, you know, wrong, you're going to end up with bad outcomes.

And it just, it's very, very concerning. And then you're not allowed to ask difficult questions because you're towing the line for the editorial for us, as you said, so you can't ask about gender, you know, gender stuff. It has to leak in slowly and it takes forever for it to sort of shift. Yeah, well, it makes me think of the late Dr. Henry Lee, who testified in the OJ. Simpson trial and said garbage and garbage out. And I think that's the issue with AI. You know, in this book, Crimes of a Mission, I really trace the anti-police movement and how it was covered by police, starting with Trayvon Martin. And I think 2012 was a really important year. I know Jonathan Haydes talked

about it. Something happened in 2012 that just shifted science, journalism. And I take it up through 2020 with George Floyd. And I do a lot of the high profile cases. And I tell the whole story. story. And it's my contention, and again, this is about truth. It's my contention that if all of these stories had been told in their entirety and contextualized properly, that I don't believe that you would have seen American cities burning in the summer of 2020. I think that, you know, my profession, and I love it. This is in a way a love letter to journalism, even though it doesn't seem that way. I feel as though we committed malpractice by the way that we had covered that movement. And of course

people are upset. Of course people are taken to the street. If people believe that thousands of people of color every year are being hunted in the streets of America by cops, of course. Why wouldn't they be enraged? Well, and I blame cable TV. We had to fill all that time

and it just started getting more and more cantankerous on air. You had to pick aside and start heating it up on camera. And then all of a sudden the entire sort of on-air staff twisted sort of pointing in a certain direction. But do you have any theories about what it was about 2012?

You know, I know I've listened to Jonathan Haidt with interest. Talk about that. It is four years after the first iPhone. You know, something had happened, but something changed on the college campuses. Something changed in America's newsrooms that year. And I don't know whether it started with Trayvon or Trayvon was simply a incident looking, movement looking for an incident and they found it. I'm not quite sure. But at least as far as

this goes, where you saw news go from a bias, there was always a left-leaning bias, but going from a bias to pure activism, where they basically inverted the process. Instead of letting facts like breadcrumbs lead you to the truth, they started with the truth and worked their way backwards and look for the breadcrumbs that fit that description. And Barry Weiss, I thought so eloquently when she left the New York Times, basically laid that out. This is the way modern newsrooms are operating. And I think she's meeting a lot of resistance trying to fight that

and trying to bring it back to a truth-telling machine. But I wish her the best with it. I'm rooting for. And COVID is really where this stuff, for me, got way out of control as well. And now we have Tulsi Gabbard saying that she has declassified biolab records that suggest, I don't know, what is it, 100 labs or something in 30 countries. And yeah. And the notion that, for instance, Anthony Fauci had no knowledge of the knowledge of the,

this or that he you know when he was testifying before congress he was testifying truthfully sort of doesn't pass the sniff test let's say that's the kindest thing i can say what do you make of this uh and what is this just sort of the military industrial complex doing its thing international relations i don't know what to make of it what do you make of it well let me take it from the journalist perspective it followed the same path that all of these stories seem to follow, which is wave number one. This is Russian disinformation and right-wing conspiracy theories. So the Washington Post, the New York Times, the BBC, the NPR, all made claims that these early reports that the U.S. was funding these labs was just that. The second wave is, well, okay,

there does seem to be some truth to it, but it's not that important. And then, of course, you get to the third wave, which we're getting to now, which is, well, how could we have known back then, right? Of course, it's an important story, but, you know, at the time we did the best we could. And, you know, we've seen this over and over again, whether it's lockdowns, the vaccine injuries, the Hunter Biden laptop, we can go on and on forever. So I just think that good journalism, look, I don't know, Dr. Drew, I can't say for sure, what does this mean? Is it nefarious? But it certainly would have raised the eyebrow of a good journalist who would have said, let's just go investigate this. This seems won't know more. And instead, journalists, who's one of their big missions is to call truth to power, are instead basically just repeating the propaganda from the state. That is not the role of journalists. Right. That's right. They've taken a certain position of defending the elites, really is what they're doing. And it's odd to me, their irrational certitude is what to me is so dangerous. And at no point have I heard any of them say, I mean, you almost see Jake Tapper doing it when he was trying to sell a book. You almost go, yeah, I guess I was overly enthusiastic. Now he's, you're

returned to his old ways of doing things. That's the part that I don't get. Everybody makes mistakes. Yes, and things may have been very, there may have been motivational factors at play that caused some of these guys to go too far in one direction or another. I see Bill Maher doing this.

He's showing introspection. He's going, oh, yeah, you know, he's just sort of evolving and thinking and doing it out loud in front of us. Why can't any of these other, and Bill's not a journalist, a comedian, and how come journalists can't do this? This really should be their job.

