The Dan Bongino Show - Dr. Robert Malone and Former FBI Agent Chris Gonzales (Ep 1943)

Episode Date: February 3, 2023

In this episode, I interview virologist and MRNA expert Dr. Robert Malone, one of the most preeminent medical professionals speaking truth to power about COVID and the vaccines. Additionally, I speak to former FBI agent Chris Gonzales about all that has gone wrong in the Bureau and his inspiring new endeavor in the parallel economy.  News Picks: Robert W. Malone, MD Substack GoodTube Kids Copyright Bongino Inc All Rights Reserved Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

get ready to hear the truth about america on a show that's not a meme to the facts with your host dan bongino so if you're watching this show today i am currently under deep anesthesia undergoing elbow reconstruction so we recorded this show a little early not too early it's still a friday show but early enough that we could get it out. I appreciate all your kind wishes and everything. I'll be okay. Knock on wood. I've got a special show for you today. I've had a lot of requests to interview this man, Dr. Robert Malone. He was a truth teller about some of the potential dangers of the COVID virus amongst the COVID protocols, amongst the COVID vaccinations. We have an interview that I expected candidly to be a

half an hour. It went a little longer than that because it's fascinating. Stay tuned for that. I also have an interview with another guy who I was turned on to by another FBI whistleblower, Kyle Serafin. Heed me on to Chris Gonzalez. He's a former FBI agent himself. He worked in the counterterrorism and the intelligence space. He has some more fascinating information about the problems going on at the FBI and how to fix them. I'm really excited about this interview. Went great.

You're going to love it. Joseph, as always, it is Friday. Kind sir. So before we get to anything, if you would. It's Friday. Hey, thank you. Very excited today. What we're going to do is I have four sponsors in the show as always. So I appreciate your patience. I'm going to read to minimize breaks. I'm going to read two up front. I really appreciate your patience. They are here to talk to you and they keep the show free. So thank you very much. Folks, T-Mobile's investigating a data breach that exposed a sensitive personal information of 37 million customers.

Breached information from January 5th may include customers' names, emails, billing addresses, and phone numbers. If exploited, cyber criminals can use this information to commit identity theft. It's important to understand our cyber crime and identity theft are affecting our lives. Your personal information gets exposed so often, making it dangerously easy for a cyber criminal to steal your identity. Protecting your identity can be easy with LifeLock by Norton. LifeLock detects and alerts you to potential identity threats you may not spot in your room, like loans taken out in your name or crimes committed by thieves pretending to be you. Happened to me. And if you do become a victim of identity theft, a dedicated U.S.-based restoration specialist will work to fix it. No one can prevent all identity theft or monitor

all transactions at all businesses, but it's easy to help you protect yourself with LifeLock. I use it. My whole family uses it. Identity theft protection starts with LifeLock. Join now and save up to 25% off your first year at LifeLock.com slash Bongino. That's lifelock.com slash Bongino, B-O-N-G-I-N-O for 25% off. Thanks, LifeLock. We appreciate it. Second sponsor today, GenuCell. What's your gift this Valentine's Day? How about taking 10 or 15 years off your appearance with GenuCell skincare and their most popular package? And right now, every most popular package is 70% off and includes the next breakthrough in skincare technology, GenuCell's Probiotic Moisturizer, my mother-in-law's favorite, absolutely free. These super ingredients found in yogurt can have the same nourishing

benefits and goodness for your skin. Probiotic extracts can help target bad bacteria on the surface of the skin and can help restore balance to your skin's microbiome for a noticeably clearer complexion and visibly younger appearance. See those fine lines, wrinkles, dark spots, sagging jawline, and even bags and puffiness visibly disappear right before your eyes thanks to GenuCell. Trust me, everyone. My mother-in-law really digs this stuff. She found her go-to skincare with GenuCell, plus its immediate effects. See results in under 12 hours, guaranteed, or your money back.

