BTC Sessions - Fauci’s 1,100-Page Diary + Fifth Amendment Silence | Dr. Peter McCullough

Starting point is 00:00:00 All right, good morning, Dr. McCullough. Thank you so much for joining me today. Very excited to have this conversation. There's a lot that we're getting to get into right away that's very topical. So I want to dig into the pharmaceutical industrial complex and problems in academia as well as the lingering effects from the MRNA shop. But before all of that, let's start with what's unfolding right now this morning. Dr. Fauci is testifying before the Senate committee across from Rand Paul fresh off the release of those 1,100 pages of his diary. So beginning there, what's your take on the diary release and on Dr. Fauci just repeatedly pleading the fifth during his testimony today? You know, these are very, very important developments and the whole pandemic controversy, if you will. You know, and this multiple of the senators have mentioned, you know, over a million Americans died of COVID. Now, that's grossly exaggerated according to the government's statistics, but even if we put it at, you know, 200,000 who died of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, those are lives lost.

Starting point is 00:00:57 And the points were made that people lost their loved ones without being able to see them at the very end. All of the restrictions, the failed hospital protocols, sadly, we're probably at about 600,000 Americans who've died after one of the COVID vaccines from a vaccine complication. So it's actually worse for the vaccine. Vaccine complications brought up during the hearing. But the revelations are that Fauci was essentially two different people. He was one person as he basically made his notes and described himself in his interactions in his diary, and he was a different person in the public, particularly on the mainstream media. And boy, so much came out in the few days before this hearing.

Starting point is 00:01:45 That's incredible. What were the revelations that kind of surprised you with regards to the diary injuries? Was there anything that they kind of caught you off guard he found really shocking or kind of like a almost like a smoking gun in terms of information? Well, first, Fauci grossly inflated the case fatality rate. Privately, he knew there was a very benign illness for most people, but publicly he inflated this. Privately, he knew that masks didn't work and weren't effective, but publicly he actually pushed masking.

Starting point is 00:02:16 We know that, you know, under congressional testimony in the past, and by the way, I've testified in the same U.S. House of Representatives Committee, he, he, He did a day after he did, and I've testified five times in the Senate, in the chair that he's in right now. I've been there. You know, he had told Congress that he had never advised locking anything down. But in fact, he did. He privately said that, you know, he talked to the governor of New York and the mayor of New York, and he was influential and essentially shutting down the country.

Starting point is 00:02:51 The other thing is that he despised President Trump, and he undermined President Trump. He actually undermined other members of the White House Task Force, including one of my former medical school graduates, Rear Admiral Brett Jarrar, who was on the Coronavirus Task Force Committee, the first one, where Fauci fed questions to Jake Tapper so Jake could try to take down Brett Jarrar, try to embarrass him and embarrass Trump. So Fauci was undermining what Trump overall and some good people like Brett Jarrah were trying to do during this time of crisis. Fauci clearly was promoting himself.

Starting point is 00:03:35 He was having other federal employees do applications and support letters so he could get financial prizes. And he did get financial prizes through this. So the self-engrandizement was incredible. And then importantly, it was about him. At one point in time, he thought he was more powerful and a bigger person in the world than the president of the United States. So Fauci was a delusional egomaniac, and now he shows up on Capitol Hill, some grandstanding by his attorney. and now he's not answering a single question under oath, not a single question. And Senator Josh Howley pointed out that someone who has a presidential pardon, they can't take the Fifth Amendment.

Starting point is 00:04:26 Essentially, in the Senate right now, he is, you know, he is in contempt. That's very interesting. Yeah, I was watching it earlier today. And even there was like, I think was it, Randtriver, who was? somebody was asking, like, if there's a red folder on your desk and he's just pleading the fifth or whether there's a red folder currently in front of them, I want to quickly just double tap on the financial prizes aspect. Of course, in the Bitcoin space, it's a lot of the time we're looking at all the money to find the incentives and realize what's going on here. Could you elaborate a little bit more on the financial prizes that he was awarded? Well, he was approached by different entities. There was one group in Israel, for instance, to apply for some type of, you know, medical hero award.