You know, there's just, I think, so much, like an institutional arrogance. I mean, I would say that, you know, what we see from Scott Pelley is like very indicative of this kind of a mindset. And I think it's like, look, we are the holders of the truth and we are going to, we are disseminating the information and this should not be questioned. And, you know, I think it got so political. I think one of the key moments, I'm going to tie this into Trump. I know this is going to sound like a reach, but Dean Bacay, who is the editor of the New York Times.

And to this day, the New York Times still is probably the most important news organization in the world. And a lot of television news and cable news still takes its cues from the New York Times. And in 2016, when he basically unleashed the hounds and said, we need to stop Donald Trump. he has a unique threat to democracy. The rules do not apply. I think that gave the permission structure to all of the news media to become activist. And we saw that with COVID.

An example I would give is at the end of 2020, when Trump's MRNA vaccines seemed like they were ramping up, had he been reelected in 2020 and was the president in 2021, How much do you want to bet? Does anybody out there think that they wouldn't have been all over the stories of the breakthrough cases from the vaccine, of the diagnosis of myocarditis? They would have been all over it. There would have been nothing but vaccine hesitancy.

But because, of course, Biden was now the president, this was just a topic that couldn't be touched. It was, you know, I mean, you're here in California, you may, you may forget that. Newsom and I think it was Kamala Harris said it too, that I'm not going to have anything to do with a vaccine that Trump's hands are on. You got to be kidding. That's where they started. Because you were going to remember, do I remember what now? I can't remember who it was who tweeted it,

but somebody got shadow banned on Twitter at the time because they had simply done nothing more than reprinted CDC numbers on the vaccine. And the administration's position, and I guess later on in the Twitter files we found out that they exerted pressure on Twitter was that yes, it was true and they were just reposting government figures, but it was creating

vaccine hesitancy, which is really Orwellian when you think of it. Yes. Yes. And look, there is still, where did I read something just today about not being willing to have a conversation about something

because it could cause people to be hesitant towards vaccines. And it was something very matter of fact. And I thought, oh, my God, we are still doing this. We are still silencing, frankly, what is scientific discourse. I don't, I don't understand. It is very, makes me very depressed to think about this. And I'm hoping we kind of get back on track in some way. And I'm looking to the journalist to sort of show some self-reflection. I don't expect somebody like Scott Paley to be able to do it. He was never able to do it.

He always sat on high. He was really kind of a disturbing character out there. Even the way he did his interviews, seemed very not engaged, not human, not just he just seemed very. Yeah, he's tough. He's kind. But the imperious elite and the defensive elite is what kind of has to stop.

they have to actually take on their job, which is not to parrot and be an activist on behalf of an elite group. It seems to me, I don't know. Or if it is all Trump, how about examining that and talking about it? What do we think about it before? Why aren't we, maybe it wasn't as bad,

or maybe it is as bad, or maybe it's still going to be bad, or maybe he's taking us in a bad place. But nothing. There's no conversation about it. I mean, here's my hope. And this might be a very small anecdotal evidence. But this book just came out a couple weeks ago.

I've been doing a lot of appearances. I've talked to so many people, friends and colleagues in the media, I've done these book signings. And I know that there are a lot of liberal people who are out there. They want to engage in this subject. I think at the risk of sounding lofty, journalists are the window that people have out into the world. No one's going to go do independent research

and read the Cochran report to see if masks work. No one's going to go read the Great Barrington Declaration for themselves. So we provide the window to the world. And the problem that we have right now is people live in different realities. And if you watch MS Now all day or you watch Newsmax all day, you have nothing to talk about. You are living in completely different universes. And so I actually really do believe, maybe this is my Pollyanna streak, that we don't have a crisis of this country, we don't share the same morality. I think we just don't share the same reality.

And that's the problem. Yeah. That is propaganda and brainwashing, right? I mean, that's what creates that. And it's happening on all sides and all over the place. And I think they should be very circumspect about participating in that. I think that's a good place to kind of wrap up. But before I do, I want to know in the course of these interviews and talk to people, has anything shocked or surprised you? Or is there or anything inspired you in a positive way? Either side of that coin or both. I think what shocked me was and I think we can tie this into COVID and the way that

the scientific community fell into line, the way journalists fell into line, is how easy a top-down culture and a culture of fear can get people to do things that they know is not right. I'm sure. And I've heard you talk at other times about this. I know that there are a lot of very well-educated experts in the field who knew we were going down the wrong path with COVID, and we're scared to talk about it. And I think that there were a lot of journalists who knew that the anti-police movement was incendiary. It was inflaming people. It was cherry-picking cases and making people feel that we lived in a much worse reality than we really did.