Here's the website. Go to GenuCell.com slash Dan. That's G under 12 hours. Guaranteed or your money back. Here's the website. Go to GenuCell.com slash Dan. That's G-E-N-U-C-E-L. GenuCell.com slash Dan right now for the first time ever. Every order at GenuCell.com from now until Valentine's Day includes a beauty box with two luxury gifts, yours free. Order now, two weeks only. GenuCell.com slash Dan.

GenuCell.com slash Dan. That's GenuCell.com slash Dan. Now to our interview withel.com slash Dan. That's genucel.com slash Dan. Now to our interview with Dr. Robert Malone. It's a pleasure to welcome to the show an actual scientist and a truth teller, a man who's been at the forefront of everything going on with COVID and the vaccines, a man in high demand. I appreciate his time today, Dr. Robert Malone. Doc, thanks for your time. I really appreciate you joining the show. I've got tremendous feedback when I announced you were coming on

from listeners who were eager to hear from you. Well, that's cool. Thanks a lot for having me on. Yeah, of course. So, Doc, I'm speaking to you, obviously, as a host here, but personally, I had lymphoma. It was stage one, caught it early,

not to bother you with my medical issues, but I was one of the earliest people to get the vaccine. A doctor friend of mine had recommended it. And to this day, it's one of my great regrets. I wanted to wait and wanted to see how things would work out longitudinally before trying this relatively new technology. So from a personal perspective, I think I speak for a lot of people who are scared right now. What went wrong with this vaccine and

is there any real hope for people who took it? What went wrong was that the government didn't do their job. The government basically contracted with the pharmaceutical industry to provide a uncharacterized product. And they didn't run it through the standard processes to ensure safety and efficacy. And so a lot of things didn't get done. And then for whatever the reason, governments all over the Western world applied a pretty sharp hammer to everybody to try to get them to take these products. And when they didn't take them, then they ramped it up and mandated it. So a whole cascade of things went wrong that we can go on about for the next three hours. But that's my attempt to capture that in real time is this

book, Lies My Government Told Me and The Better Future Coming. So it's a long sorted story of the intersection of incompetence and I think a certain amount of nefarious intent that's hard to sort out. In terms of is there any hope for folks? Yeah, please. That's the part I'm really concerned about. I'm vaccine damaged. That's kind of important to recognize. After taking the second shot of Moderna, and that's another story having to do with my having long COVID and needing to travel and also being reassured by Peter Marks at the

FDA that this was all in the up and up. But when I took my second shot of Moderna, I got one of the bad batches and developed hypertension with a systolic to 230, narcolepsy, Pott syndrome, restless leg, a number of symptoms that we now overcome, including tinnitus, by the way. a number of symptoms that we now are common, including tinnitus, by the way. And this has persisted. I had a lot of relief from taking ivermectin, but it's still, I've had a lot of these chronic symptoms. So I'm currently on the FLCCC recovery protocol. This is now quite a while after I've been vaccinated. And in addition to the FLCCC protocol, I'm taking some supplemental proteases that many of the physicians are excited about as having benefit for the clotting problem that, you know, these low-level microvascular clots that seem to be causing a lot of these symptoms, including exercise intolerance. And I absolutely have more energy

than I had. I'm able to sustain more work, you know, walk faster and farther, etc. farther, et cetera. Dr. Malone has a sub stack also folks, rwmalonemd.substack.com. We'll get that up on the screen, that link. You probably want to check that out. So doc, from a guy like me who was outside of the cancer, was relatively healthy. I'm a big gym rat. I always have been eat really clean. I've noticed through monitoring my HRV, my heart rate variability, that after the vaccine, my HRV score dropped dramatically. Now, I've no doubt that had a lot to do with

the chemotherapy as well, but it's strange because I was doing okay during the chemo. As has mine. Why do you think that is? What's the mechanism by which that may be related to the vaccine? So this is one of those mysteries that still has yet to be uncovered because none of this research is really being done. suggest is that these lipid nanoparticles do have some odd affinity for the atrial ventricular node,