Starting point is 00:05:10 And in doing so, he actually had his staff do it. He had people write letters. They were emailing each other to get more material to put together his application for Fauci to get a nearly a million dollar cash award, which he pocketed. He got it. You know, we cannot have our public servants during a time of crisis spend their time on getting personal cash awards and actually, you know, utilizing other federal employees. You know, through his entire diary, he's expressing no concerns about Americans and Americans losing their business or dying of the illness or dying of a vaccine complication. He doesn't treat any patients himself. And, you know, to make matters worse, I mean, this is astonishing. He actually takes the Moderna vaccine in December of 2020. He suffers a Moderna blood clot in his long and a pulmonary infarction in June of, 2021, and he carefully keeps all of this quiet and goes on a blood thinner. By that time,

Starting point is 00:06:16 5,000 Americans had reported vaccine blood clots. It was in the peer-reviewed literature. The CDC was slow to come around in late 2022, admitting that the COVID vaccines caused blood clots. Fauci kept it all quiet. Instead of coming out publicly and say, listen, I've had a complication. I don't want this to happen to any more Americans. He let more Americans. He let more Americans, Americans suffer vaccine, injuries, disabilities, and deaths. So let me get this right. So he had a vaccine injury at about 2021 and continued to let things roll. CDC didn't respond until 2022.

Starting point is 00:06:50 So basically another year of letting people continue. Also, it's funny, sometimes you find yourself in your own little echo chamber. I live in the Bitcoin space and hang out with other Bitcoiners where we've long had a good sense of what's actually going on here. I was actually kind of surprised to hear that people are still pushing for the shot today. How is it that this product is still out there and getting pushed forward? why is it still even on shelves? Or is there something I'm completely missing? The government has spent over a billion dollars with Pfizer and another billion with

Starting point is 00:07:18 Moderna for unwanted COVID vaccine boosters, now the seventh booster. This is astonishing. The McCullough Foundation did an analysis because the CDC won't tell us how many people are taking shots. So we used sales data from the financial reports and costs per dose and wastage, etc. And we've concluded that 31 million Americans are still taking boosters. That's under 9%. So it can't the vaccines can't possibly be having a theoretical beneficial effect on the population. And we think sadly that we don't know for sure, but we think sadly that the major users of the vaccines are those forced to take them, children where the vaccines are on the childhood schedule or, you know, health care workers or other front-facing workers who don't want the vaccines

Starting point is 00:08:11 and are still taking them. I think the vaccines have become safer because they code for a more benign form of the spike protein. But still, these are genetic shots. Our research suggests that the genetic material is circulating in the blood for years after taking these shots, and we're greatly concerned. I want to come back to that circulating in just a second. One thing I did want to touch on just from the earlier part in the conversation with regards to Fauci trying to undermine the Trump administration. He's been there for a very, very long time. I'm just curious your thoughts on if he, if it's particular about Trump or if there's some partisan issue there, why does it seem like such a left-right divide with regards to health? It shouldn't be a left-right divide, but in the Senate proceedings

Starting point is 00:08:52 going on right now, you know, all of the lawdits and senators falling over themselves to congratulate Fauci. They're all on the Democratic left. And those asking questions on behalf of Americans, you know, generally launching an inquiry into what happened and what Fauci knew and what he, you know, what he did, they're all on the, you know, congressional Republican right. You know, health care should not be a right or left issue. A COVID inquiry should not be a left to right issue. We should just want to know. And these questions are just legitimate questions. So where I'm concerned is that on the Democratic left, they seem to act like they don't want to know or they do want to know and they're influenced by some force that is telling them, no, no,

Starting point is 00:09:49 let's not ask any questions of Dr. Fauci. In fact, some on the Democratic left ask no questions. They simply use their time to praise him. Absolutely ridiculous. Also further looking at the diaries as well, if I'm not mistaken, there was some entries with regards to the origins of COVID as well. And then we had Tulsi Gabbard come out and give us some information about that a couple months ago, a couple weeks ago at this point too. I'm curious your thoughts on that.

Starting point is 00:10:13 I'm wondering even if, like, there's one, there's a credibility issue. Like, I feel like the medical establishment, even academia as a whole, was already having issues with like reproducibility of results, depending on like particularly which field we're looking at. But I feel like this has just taken out the knees of credibility of academia and medicine as a profession. And then I see things like that with regards to them, more or less suppressing the theory that it came from the Wuhan Biology Institute. I just want to get your response kind of to all that to what it's done to medical credibility and maybe some downstream consequences as a result. That's a fair comment.

Starting point is 00:10:45 Credibility of institutional medicine and particularly the medical journals has plummeted because the medical journals, the mainstream. medical journals listed the contention that the virus emanating out of the Wuhan lab was medical misinformation. Major medical journals did that. In fact, major medical journals published a fraudulent explanation that it came out of nature. It came out of a wet market. So the medical institutions are on the wrong side of history here. And what Fauci said privately, his diary is at, listen, we know it came out of the lab. All the experts agree. He called a meeting of experts. And that's Christian Anderson from Scripps, Jeremy Farr, at the Waltham Trust, who's now at the WAHO, you know, a whole slew of experts. And they told Fouchy, listen, it came out of the Wuhan lab.