I think people knew that was wrong. But yet, there's group think. There's fear. So that was the downside. Although it was handed from the top down, it was inculcated from the bottom up. And this is the thing about all these movements and mass formations. You have, you know, 10% of the people that are saying, hey, what's going on here? 70% just want to be left alone.

And then 20% are true believers. And they're the ones, they're the prison guards. They're the ones yelling at people in the Walmarts to wear their mask and things. It's the bottom up part that really shocked me. And I would argue that it's the media that really caused that 20% to do what it did. And people need to examine themselves. If the press is going to examine themselves, people need to look at themselves and realize if you were reporting your neighbors for having a barbecue because that was a super spreading event, you, I've said this before on this show, you would be the prison guards in 1933. Absolutely. You certainly would be the brown shirts. So please know that about yourself. Don't do that next time. Rob, we got to all go get the book. Usual places, I assume. The usual places. Crimes of omission by Rob Rosen. Drew, this was so much fun. Thank you so much for having me on.

I really appreciate it. Good to see. We should we should come back around to do it again. Now I know why the dead files were so good. I know. I think Susan would, maybe we'll have Cindy in here. We'll bring Rob back around. I've never seen you know, more thorough use of psychic mediumship and history. I'm telling you, the Dead Files were one of the best produced psychic medium shows. And she is not blowing you so much. Because she literally, while we were watching it every night on our vacation. Among some of the other dead ones. She said something like, oh, the way they did the history.

I want to use it. I want to use your idea for something else we're doing with mediums if it works. Because I just think it's really good to be comprehensive with the history. You're not to produce it. Yeah, there we go. It's so cool. I promise we committed no crimes of omission on that show. We told the whole story.

It's crazy. It's so thorough. Thank you. Thank you for your service. Rob, great to see you. We'll talk again soon, no doubt. Thank you. Great seeing it.

Thank you. You got it. All right. We are going to, I guess, switch gears a little bit here. Let me tell you about our upcoming guest. It is Ralph Scholl. Holheimer, he is the head of the Center for Applied History and International Relations, theory at the Matthias Corvinus, Kli, Jim in Budapest,

research focused on political theory, international relations, emphasis on how culture, values, and ideologies influence state behavior. So it's a perfect follow-on to what we were just discussing with Rob Rosen. So Dr. Ralph Schulheimer, after this. If there was ever time to be rationally ready, it is now. I urge you to consider getting one of the emergency kits from the wellness company. Because TWC has seven different kits that are customized for a variety of situations. Wouldn't be a bad idea to take a look at each.

Considering, say, what we've just been through in California with the fires, I was happy to have the field kit on hand. And the contagion kit, in particular, is suited for what is being predicted to be the next outbreak. That would be the H1N5 or avian or bird flu. Of course, the same experts from the COVID era are freaking out about this potential pandemic. But don't panic. Just arm yourself with the meds you might need if this comes to pass. Contagion emergency kit contains ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, tamiflu, and bodesonide, an inhaler that is good for airway reactivity and tightness as well as reducing viral

replication in the airways. Go to Dr.do.com slash TWC for 10% off your purchase. And your body tends to respond to whole food nutrients working together, rather than isolate ingredients, all compete for absorption. Pahliavalliolia's bone broth is a whole food, not a supplement. It delivers vital amino acids. The way nature packaged them made from 100% grass-fed bones. No filler, solvents, artificial, anything comes in six varieties. My favorite, of course, is chocolate, which goes in my coffee on a regular basis. And Susan makes me these protein frappuccinos. It is a nutritious treat, not just a sugar bomb. It's all college of protein. Go to doctor.com slash Paylo Valley for 15% discount when you buy this or 20% off when you subscribe.

We are such a fan of their products and the care with it's Autumn and her team. Thank you. She says I can drink it. It goes about processing and the regenerative farming, everything we sign off on all her stuff. So excuse me. This can't sit in front of me without me drinking it. That's brilliant. And thank you, Drew.

Who's Dr. Drew? Where is he? Dr. Drew. Dr. Dr. Schollhammer, you can find him on YouTube at Ralph Dash Schollhammer, S-C-H-O-E-L-H-M-M-E-R, host Hammer Time. He also host, he's also columnist for Brussels Signal and unheard, and he can be seen on national and international television program as well, Sky TV and whatnot. Dr. Schollhammer, welcome.

Thank you for being here. Dr. Drew, great to be back out again. And thanks for the very humbling introduction. I really appreciate it. Of course. So it seems like a really crazy time to be talking to you in terms of, I don't know if you heard anything we were just talking to Rob Rosen about. But this notion that media and ideology and the culture is all sort of running amok in an extraordinary way. It must be a wild time to have your area of expertise.

what captures your attention? Well, what captures my attention mostly at the moment is not just when you discussed this with the previous guest, it is not just the attempts to limit information, if you want, to crack down on alternative media. It is also the state media openly publishing fake information.