the little clock that drives your heart, and may be damaging that. There's evidence also that they may have an affinity for some of the conductive tissue. But the honest answer is we don't know. We just know that, in fact, what you're experiencing as a symptom is not unusual. Over. Yeah, I it obviously terrifies me because I've spent my entire life living a healthy lifestyle, you know, disavowing, you know, nonsense and excess alcohol and drugs to live a long life and watch my kids go to school. And I get emotional talking about it because this is the temple God gave me. And to do something I thought was going to better my health, take this thing early on because I was my lymphatic,

due to lymphoma, Doc. Lymphoma, yeah. Yeah, my system, my immune system, neutrophils, my eosinophils were really low. And I was told, oh, you really should take the vaccine because you could die of COVID. But I never thought later on that obviously this damage would be as substantial as it is. Is this due to the spike proteins and this relatively untested technology?

The data suggests that it may be due to the spike proteins and this relatively untested technology? The data suggests that it may be due to both. That's the honest truth. There's no question that spike is a toxin, and spike absolutely affects your heart and your entire vascular system. And that's this point about the microvascular coagulopathy. That's a big pair of words. But you'll understand it because you have a sophisticated understanding of health and you've been focused on this. So you understand that blood comes from the heart through the arteries down towards your capillary beds, which is where all the gas exchange and waste products exchange happens

in your bloodstream. And right before it gets to the capillaries, it's got really small arteries, they're called arterioles. And then after it moves through the capillary bed where all that good business goes that, you know, moves out your lactic acid when you're working so hard, etc. So you don't hit the wall. Then it goes into venules and then into veins and returns back to the heart so there's a quick review of vascular circulation and it appears at least this is current thinking this is really emerging science right now through a series of collaborations between UK docs and American docs. The UK docs and European docs are better able to do some of the science because of all the restrictions and problems that we have here in the States and doing the basic science on this.

But the US docs have more latitude to actually try stuff out. US docs have more latitude to actually try stuff out. So the current working theory among a number of these is that we have residual microvascular kind of sludge clot that's blocking the afferent side of your capillary bed. I'm sorry to use big words. I don't know how to break it down. No, that's the audience. Yeah. But we're doing okay. I hope. Yeah. So, so what, what matters for guys like you and other high performance athletes is there's a considerable number of athletes that used to have

really good exercise tolerance and then they take the jab and that kind of goes right down the trash can uh being trying to be gentle with my words here and uh it and yet they have good oxygenation at rest that's a paradox and that paradox could be resolved if what's going on is that basically you have restricted flow in your capillary head because of these small microvascular clots. And then on the outside, on the outflow side, you're not able to really perfuse very well. That leads to this problem of exercise intolerance because you may be at rest doing fine. And then when you get out into the field and run your 440 or your four minute mile

or whatever it is you do, suddenly you can't perform at all because you hit the wall, you build up lactic acids. So for those that are having that kind of experience, that's probably what's going on is this clotting problem. But in terms of the heart rate variability, it may have something to do with the ticker, the thing that sets your heart rate and how it responds, among other things. Basically, all of this remains speculation. among other things. Basically, all of this remains speculation. Yeah, I wish it weren't. I wish we had a serious body of scientists as committed to this as you were,

who are not so keen to fall into political narratives. Now, Doc, I've heard about this exercise-induced myocarditis that we've seen anecdotally a number of cases of out there. And the younger people this is happening to, is that a mix of, say, gas exchange problems at the vascular bed level and also the release of catecholamines during exercise, those adrenaline-type compounds people get when they're excited? Because, again, it seems strange that, as you said, that they show no symptoms while sitting down watching TV, drinking a beer, and then they get on the field, these high performance

athletes and they're dead. It's just, it doesn't seem to make sense. Yeah. So that's another one that's still, I think you have a hypothesis that you've mentioned there in terms of what the etiology can be. There's really multiple working hypotheses about what's happening with the high-performance athletes. And this also relates, it appears, to testosterone levels. As you know, the people at highest risk for the myocarditis and the myocardial damage are young males. And it appears that