Starting point is 00:11:44 And Fauci literally, with this group, crafted a different story that it came out of nature. He stuck with this story. Christian Anderson from Scroo. scripts, published a fraudulent paper titled The Natural Origins of SARS-CoV-2 in Nature Medicine. Anderson has never retracted that paper. The journals never retracted that paper. The WHO signed on to this. The WHO declined Rear Admiral Brett Jarr's nominees to go investigate Wuhan, China.

Starting point is 00:12:14 And he, the WHO asked Peter Dasick. Peter Dasick is now debarred from the NIH. He's been called to testify. Peter Dasick was the go-between between Ralph Barrick at UNC. Chapel Hill who designed SARS-CoV-2 and did, you know, is his brainchild. And he carried the plans to Wuhan, China. And the work was done by Dr. Xingling-Liener group in Wuhan China. So Peter Desic knew all the time that the virus came out of the Wuhan lab. And he went over there and lied back to the WHO in the U.S. and said it didn't come from the lab and it came from nature. So institutional medicine, has been absolutely crushed on this. And I'm shocked. Here we are in 2026. No major journals come out and said, you know what? We're sorry. We're wrong. We want to publish Eratim's on this. We want to set the record straight. Still to this day, no institution wants to set the record straight. Outside of the U.S. House and Senate, thanks to Republican leadership.

Starting point is 00:13:17 What's, I want to just kind of pause on there for a second, too, because the one thing that strikes me is particularly like, we know it came from the lab, they know that we know it came from a lab, and we know that they know that we know it came from a lab. So at why, at this point to time, why is defending the natural origin, the wet market theory, so important? Do you have any ideas, any speculation on what that might be? I think this goes back now to the 1970s bio-weapons treaty. And, you know, we signed an international treaty saying we would not develop biological weapons. And you know, there is a paper published in the peer-reviewed journal, in the National Library of Medicine by Farcus and colleagues in the Journal of Military

Starting point is 00:13:58 of Medicine. They concluded, based on objective criteria, that SARS-CoV2 the virus is a bioweapon. So, I mean, it's right there. If there is agreement, broad agreement that the U.S. and Chinese were working together to develop a bioweapon that violates international treaty and it raises the whole issue, what was the plan for this bioweapon? Who is it going to be used on? And it goes from there. So I still think at a core level, our intelligence community, which is now kind of wavering on this lab origin, our intelligence community is probably sending strict messages out through what we call the biopharmaceutical complex, a large organized communication network, to not concede the laboratory origins of the virus because it will crosswalk to

Starting point is 00:14:55 a violation of the International BioWeapons Treaty. I'm curious if you know offhand the evidence that points to it actually being a potentially a bioweapon. Is there something specifically in the, what is it, the, oh, I'm blanking on the way that it's igma a gain its way into lung cells? what's the indication that it may actually be manmade and a weapon? Right. Well, that's the Farkas paper.

Starting point is 00:15:17 They use 30 criteria, but it centers on this. It centers on the spike protein, which is the spine on the surface of the virus. The ball is a nucleocapsid. That's kind of the natural part of the human coronavirus. The spike protein, this part, was engineered in the Wuhan Institute of Virology to allow the virus to invade respiratory epithelial cells, go inside the body, caused organ damage, caused blood clotting, and actually kill the organism. And that's exactly what it did in Dr. Ralph Barak, his papers that were orchestrated with Peter Dasik, David Morins,

Starting point is 00:15:55 Anthony Fauci. The spike protein is laboratory, you know, derived. And one of the things we found clinically is that once it gets in the human body, it stays there potentially for years. so for sure it's a bioweapon. It's interesting. I do want to talk about the biopharmaceutical complex, and do you actually want to talk about the journal complex, journal industrial complex as well too. But just quickly on that, you mentioned beforehand.

Starting point is 00:16:21 I think that you're finding, are you finding just spike protein three years, three and a half years later? Or are you finding MRNA still lingering three and a half years later as well? Well, in those who've taken the vaccine, we're finding both the Pfizer-Messinger RNA, we've yet to study Moderna,

Starting point is 00:16:39 but Pfizer for sure, three and a half years after the shots, vaccine spike protein, three and a half years after the shots. That's the full-length spike protein. And those who have have the natural infection, the tip of the virus, the S-1 segment, can be found in the human body about two years after the infection. And finding the spike protein in the body is related to symptoms.