I give you a very concrete example. There was a recent, and by recent, I mean, today, there was a cease and desist letter to the German public broadcaster, because they claimed that Elon Musk was calling for right-wing groups to hunt migrants in Ireland, which was completely made up.

He didn't say anything of that kind. And I really want to emphasize it, that German state media went out and made that claim. So they were lying. Of course, they underestimated that Mr. Musk immediately went after them, and he got a cease and desist data. But this is the absurdity we live in.

The very news outlets, the very governments that claim that alternative media, like you, like me, that we are spreading fake news. news. They are doing it themselves, or to give another concrete example, when there were the ice crackdowns in the United States, again, the same German state's TV station, they used AI-generated videos to make it look even more brutal and even more reprehensible, whatever your take on it is, right? They had to create fictional accounts of how ICE is behaving because

they didn't like what they really counts. And again, these are taxpayer-funded news outlets that claim to present the truth, and they're the only ones who are reliable. It is quite remarkable and quite scary in certain cases, I have to admit. Yeah, it's scary. And the whole way things are framed, am I getting this right that the German Chancellor gave a speech claiming that the alternative for Germany, alternative for Deutsche Land,

stands in the tradition of the Holocaust? No, you got this right. I mean, this is what he said. I mean, he tends to say, especially if he has a camera in front of him, he tends to say a lot of stupid stuff. for example, that he would not send his children to the United States. And I think just two days ago, he said, oh, my God, America is so great. It seems like he always says what he thinks the audience around him wants to hear.

So that is a weakness I think the German Chancellor should not have. But this is, again, completely absurd. If you look at German history, there were more actual Nazis, you know, in the post-war conservative party and the Social Democrats and all these other parties, then in the AFD, because the AFD is barely 20 years. years old. So again, it's a historical and it's a form of propaganda to discredit

the opposition. And you drew, you know this very well from the United States. The attempt to discredit anybody by putting them into the vicinity of national socialism is an old strategy. But certainly enough. I don't know if you saw the

counter-programming to the UFC fight at the lawn of the White House, was it two nights ago. They were singing about you know, we're going to go after the fascist or we're going to get you fascist. And I thought, did they even, what did they, what do they, where does that come from? How are they, what, who are they talking about? And I was in France a couple days ago and I was talking to a waiter and I just, I said, you know,

what do you think about Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella? And he goes, oh, far, extreme right, extreme, you know, Nazis. And I went, okay. And how about Melanchon? Oh, well, that's just traditional left. a nutty cuckoo communist who says crazy shit all the time. And they look at that as just, oh, that's just the traditional left. But Drew, I've been reliably informed but a mainstream either in the United States

that if you have an SS tattoo on your chest, you're just a regular down-the-road Democrat. So it seems that the conversation on this issue is shifting quite quickly. Or that it can happen that you have the tattoo and don't know what it means. And by the way, just as a quick side note, if you're in the military and you have interested in military history, you know exactly what the death head of the SS looked like. But, you know, the double standards depending on where you come from politically. Well, but this is again, back to what we were talking about with Rob Rosen

and the way the press looks at things. But it is what I don't understand is the extreme rhetoric. You know, it's these far right, fascist, all this sort of, it's hysteria. It's hysteria talk. And I don't understand how we got here. You know, we sort of pulled back from everyone is Hitler that I don't like. But now everyone is fascist that I don't like. Yeah, and now everybody is basically super Hitler that I don't like, right?

This is, I think, going to be the new thing where I say, well, Hitler was bad, but these other guys are even worse. But I can understand the hysteria a little bit because imagine yourself in their shoes. So you oppose Le Pen, you oppose Farage. oppose Trump, you oppose the AFD. Yet in every poll, they are climbing and climbing and climbing and climbing. I mean, we are no longer talking about them doing well in elections in certain countries, my own country of Austria, for example. We are talking about them taking an absolute majority in parliament. So this is not just about, oh, they will have more influence. This is about them really taking power. And I understand from their perspective, it is something that I would welcome. But I understand from their perspective that they get more hysterical. Because the whole, you are a Nazi,

you know what, it no longer sticks, particularly the younger generation. I mean, imagine yourself, Drew, if you are born in, let's say, 2001, 2002, and somebody comes along and says, look at what happened 80 years ago, don't get me wrong, I'm all for historical memory, but it just doesn't resonate with them as it does with you and my generation. Yeah. Back to the counter-programming to the UFC fight. One thing I noticed was that the counter-programming to the fight was, I mean, the people at the podium were in their 80s.