the categories like you're in, bodybuilders, et cetera, high performance folks, as you know, when you work out, you often get a testosterone surge. So it appears that, and I'm not a cardiologist. I just want to make that clear. I have a training in pathology and I'm a molecular virologist, but I don't want to pretend to be Peter McCullough, for example, or Asim Mohatra, who are core specialty is in this area. But the current hypotheses are, number one, that we are absolutely having myocardial damage, whether it's clinical or subclinical. And when you damage heart muscle, it recovers by scarring. And these scars conduct electricity, as you probably know, differently from regular heart

muscle. And so you can get what's called a circus rhythm, where you get this coordinated conductivity that is what causes the ventricles to squeeze blood in a coordinated fashion. And you can get within cardiac muscle an electrical impulse that starts to move through the scar tissue. It gets delayed while the rest of the signal is going through the regular myocardium at a certain rate. And then the delayed signal suddenly comes back into the muscle during a repolarization cycle. And that sets up a kind of a random contraction. And you know that as ventricular fibrillation. And ventricular fibrillation is not consistent with

life. So this is the gentleman that falls apparently, you know, passes out, has lack of oxygen to the brain, falls in the football field, and is able to be successfully cardioverted. So, you know, cardioversion is shocking the heart so that you kind of reset everything at the same exact point, and then that atrioventricular node can start firing off and bringing you back into a regular cardiac rhythm. So that's one thing is the scarring consequent to myocarditis and these events can be most easily triggered when you're in the in the moment of a high performance exertion. So that high performance exertion can actually create higher risk that you enter into one of these aberrant electrical cycles that then

triggers this ventricular fibrillation problem that kills your ability to pump blood. Then you don't have enough oxygen, then boom, right? So that's one pathway. It also does appear that there's something about these lipid nanoparticles, as I mentioned, that seem to have a particular affinity for the atrioventricular node and some of the conducting tissue. And so that can also be associated with this, where you have, let's say, a subclinical damage or compromise that you don't really notice in your daily life necessarily, but then when you're in a moment of high stress, you may get it. Now, there was this event with the Buffalo Bills that was suggested to be a consequence of this phenomena

where you have a sharp chest impact, and that can cause an electrical abnormality when I looked at those videos I I did not see evidence of the kind of hard impact that is usually associated with that phenomena which is you more likely to be you know the batter gets hit with fast pitch right in the chest in the case of the football players there he was hit with a glancing blow from a shoulder pad at a region over his chest that his own shoulder pad provides partial protection to. But it could be that he had prior damage that made him more susceptible. And we don't know any of that right now. We don't have any information about when he was vaccinated, et cetera. So there's that. Then there's these other phenomena that you're talking about that are more subtle and involve homeostasis and various signaling molecules, you talked about catecholamines,

that can interplay with this. And I think you really have to kind of think of it as a net sum of all of these things that can impact on your heart. And then as we were just mentioning, you can have these microvascular clots. And here's the other thing that's playing into this is the cardi're the cardiologists and interventional cardiologists these are the guys that stick the catheter down your heart vessels um is interventional cardiologist they're reporting these uh sudden st elevations they call it stmis or stemis is the acronym and uh this is typically seen with somebody that has like a ruptured plaque, you know, cholesterol plaque, that kind of thing in your heart,

in the main vessels that serve, that support your cardiac function. And yet they're seeing this in off, in relatively young people that shouldn't have major plaque issues. And what they're finding in many of these patients is that there seems to be a focal clot that is either thrown there as an embolus, so it formed somewhere else and then went down into those cardiac vessels, or it formed in the cardiac vessels, but they're really hard. They can't push some of these, the interventional cardiologists are reporting, they can't push the catheter tips through these things to blow up the balloon that would otherwise squeeze them to the side of the vessel wall and allow the blood to flow through. And then they can put their

stents in and do their other magic. And these little clots are like little rubber balls in there and they can't push the tip of the catheter through. And this seems to be related to directly to spike protein because the spike absolutely triggers both odd behavior biologically in platelets, these things that are these non-nucleated cell-like things that float around in your body that help control coagulation. And the spike protein also appears to trigger this high degree of fibrin cross-linking, which is what leads in part to this sludge that I was talking about in the afferent branch, you know, of the afferent limb of circulation. And this is, this is the stuff, you know, there's been some, I'm not going to name names, but some videos out