Starting point is 00:17:07 People having trouble with heart, damage, blood clots, nerve damage, long COVID. In fact, the spike protein and the message RNA is found directly in cancer now. Interesting. Okay. I want to quickly expand on that a bit more. There's probably something I'm missing, but how is it possible that it's still lingering that long after the fact? Wouldn't the immune system be basically cleaning up everything? And just for rough clarification, when you're saying you're finding it, are you basically just taking like blood samples and just PCR and we can see that it's still kicking around? Well, let's take the messenger RNA first. So using a lab in Germany and Modia and using a PCR technique that actually finds multiple primers on Pfizer, for sure, we're finding

Starting point is 00:17:55 the Pfizer messenger RNA in the bloodstream. And the body has kind of put a little phospholipid packet around it called an exosome, but it's physically in the body three and a half years after the shot. The spike protein with the vaccine, you know, it's held open by two proline inserts into what's called the pre-fusion confirmation, so it doesn't undergo any receptor mediated catabolism. And there are no human enzymes that are known to break down the spike protein. I think it was very specifically engineered to stay in the body a very long time. And that's one of the reasons why Farkas and Collies concluded it is a bioweapon. Now, with the infection alone, just the tip of the spike proteins in the body, and it actually is found inside monocytes or forms of white blood cells.

Starting point is 00:18:45 Hopefully the body is digesting this scene and getting it out. But the fact that the spike protein is so resilient to enzymatic breakdown, and the fact that the messenger RNA, there is no human mechanism by which we can get rid of Pfizer-Maderna, is greatly concerning. I'm curious for someone that would have taken the vaccine. You talked about blood clots and potentially, I think it was nerve damage or nerve issues as well, too. What sort of symptoms are we seeing for long COVID patients, people that still have the circulating in their body? And in your experience, is there any effective treatment for actually helping to deal with it once identified? Well, there's four major areas where both long COVID and the vaccine and both.

Starting point is 00:19:27 And remember, the vaccines don't work. So patients got COVID anyway. So they have what's called a combined or hybrid injury. So those who took the shots who still got COVID anyway or in some order, those are the people worse off. And 97% of us have had COVID and 81% of us have taken a vaccine. So we're talking about the majority of people here. We're seeing syndromes along the lines of cardiovascular, which includes myocarditis,

Starting point is 00:19:56 paracarditis, advanced arthroscopic cardiovascular, arrhythmia, cardiocarditis, arrhyth, cardiac arrest, proven, neurologic, paralytic syndromes, Guillembray syndrome, transverse myelitis, stroke, neuropathies. We're seeing autoimmune, which are various forms of misconnective tissue disease, rheumatoid disease, thrombotic like Fauci had, a blood clot that shoots to the lungs, thrombotic syndromes elsewhere. You know, big blood clots that are amylogenic, they're rubbery, they don't seem to dissolve well. with blood thinners. And then a fifth area of concern not proven is cancer. Now, the approach has been brought forward by the wellness company. It's the only company that has evidence-based, you know,

Starting point is 00:20:43 peer-reviewed approach to deal with the spike protein. And the product's called the ultimate spike detox. So this is what ultimate spike detox looks like. It's been on the market now three years, supported by multiple peer-reviewed publications. It's the combination of been intestinal-grade, high dose, natokinase, bromline, curcumin, and other minor ingredients. But in preclinical studies, and in clinical studies, you know, it degrades and dissolves the spike protein helps people get this out of their body. Good. Well, it's good to hear we at least got something to try and deal with it.

Starting point is 00:21:17 We mentioned a couple times now cancer as well. What is it that we're seeing in terms of, is it just an uptick in, let's say, instances of cancer in the population, or what are we seeing that you're of concern with regards to the spike protein and cancer? With the pandemic, we've seen the emergence of the term turbo cancer. That means a cancer presenting at a younger age, a more advanced stage, and it's more aggressive in its progression. And National Cancer Institute's reporting this has been on the cover of Time magazine last year. So this is well-recognized female breast, reproductive, colon, prostate, lung, not all cancers,

Starting point is 00:21:56 But these solid organ cancers soon to be skyrocketing when examined, we're finding the vaccine and the spike protein is playing a role. Interesting. What is your, do you have a mechanistic hypothesis as to what's happening there, what's causing it? The best paper to quote is by anguice and bustose. And it's called the multi-hit hypothesis of oncogenicity of the COVID vaccines. And it has to do with the fact that the spike protein impairs our tumor defense. systems, BRCA, and P53. So that would be spike protein from the infection as well as the vaccine. So the infection may put us at risk. But the genetic vaccines were a very, very bad idea.

Starting point is 00:22:39 They never cleared oncogenicity testing preclinically. And the messenger RNA vaccines, we know messenger RNA because it's very long-lasting. It's pseudo-urigenated. It impairs DNA repair. It, you know, sadly, it changes gene expression. We've demonstrated that in multiple studies. And at least part of it actually integrates into the human genome. So this is bad news. Really? Sorry. It's integrating into the human genome. Like, what is that, retrovirus? Right. Well, it's not the entire code. Now, in a preclinical model by Alden and colleagues in Yangt de Moranis, they were able to show at least an amplicon, a 444 base pair, got into the human genome from Pfizer within, really within a matter of hours.