Bet Midler is in her 80s. Jane Fonda in her 80s. And most everyone I saw there were old white people. And I thought over on the UFC side, there's a lot of white people, a lot of African Americans in the military uniform. And they're young. Everybody's young over there.

I think there's a generational thing you're pointing at that's starting to happen as well. Not that everyone falls in line. line with these different political orientations based on their age right now. But it's kind of, I'd not seen that so much before that you're saying it, that trying to sort of brainwash people about, you know, the reemergence of something from almost 100 years ago. It's like, young people just like, yeah, yeah, okay, okay, grandpa, that's fine.

What else you got? Yeah. But I'm curious from your standpoint, I'll let you finish that thought, but I'm also curious for your example, you're an academic. What is going on here? What's your theory about what's happening from the cultural ideological perspective? And finish your comment first. Now, I was just saying, you know, if you roll out Robert De Niro and he has one of his,

you know, F-bomb Tourette's syndrome, you know, attacks. I mean, this is not something that resonates with a young person. I think what we are experiencing, I mean, there's a great book out there for those who are interested by Neil Howe is called The Fourth Turning. I think we do have one of these major structural demographic shifts. By the way, not just in Europe, also in the United States. World War II is now two generations behind us. So this generation we're talking about,

they don't even have necessarily a very close relative who lived through that period, right? Which is completely fine. This happens every two generations. They're completely detached from these events, and they are now looking for new things. Now, you see this, I would argue, in all kinds of areas, right? You see it in some way also when all of a sudden people like Nick Fuentes become popular with young people.

But you see it, of course, also with some pike, with all these different or Curtis Yardin, right? There's a whole list. And I'm passing at this conversation, no judgment on these people. But it shows you that the youth has moved on, that the next generation is moving on. And the interesting thing is going to be, will the established parties or the new parties kind of wake up to the strength? to this trend first, at least in Europe. I think in the United States is always difficult because you have these different layers

within the established parties, the Democratic Party and the Republicans, which in Europe are very often independent parties all of their own. You know, Caleb threw up on the screen there, the cover of the book The Fourth Turning, which is a certain orientation. It's a kind of a, it's an interesting theory.

And it's sort of, from my perspective, kind of goes without saying that different generations have differing sort of personality profiles and end up with the kind of different political points of view. But do you think that that book was getting onto something factually accurate? I think so. I think so. I mean, you know, they brought out the same book in several iterations. So, you know, the fourth turning is coming. The fourth turning is here. Here's how it's going to be after the fourth turning. But I think every author has the right to sell as many books as possible.

But if you look at the content, right, I think they have been pretty close to the mark when they argued that the 2020s will be a time period of significant turmoil, both in the United States and in Europe. And I think it's very hard to deny that this is happening, because even a lot of the stuff that's going on internationally has domestic causes very often. So I think it's a very good book. And again, as I said before, the distance to historical events is my parents were born in the 1940s. I still had a very close relationship to my grandparents who were adults during World War II. But the generation coming after me, right, they don't have any. kind of that connection, which is why they don't react the same way as you and I did when you hear,

for example, they claim that you are Nazi, they claim that you are fascists. Because for us, this is something that was somehow closer because we knew people who lived through that period or the greatest generation in the United States. You probably knew people that fought in World War II, that landed in Normandy, that were involved in the war industry in the United States. But those born, after in the 1990s or even later, they have no connection to this. So this is now a historical period that's going to need new anchors

and it's not yet entirely clear what these anchors are going to be. I want to shift a little bit to another topic they're doing in Europe where they're thinking about outlawing VPNs and I guess in the UK, they want to outlaw social media under the age of 16,

which on its surface sounds like a great idea. I mean, this kind of thing people are kind of fishing around for. But I think I saw Elon Musk today or yesterday suggesting that this is just another way they're going to get at silencing people. Oh, God, yes.

I mean, it's almost funny. I mean, we are now reaching a situation. It's going to be easier to vote in California than to get an Instagram account in the UK. I mean, it's probably not long, I have to admit. I'm probably not long. I think they're still counting votes in California. No, this is completely absurd.

And of course, it's a crackdown on free speech because whom are they targeting the 16-year-olds, whom are the 16-year-old shifting to to their right-wing party. So I mean, this is quite obvious. And you know what the most absurd thing about all of this is? I always believe they want to limit access of young people, for example, to pornography.

But that's not covered by this. So it's really, you cannot have an Instagram account, but if you want to look up hardcore pornography, not a problem. So it's quite absurd, and I think it's it seems quite obvious what the goal is. That is so crazy.