about died suddenly that have inexperienced people asserting that certain types of clots they're finding at autop cadavers and also clinically as acute pulmonary emboli or other forms of clots that are formed actually in the vessels that can be stripped out. And they, my friend, Ryan Cole has examined many of these. He talks about them feeling like rubber, like a rubber band. And these are the ones that are more gray and highly cross-linked. So that's the macro version. And then there's the tiny versions that, you know, like little tiny rubber BBs that get stuck in your vessels. And they're really hard to degrade. Normally, fibrin is supposed to get recycled. When I cut my finger the other day with a razor blade, I'm not giving you the finger, it just happened to be the one that I cut

off of a box cutter. I bled a little bit and then it clotted off, right? And we want that and it healed and then you want those clots right? And we want that and it healed. And then you want those clots to resolve. That's normal fibrin turnover. And there's something going on with this high levels of spike protein in vessel walls and in these clots that's causing the fibrin to get cross-linked in such a way that it doesn't get degraded in the normal way, which, by the way, is why I'm taking this new protease.

And I'm absolutely not recommending it. I want to get into that. But it's called natokinase, just FYI. I'm not making a medical recommendation. I'm just letting you know that for those who are hoping, you know, who need hope, as do we all in this in the face of what we're seeing. It does appear that there may be some new advances coming on that certainly give me hope. And I hope give you hope also as someone that's potentially vaccine damaged. Now, I think I heard you say stage one lymphoma a couple of times,

and I'm hoping that that is not recurred. No, thank the Lord, Doc. It hasn't. I just took a pet. So I stay vigilant with it. The rest of my life is going to be spent getting scans and things like that, which, you know, it's horrible. But I saw people in the hospital, doc, kids 13 with, you know, stage three and four levels of blood cancers. So I thank the Lord every day. It's a small obstacle. You know, I don't,

I don't feel bad for myself and I don't waste any time on it. So I appreciate your concern. Doc, I'm going to take a quick break. On the other side of the break, I want to ask you a question about how we didn't foresee some of this. Stay tuned, folks. We'll be right back. Okay, we'll get right back to Dr. Robert Malone

in just a minute. But one of our sponsors is GetRefunds.com. Don't miss out. Go to GetRefunds.com today because if you own a business, it's been a bumpy ride. From the pandemic to inflation, I'm sure you could use a break

and innovation refunds can help. If your business has five or more employees and managed to survive COVID, you could be eligible to receive a payroll tax rebate of up to $26,000 per employee. It's not a loan. There's no payback. It's a refund of your taxes. The challenge is getting your hands on it. How do you cut through the red tape and get your business the refund money? You go to getrefunds.com. The team of tax attorneys they put together are highly trained in this little known payroll tax refund program, and they've already returned $1 billion to businesses that can help you too. They do all the work with no charge up front. They simply share a percentage of the cash they get for you. Businesses of all types can qualify, including those who took PPP,

nonprofits, and even those that had increases in sales. To find out if your business qualifies, just go to GetRefunds.com, click on on qualify me, and just answer a few questions. This payroll tax refund's only available for a limited amount of time, so don't miss out. Go to getrefunds.com. That's getrefunds.com. We're back with Dr. Robert Malone, truth teller on COVID. We could have used more of that in the beginning. You can find him on Substack at rwmalonemd.substack.com. You can also follow him on social media. Doc, the warnings about the spike protein, were they not there? I mean, as someone who spent a career literally in science,

I get it that the technology sounded good in theory. The ability to hijack messenger RNA, to use our own nucleotides to produce elements of this virus that would then would engage the immune system for a... Or our own amino acids, but it's a tomato, tomato. You got the right idea. Oh, sorry. But why wasn't Spike identified? Yeah, why didn't they see this? Someone had said to me, Doc, someone with some experience in the space, and please correct me if I'm wrong. I don't want to put misinformation out there, unlike the left. But the original idea with the vaccine was that the spike protein injection with the lipid vehicle, lipid nanoparticle vehicle, that it would stay localized and it would cause a local immune response. So that was, that didn't work out. Okay. So you're, there's a whole bunch of things that you're kind of mashing up there and, and I don't mean to in any way disparage you.