Starting point is 00:23:26 We've demonstrated in a woman in her 30s with an aggressive bladder cancer from the vaccine, that's about 20 base pairs of Pfizer we can actually see right in the tumor DNA. So this is bad news. We think, by the way, this is probably dose-related. So the people have had the most doses of messenger RNA could be a, at the highest risk of cancer. And this would apply also to messenger RNA influenza vaccines and respiratory and social vaccines, which were allowed on the market again with no preclinical cancer testing. Two things that kind of want to heal on there. I'll start with the one. In terms,

Starting point is 00:24:03 I remember which year was it? It felt like one of the years there was no death from influenza, which just seemed like a complete statistical like impossibility. If we look outside of just the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, do you have concerns? We mentioned. influenza, are there other ones on the market that you have, you have concerns with at this point? Yeah. So all the message RNA vaccines. So right now it's, it's influenza, RSV, and the COVID vaccines, Pfizer and Moderna do not look safe. I don't think fundamentally the platform looks safe or effective. Moderna's got Ebola and Hantavirus vaccines in testing right now. Moderna has cancer vaccines in testing. I don't advise anyone to take a messenger RNA.

Starting point is 00:24:47 vaccine. They haven't passed the basic preclinical testing for oncogenicity, triadogynicity, or genotoxicity. There's no published pharmacokinetics of how they get out of the body. So if you take a shot of messenger RNA, how do you get rid of it? Our data suggests the human body doesn't get rid of it. So I think the entire platform has been kind of waived on the market here by the U.S. FDA. It's been very ill-advised. When you mentioned one of them in development right now, the hantavirus, that immediately jumped out of me. Because if I'm not mistaken, we had a little bit of a media scare with regards to hantavirus.

Starting point is 00:25:25 I want to say a couple months ago, which seems a little bit all the suspicious or a little bit concerned. But maybe that's just a coincidence. I just wanted to point that out. True. And the hentavirus on a ship, all kinds of controversy there. Antivirus has always spread from rodent to human. Suddenly on the ship, a false narrative was created.

Starting point is 00:25:43 by the WHO that it was spreading human to human. They locked people into biosecurity centers for 45 days. At McCullough Foundation, we came out and said, no, it doesn't spread human to human. Very good paper by Toledo and colleagues in 2022, you know, prove that. It does not spread human human, yet people are locked down against their will. They never disclosed the rodent control logs. You know, that was fraudulent on its face.

Starting point is 00:26:09 And then, sure enough, we're told, Moderna, in the wings, has a Hanta virus vaccine. We're also told, by the way, there's no treatment, yet everybody went to the hospital with Hanta virus, they survived. Interesting. All right. Let's dive in there. I think that's a good spot in terms of the, you mentioned the biopharmaceutical complex.

Starting point is 00:26:29 And funny enough, like particularly on this podcast and this show, we talk a lot about the financial industrial complex. We talk about the military industrial complex, the tech industrial complex. For anyone that might not be familiar with the term, when you say biofarmaceutical industrial complex, what are you referring to? And what are the concerns there? What is this machine? Give us the lay of the land.

Starting point is 00:26:47 Well, recall when Eisenhower in his farewell address, he warned America about the military industrial complex, that there could be a group of organized companies and individuals that profit so much from war that they would want to keep war going, no matter what, to support the industry, even though that may be very bad for Americans and other countries and is to just propagate war for the sake of propagating war. in my first book, Courage to Face COVID-19, we outline a biopharmaceutical complex. That is the same construct, but it has to do with biowarfare and companies that are invested in creating dangerous viruses, bacteria, and fungi, and then also creating antidotes

Starting point is 00:27:35 or personal protective equipment, therapeutics, or vaccines, that they're in the business of doing this, And in order to make big money, there has to be pandemics. And so this whole complex, we believe, involves the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization, CEPI, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation, which has a whole business plan on this, the regulatory agencies, including the CDC, FDA, and NIH. We actually have pandemic response units in our government, Barta and DARPA that are working hand in glove, the UK regulatory agencies, Canada, South Africa. Australia. Now, the pharmaceutical companies and the therapeutic companies, they're suppliers to the complex.