All right, I want to ask you one more time, though, what's happening here from, do you have a theoretical frame other than the fourth turning, which is partly what you've described here, of what is happening to us? Is it about the phones? Is it about the media bias? Is it something that just happens periodically in human history? And this is just our version of it. Where are we? And can you come up with the theory is why? Oh, absolutely. I mean, my theoretical frame is that contrary to what many will argue is that democracy is actually working because the purpose of democracy is that within an existing political system, the people can decide whom they want to be in charge. But the issue is that those who are currently

in charge, they don't want this changing of the guards. So what we are experiencing at the moment that any time somebody says they do fill in the blank to defend democracy, what in fact they're doing is sabotaging democracy because the whole point is that people can vote for new parties, for new movements, put them in charge, and if they fail, right, they can put somebody else in charge. But you see, from the restrictions of free speech, from laws that are being passed that are supposed only, right, to serve the purpose of not allowing these alternative movements to get in any way, shape, or form into power, right? All of this is designed to basically lock in, you'd said something before that I liked very much.

It is the status quo elites, right? They want to maintain the current status quo at all costs. And this is what we see happening because the argument is if we don't allow people to debate, if we don't allow people to voice their opinion, if we don't allow Elon Musk to own X, then we can continue and maintain the conditions as they currently are. But the pressure is building, and again, the ironic thing is,

they said, oh, we just have to keep the right wingers out of power. But the problem is that in more or more places, the right wingers are getting close to 50, 51%. So they won't need anybody else to govern because they will have a majority all of their own. Yeah, I've heard that sort of frame before, and I think that is accurate. We put up the hammer time.

Is it a podcast or a stream? Let's put that up again, Caleb. Tell us about that. It is both a podcast and a stream. I have to admit, it has been laying dormant for a while, but I will revive it. So everybody who sees this, please check it out. I hope so.

I have a couple of interesting things to say. Of course, it's all free. There is no paywall. There is no, no charges, no nothing. It's purely for your information and I hope also for entertainment. So take a look. Hit the subscribe button and the like button. I would really appreciate it.

And I hope to see you over there. And it's also ralphshulheimer.net. Am I pronounce it your last name correctly? Yes, perfectly. Perfectly. Okay. All right, excellent. And also on X, it's Ralph Fell, F-E-L.

Is that correct? That is also correct. Okay. Yeah, it is, it's interesting to, you know, the Chinese curse, right, may live through interesting times. And there is, this elite that is, this ensconced elite, I've heard it sort of referred to as the managerial class. Obviously people are exercised about the amount of money that the elite has and the way they're holding on to things. to me that's sort of the extraordinary part i think i think that's a little different about right now because i think in years past the elite uh very much focused on the next generation and didn't live as long and didn't cling to their their power quite the same way i mean look at our government they've got a bunch of 80 and 90-year-olds in there that that's unheard of so it's going to take a while to shift i guess maybe that's the part that's new but it does seem to be changing and talking to you

gives me a little bit of hope that sort of rationality, truth can sort of reassert itself. I mean, this is the big question, right? If you look at all these studies about changing historical times, the question is always, do you come out stronger a week at the end of it? I mean, the Roman Empire or the Roman Republic went through several crises. Usually, for a couple of times, they emerged stronger. But, you know, after six, seven times, they didn't emerge at all. So this is always the big question.

Is this going to be the rebirth of... something even better, or is this terminal decline? And I think it is too soon to tell. I mean, the optimists say, oh, don't worry. Like, the light is at the end of the tunnel, and it's going to be great. But it could also be the oncoming train that's going to run you over. Yeah, of course. And the fourth turning, sort of, to me, gives a little more of a positive spin to it. They're talking about this hero generation coming in. So we will see. Let's hope they're right. Ralph, we thank you for, yeah, hope they're right. I appreciate you being here. Thank you, Drew. It was awesome.

All right. Next up, one more guest to bring to you guys. It is Yasmin Arrington Brooks. She is the founder and executive director of Scholar Chips with these emphasis on CHIPS. She is a 4013C non-c-3, rather, nonprofit, providing college scholarships, mentoring, and mental health support to children of incarcerated parents. We'll talk to her right up to this. Hey, Dr. Drew here. and we are interested in health and longevity,

and the longevity nutrient is Fatty 15, discovered amazingly by a veterinarian who was responsible for the Navy's fleet of dolphins. Turns out dolphins are healthier when they have adequate amounts of pentadecanoic acid, which is C-15. It also, for us, it helps humans as well, reduces the oxidative stress on our cell membranes,

which is part of the aging process, called ferruposis. So she takes it, I take, the whole family takes it, and if you'd like some, go to Dr. Drew.com slash fatty 15 for yours. There are discounts there. Oh my God, look, Drew. It's a dolphin. Oh, my gosh. Hey, Dr. Drew here.