Starting point is 00:28:18 They actually get very rich government contracts, many times no compete contracts, but they're simply suppliers. They're not driving the agenda. Importantly in the complex are NGOs, non-government organizations, Gates Foundation, Rockefeller Trust, Welcome Trust. We believe they're playing a huge role. And recently, Bill Gates was on Capitol Hill testifying closed session. about his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein because they were very much involved in pandemic planning. Pandemic planning means that they were creating a pandemic in order to provide a response that is mass global vaccination. That was outlined in Gates's Johns Hopkins planning seminar in 2017 called the Sparse pandemic where they said there's going to be a coronavirus pandemic. And then,

Starting point is 00:29:06 of course, an event 201, that's again, Gates and Johns Hopkins and Averill Haynes, who became our Director of National Intelligence, and she was at the World Economic Forum, they basically said, we're having a coronavirus pandemic is going to happen, and we will mass vaccinate the world. So this has all been telegraphed to us. This biopharmaceutical complex is real. They deal in trillions of dollars. Wow. It sounds like it might even be like on scale or on par with the military industrial complex there. Quickly expanding a little bit more on that. This is always something that I kind of missed. the hell did Gates get involved in health? Because that to me still feels like a weird jump.

Starting point is 00:29:46 If you have any information with regards to that. And then expanding on a little bit more with the NGOs, what is the, do you have any insight in terms of the motivation? Is it purely that they have stake in the pharmaceutical, they have stake in the solution. So they're trying to push the problem. Or is there something else that it might be missing there? Well, first off, let's take Gates. Remember, in his antitrust proceedings, he essentially is knocked out of being a competitive capitalist. So he evolves into a philanthropist. So he forms the Gates Foundation, certainly a lot of money, but he uses it for capitalistic reasons. So for example, Gates is very involved in planning the COVID pandemic, planning mass vaccination. What does he do?

Starting point is 00:30:28 His foundation invests in bio-intech. That's the German firm that has no products because he knows they're going to get the contract through Pfizer for a COVID-19 vaccine. So, you know, he gets a massive return on his investment. Seppi, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation, that's another NGO he invests in them. They're a vaccine incubator, and they're rewarded with billions of dollars pouring in from governments all over the world. So we're talking about big money. That's how Gates got into it. these NGOs profit because, you know, a not-for-profit organization depends on donations. No better source of donations than government agencies. You know, one U.S. government agency that's in the slush fund donation business is U.N.A.I.D.

Starting point is 00:31:23 And the money flowed through there and actually the Department of State to so much of the biopharmacidical complex. Absolutely incredible. It always seems to come back to the access to the money printer, right? just people trying to get as close as they can to the fresh notes coming off of the machine. I want the tag in there and see if you have any thoughts on this. So one thing that I was thinking about before our conversation is just the self-reinforcing orthodoxy of the journal like industrial complex. We have the academics that are then also doing the peer reviewed, and they have an incentive basically to not in order.

Starting point is 00:31:56 Their funding, usually and their tenure depends on their ability to output published papers. and then they sit on the peer review for those published papers. It kind of sets up a system where a heterodox view could never come in. It's going to be self-reinforcing to keep the existing kind of landscape. I'm curious your thoughts, one, on academia, the journal industry as a whole, and then how that relates to the biopharmaceutical industry in terms of, is there money flowing between the two to the two work hand in hand? It seems like they are very clearly related.

Starting point is 00:32:26 Well, just look at the advertisements in the medical journals. served by big pharma companies, and these big advertising contracts, their journals don't want to threaten. So, you know, Pfizer, for instance, has a lead blood thinner called Eloquist. Well, I can tell you, no journal in the world where you're advertising eloquist is going to want to publish a paper about, you know, side effects from the Pfizer vaccine. And by the way, the same thing is true on the mainstream media. Once you see that evening advertisements, you know, Glaxo Smith-Kline, Jansen, Pfizer. Once they have a media contract, the station never will have a story about a safety problem from

Starting point is 00:33:09 that company. They control the narrative of the media, whether it's the medical media or the mainstream media. Now, to make matters worse, though, there's another, I think, very important point when it comes to vaccines is there's almost like a medical religion around vaccines. There's a vaccine ideology. And so vaccines for 300 years have been presented to us as being safe for 300 years. And in fact, anybody who, you know, speaks contrary to that is heterodox and is considered apostate.

Starting point is 00:33:44 This has been going on for 300 years. And in my second book, which is a New York Times bestseller from the McKellah Foundation, we highlight this. We go back 300 years. And you know, as you sit here today, there's 20 scientific instruments, surveys that detect vaccine hesitancy. And if one is judged to be hesitant in taking a vaccine, that's actually considered a mental disease. What? Yeah. So vaccine hesitancy and the World Health Organization, other public health organizations have said,

Starting point is 00:34:20 one of the biggest threats to public health is vaccine hesitancy. So if vaccine hesitancy is a threat, then therefore it must be wiped out. So journals are in the business of wiping out vaccine hesitancy. So they will never publish a paper about vaccine side effects because it could lead to vaccine hesitancy. Which I imagine has to be going through the roof of this point in time. And I empathize with anybody who's trying to make a decision about such things because there's such an information, asymmetry in terms of like you you needed a medical practitioner in order to be able to do the the what is it 10,000 hours of study and expertise in order to advise you on these sort of things.

Starting point is 00:35:00 I'm always very hesitant about the idea of having even the vaccine schedule, which I could be completely wrong about. But the idea of having a one size fits all treatment always just kind of gets the hair on the back of my neck to stand up a little bit here. So with regards to vaccine hesitancy, I'm sure, but do we have any data with regards to I assume it's still on the rise. Maybe it's tapered off at this point in time. And how would you advise people to think about these sort of things, right? What should they be considering going forward? How do you make this decision in this day and age? Well, let's just take the COVID boosters. So we've already covered it. Our official government stance is that we should be taking boosters. They essentially say, you know,

Starting point is 00:35:35 anybody with any medical risk and it's a very, very liberal criterion to take a booster. Well, I told you, 91% of Americans are not taking boosters. We're obviously very hesitant. I mean, I would never take a COVID-19 Goose strap, I'd be fearful of getting a blood clot or heart damage or dying. I mean, these are legitimate concerns. Safety profile is very concerning. A paper by Vasuvian and colleagues show for the childhood vaccine schedule. Now 60% of young parents are vaccine hesitant. I'm in, I completely understand and empathize with that position.

Starting point is 00:36:13 I believe the title of the book is Vaccines, Mythology, Ideology, and Reality. I'd be curious a little bit more on the, thank you, sir, I'd be curious a little bit more on the mythology side. What are some of the mythologies surrounding vaccines that are still persistent today? Well, I mean, look at this. Look at the cover. The cover is a 20 euro coin that was issued by the Vatican in 2022. It's a silver coin. And it features the classic tripartite image of a boy about to receive the Eucharist, the body and blood of Jesus. Christ. And instead of receiving the Eucharist, he's getting a COVID vaccine. No, this is, this is legit. Yeah. So, you know, our book goes all the way back to the beginning. This isn't new. We had to start somewhere. So we started with Cotton Mather. And Cotton Mather was a Puritan

Starting point is 00:37:09 minister in the early 18th century in Boston, Massachusetts. And he's working with variolation. which is the very first attempts at smallpox vaccination. He declares publicly that this is a gift from God. And, you know, he also is notable for another thing he did. He was actually an advisor in the Salem Witchcraft trials. No, okay, I say I recognize that name, but is that where I'm picking it up from? Kay. Yeah.

Starting point is 00:37:44 So there is an ideology. It goes way bad that this is religious. We should accept this, that this is a gift from God. It doesn't need scientific scrutiny, that they're safe and effective. You know, centuries ago, people were put in jail if they didn't take the smallpox bag. Really? Yeah. I didn't know that.

Starting point is 00:38:03 Yeah. So, you know, we were upset about mandates and losing our job and getting kicked out of the military. I mean, hundreds of years ago, we could have been put in jail. That's absolutely incredible. one of the other kind of themes in around the Bitcoin space that comes up quite often is this idea of a fourth turning. I'm not sure if you're familiar with Neil Howland, the idea of a fourth turning is basically a generational shift that happens roughly 80 years. And you can see the cycle playing out. But the important part for the conversation that I'm bringing forward is at the end of a fourth turning, which the theory is that we're kind of in one right now, is the dismantling of the existing institutions.

Starting point is 00:38:42 And I can see that in the banking industry. And I can see that kind of in academia as well, too. I'm wondering your thoughts on the institution, like the medical institution, kind of moving forward. How do we correct for these sort of things? Is it that we have to build a parallel system, build a new, tear down the old? Or is it at all recoverable? Well, I can tell you, certainly on the research side, McCullough Foundation, in a sense, is an alternative medical investigation research organization. We have over 100 peer-reviewed publications in the pandemic. We published, you know, the most widely used treatment protocol for

Starting point is 00:39:16 COVID-19, the most widely used detoxification protocol that copyrighted my name. We've published the most definitive report on the autism crisis and childhood vaccination, which looks like they're linked. We've published the most definitive analysis when it comes to, you know, artificial dies and drugs, for instance, that's forthcoming. We've been the first to publish and trace Pfizer vaccine in the bloodstream. So, you know, we're doing all this. This isn't being done by Harvard. or Northwestern or Yale. Now, I'm a former professor of medicine. I've published in the best journals. I've given grand rounds at the most prestigious institutions. But in a sense, I've had to do this in a parallel fashion because of censorship and professional reprisal. The same is true on the therapeutic side,

Starting point is 00:40:06 certainly on health and wellness. So wellness company, which I helped form in 2022, is far and away the largest vertically integrated health and wellness company. And we have health and wellness products, nutraceuticals and devices. We have traditional Medicare care management, telemedicine. But, you know, wellness company is standing strong on this. The COVID vaccines are not safe and not effective and shouldn't be taken. By the way, the wellness company is the only corporate entity that has officially said that. Really?