And even when we travel, we bring the new convenient fatty gummies. They're delicious and they're portable and they're great. And remember, this is a longevity ingredient. It fights against the oxidated stress on our cell membranes. We call that process ferroposis, discovered in dolphin research by Dr. Van Watson. And I'm taking this every day, even when I travel. It's fatty 15. I want to take a quick call here.

Eric. Janice, go ahead. Christine, you're an ER nurse. Dr. Drew, what happens if you inject something oil based directly into a vein? Did the drug company lie to the government or did the government just choose to lie to the public? New and here is very good. We're able to express ourselves. I don't see the profession doing anything to really build trust beside you.

Happy to be on here. Thank you for having me. You and I see the world the same way. What is it like for you to be the most chiseled and best-looking man in media? Giving us the information we need. Thank you for the truth. My pleasure. We are going to take your calls at 8333-D-R-D-R-E-W.

And we have time for calls after I talked to Yasmin. She's again, Yasmin Ayrinton Brooks, former founder and executive director of scholarship. You can follow her on X Scholarchips, C-H-I-P-S Scholarshipsfund.org, and she has her own account on Yazzie, Y-I-Z-E-Speaks. Yasmin, welcome. Hi, Dr. Drew. How are you? Thanks for having me. I'm doing well.

Tell us about the project. Yes, absolutely. So Scholar Chips, the Chips is an imperfect acronym for children of incarcerated parents. And as you mentioned, we are a 501C3 nonprofit organization. Our mission is to provide college scholarships, mentoring mental health supports, and a robust support network for young people who have incarcerated parents. We help them get to and through college and into their careers. I'm guessing you have a personal experience that led to you pursuing this. Absolutely. Yes, absolutely.

So when I was a junior in high school, this was back in 2010, my dad, well, really my whole life since I was about two years old, my father has been in and out of jail and federal prison my entire life to this very day. And so when I was in high school, I enrolled in an after school extracurricular program called Learned Serve International in Washington, D.C., which is where I go. grew up, and they exposed us to social entrepreneurship and social innovation, and this idea that even at a young age, we have agency to make positive change in the world. And they challenged us to identify one social issue that they asked us, you know, what pisses you guys off? You know, an issue that we wanted to see change and improve, and then come up with a venture project or a creative solution to that problem. We had to pitch this idea. to a panel of judges.

I call it like a mini shark tank for teenagers. And so that is how scholarships was birthed. My maternal grandmother who raised me has always been an advocate of education. And we knew that I was going to take the college route. We didn't know how we were going to pay for it. And so my grandmother says to me, after we've done about a year of research online, she says, yes, I mean, there are so many college scholarship. out here, niche programs, but I don't see any for young people like yourself who have

incarcerated parents. So I took, you know, I did the research and, you know, at that time, the statistics said that over 2 million young people in the United States have an incarcerated parent. But now there's an updated statistic from the Annie E. Casey Foundation that says nearly five million young people in the United States have had an incarcerated parent. So there are a lot of us, And I realized I was not alone. I was encouraged to make this a real, brilliant organization. And we have been giving scholarships and book awards and helping young people.

We've given over $700,000 in college scholarships since 2012. Amazing. Yeah, people do not understand that having a parent in prison is considered one of the major, what's called adverse childhood experiences. It impacts on development. It picks on your options. and you need special support for that. And the fact that you're providing this one area

that could easily have been overlooked, by the way. You know, it's one thing to get the mental health services. It's another to provide these things that allow people to move forward in life. Yes, exactly, Dr. Drew, exactly. What do you want people to know about the program? Where can they get involved? How do they support it?

And how do they apply for your scholarships? Yes, absolutely. So we actually just finished our 2026 application cycle. So we're reviewing applications. We're interviewing young people across the country as we speak. But we need as much support as possible. Our headquarters is based in Washington, D.C., but we support young people across the country. So there is national eligibility.

Please find us on scholarships fund.org. Again, that's Scholarships, C-H-I-P-S fund, F-U-N-D.org. And as Dr. Drew mentioned, scholarships, we are across a social media platform. So LinkedIn, we're on LinkedIn, scholarships for children of incarcerated parents. We're on X. We're on TikTok. We're on Facebook. Anywhere you are, threads, anywhere you are, come meet us.

We need mentors. We're always looking for folks, particularly who have. who have gone to college, who have had that undergraduate experience, because we all know that that is a unique experience. You don't necessarily have to have had an incarcerated parent, but if you're directly impacted, that always helps. Just to be a listening ear, to encourage your mentee and to help them to and through college, we need donations, we need support.