Starting point is 00:40:39 At this point in time, I figure there have been a few others that trickled out at some point. geez. My lord. I did also want to ask, just going back to the earlier in the conversation, too, going back to the idea of trust in the institutions and maybe building a new, just on a personal level, not saying necessarily what will happen or what legally will transpire. I'm just curious, I imagine that having Fauci's diaries and having them testify is, I mean, you were just like lambasted and drag through the streets in the early COVID time. Like, they were unbelievably vicious in the media. I'm just curious what you'd like to see the outcome of the situation be. what would be your preferred, you know, outcome?

Starting point is 00:41:13 Well, if we go back to 2020 and 2021, Fauci would be on CNN. I would be on Fox or I'd be on ABC. But you can put our videos together. So I was the most, you know, frequently interviewed person on this, you know, true narrative what was going on. And Fauci would say to wear masks. I'd say, no, they don't work. And you don't need a way. Fauci would say, we need to lock down.

Starting point is 00:41:35 I said, no, everyone's going to get it. We're not going to, you know, I was right. Fauci would say, wait for a vaccine. I said, no, treat sick patients now with a protocol so they don't end up in the hospital or die. Fauci said to take genetic vaccines. No, no, they don't look safe. And safety comes first. I don't know how bad this pandemic is.

Starting point is 00:41:57 We can always treat patients. But if we give an unsafe vaccine, we can't take it back. So I made the right call hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times. So for sure, I've been vindicated. recently I was interviewed in Europe, and I was asked, you know, what do you want in the end? And I said, listen, you know, I just want people to know the truth. That I came out there and I hid it every time I was evidence-based. And, you know, I was treating patients. I was seeing and examining them. Fauci didn't help a single person. And now, in every question, he's pleading the Fifth Amendment.

Starting point is 00:42:34 I've been in his seat five times and answered questions from the U.S. Senate. Every time I've answered them to the best of my ability under oath. And that's what America should demand of any professional who has to go to Capitol Hill. Especially a government employee. I feel like they should be more than anybody a little bit more obligated to testify. Dr. McCullough, this has been absolutely wonderful. Before we wrap, is there anything else that you want to share with the audience that I may have missed on.

Starting point is 00:43:05 I think they think it's important to get out there. Yeah, I think it's terribly important for, you know, people to visit McCullough Foundation. Go to www. www.machlaFND.org. Take a look at our work. Pick up our two books, Courage to face COVID-19 and vaccines, mythology, ideology, and reality. And we have a third one out, which the Bitcoin people are going to love. It's called Mind Viruses. Americans, America's irrational obsessions by John Lee, who's New York Times bestseller.

Starting point is 00:43:37 These are great reads. The reason why books are so important is they can't be altered and they can't be, you know, in a sense, changed by search engines, Google. You know, we know right now the online version of things is very anti-Bitcoin. It's very anti-true science. It's very anti-medical independence. going on right now. And it's great to come on your show and bring your community the truth. I'm available for appointments here in Dallas, Peter McCulloughMD.com. That's where you can

Starting point is 00:44:18 sign up for an appointment. And then, of course, the wellness company, wellness company, right now it's not publicly traded, but it is well on its way to an IPO. And that's www.TWC.health, forward slash focal points. Also sign up for focal points substact. That gives you all the late-breaking analyses and citations. I always cite the scientific literature, and that's the focal points.com. Thank you so much for helping me. You know the world is heading down a dark path.

Starting point is 00:44:50 Online censorship, central bank digital currencies, a complete loss of privacy, and it's only accelerated. Most people are falling behind with the latest technology. And those that aren't are sacrificing their data, their control, and their dignity just to keep up. That doesn't have to be you. Here, you'll have everything you need to break free. Over the past decade, I've helped 20 million people take control of their money, their data, and their digital lives. Now I'm bringing everything I've learned to one place.

Starting point is 00:45:21 Sovereign Sessions is your home to learn, master, and live freedom tech. Bitcoin, AI, private communications, self-hosted tools, Every thing. Each week, I'll walk you through step by step with the most critical tools that put you back in charge. Don't ask permission, take control. Welcome to the Sovereign Sessions.

BTC Sessions - Fauci’s 1,100-Page Diary + Fifth Amendment Silence | Dr. Peter McCullough

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.