So again, visit us at our website and across social media platforms. Yes, I mean, thank you for doing this project and thank you for us making us feel a little bit better about ourselves today. Like we're doing something that's helpful

and I just am so inspired by you. Thank you. And absolutely. Help me help you, for sure. But thank you for the opportunity Dr. Drew to share more about scholarships.

You bet. Yazi speaks is where you can follow Yasmin herself. And then Scholarships is the ex also. Thank you, Azbeen. Thank you so much. Thank you. Bye. You got it. So nice. Oh my goodness. And if anyone wants to call in 8333-D-R-D-R-A-W, we are still got a few minutes for calls if you wish.

Let us put up upcoming shows because I'm very excited. Tomorrow, Gad's sad coming on in. And we have Mike the situation, Sorrentino on Thursday. Mike, obviously his recovery has been very, very excited. and I've worked with those guys at Jersey Shore quite a bit. And then the Wise Nuts podcast guys coming in after him. Baccia Angar Sargon coming back. Brian Dresden. Andrew Yang coming in here. Scott Presslow, same day.

There's a lot of going on here. Dr. Stephanie Van Watson coming back around, talk a little bit of fatty 15. V. Bebekei Maniqa. I can never pronounce her name properly. She, of course, is the physician, medical researcher, who published some of that original data on the fact that specific lots of the COVID vaccine were the ones having all the side effects.

And that has been once again become a topic. It's come around again. Let me see. Naomi Wolf come back, of course. Salty Cracker coming in in August. We've got a lot of stuff coming up. But I think the next week or two is very, very excited for me because they're all guests that I admire greatly.

and enjoy talking to. You guys are not calling in. You could if you wanted to, but let me look at the restream, see what's going on with the comments there. Caleb, anything on your mind? No, I'm excited for Gad's sad.

I think he can talk a lot about what just happened in the Los Angeles elections where everyone at least half of Los Angeles just decided, we love the way things are. Let's just continue this way and change nothing. This is, everything's going perfect here. It's his insanity.

That is suicidal. suicidal empathy. Literally not. That's what it is. You will learn tomorrow with Dr. Sadd what deontology is, deontological perspective. You will. I recommend you read his book,

suicidal empathy, and we'll give you a taste of it tomorrow. I know Gad very, very well. You know, he hangs out in Laguna once a year and we try to get together when he's there. He particularly likes a taco stand. Laguna. I've yet to share the tacos with him there. I've been a couple blocks away with him.

And I called him a few times when he was writing the book. And he's like, I'm in a coffee shop. I'm writing suicidal empathy. And I thought, okay, well, I can relate to the topic. I know when it's, but little did I know is going to become a big old bestseller. All right. So tomorrow, Gad sat in here. We look forward to seeing you. We're at four o'clock tomorrow. It's our Wednesday show. so Caleb can do the, do you want to talk about what's going on there over at the Maha stream? RFK's organization, the Maha organization, we do a live show

for Maha to cover all the latest news and the updates and what they've been doing and what they've accomplished throughout the week and you bring in a lot of the top people. Dr. Oz, RFK, we had Cheryl Hines on last week. So just go to look at Maha Action.org and you can find the schedule and watch the shows there. There was this weird, weird rumor

that RFK was going to step down or be fired or something. He has been on the record that is total BS. So I don't know where that came from or why it was flying around, but so be it. More of the, you know, why you can't believe everything you hear in the news. You just got to be really, you know, correct me if it turns out to be true. But even AI, I noticed, you've got to have a certain skepticism and knowledge-based to even assess what comes through on AI. It's kind of extraordinary that you have to already know something about the thing you're talking about. I mean, you're asking AI about to know whether the information is good or not.

So, well, hopefully what we do here helps. You have no idea how correct you are about that. Like, everyone wants to talk about how AI is going to steal jobs and make everything too easy for everyone. But when I use AI, it's like I have to literally write as a human a 20 to 40 page document of instructions and details and branding. And like, you have to put, if you want to get good results from AI, you have to put good stuff into it first. Garbage in, garbage out. That's right.

That's right. But even what comes back, you have to have, you can't be totally naive. I mean, you can be, obviously, and it's not unhelpful. It's just you have to be skeptical about what you're getting because you'll notice, Gilman amnesia applies to AI as well. If you know something about the topic, you'll realize, oh, that's not, that's not really accurate, isn't really what I want. You can keep going downstream to get closer and closer to the truth.

but Gelman amnesia is a very important concept. And it applies in virtually every media all the time. So be careful. All right, everybody, thank you for being here. And let me just check, make sure no calls have come in. They have not. We will see you tomorrow at 4 p.m. Pacific Time. Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Caleb Nation and Susan Pinsky.

Emily Barsh is our content producer. 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 Dr.Drew.com slash help.