It's, it's easy to get lost in the technology. So, so it's not the protein that gets injected into you. It's the RNA that codes for the protein and then your cells make the protein with these genetic vaccines, whether it's adenovirus or it's mRNA. In the case of, say, Novavax, which is also licensed here in the United States, they are injecting you with spike protein that was made in caterpillar cells just to get that nailed down. The idea was, is that this genetic information in the form of mRNA, for example, is administered to you in such a way that your cells take it up, they produce the protein, and that causes, that triggers an immune response as if those cells were infected with the virus,

but without having the whole virus. And these viruses have various tricks that suppress the immune system. And so being able to express just a couple of proteins that don't have those tricks associated with them might enable you to have a better immune response than you get with natural infection, in theory. That turns out to not be the case in this case. But putting that aside, the belief system, and it was a bit of a substitution of hope for data, the buzz in the field had been,

in this field of research had been for a long time that if you subtly change the structure of the positively charged fat it would have a relative uh if um targeting activity that it would go to your liver or uh in the case of these products it was believed that it would go to draining nodes and sit there and produce the protein. The RNA would make the protein and the protein would make the immune response happen. And it wouldn't go throughout the rest of your body. We knew early, early on, the FDA knew before the clinical trials to move forward that this was not the case but uh nobody was allowed to say it and then uh i was one of the first to say look guys spike is a toxin and i got no end of grief

from the fact checkers over that uh fact checkers who don't typically even have a degree in biology let alone you know 15 years of training training. But it doesn't matter. That's what they said. It was, you know, enforcing the narrative. And that was all because if I was right and spike was a toxin, then there was gross malfeasance here because they hadn't done the toxicology that they should have done if they were causing people's bodies to make a toxin. But now we know that I was right and they were wrong. I'm not bragging. I wish that wasn't the case. And it wasn't any great mental leap for me to figure that out. The data were out there. There was just a whole lot of denial about it. And it was wrapped up in, I think, that aspect. Why did they choose spike can't get into their heads, but it appears that the logic was, well, this

is what we did before, even though it didn't really work very well. We're going to do the same thing again because it's convenient. And at least we have some data saying that this might work. And so they did, they just kind of put blinders on and, and didn't think about the potential toxicity and damage associated with this protein. They never did the studies. And it's kind of a case where they guessed wrong, but they guessed wrong. And literally billions of people were forced or coerced to take the product based on their bad guesses. Does that make sense? Yeah. No, it makes a lot of sense. And I wish it didn't. As you just said, I wish you were wrong

too. I wish I was wrong having to do shows like this, warning people that there may be some issues with this. Doc, what about the J&J, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine? I read an interesting piece in the Wall Street Journal the other day suggesting that that may have been a superior vaccine that notably did not use the mRNA technology, used kind of a traditional model of infection control with production devices. What's your thoughts on that? I wouldn't call it tradition. Um, uh, and fun fact, uh, the, uh, company that J&J bought when they acquired the technology was called Crucell, which traces its roots right back to the same lab where I did the original RNA work in the late eighties in, at the Salk Institute. So that's a fun little tangent. But this is a cold virus, adenovirus, that has been engineered to allow the removal of certain key cold virus proteins or adenovirus proteins and insertion of other proteins, in this case, spike. And this technology is very susceptible to whether or not you have previously been exposed to a related cold virus or adenovirus of a similar serotype is the technical

term. And so it has historically had problems, the technology platform, and it has absolutely been tested in prior vaccines, but I absolutely would not call it traditional in any way, shape or form. If that was Wall Street Journal saying that, either A, they don't know what they're talking about, or B, they're working for J&J. And it's a placed article, to be blunt. Yeah, I don't want to mischaracterize what they were saying. The gist of it was that the, basically the results with a longer term immunity seemed to be more effective. It was kind of more of a shot at the mRNA vaccine than a celebration of the J&J. There's reason, there's reason to believe that that could well be true. It absolutely does express the spike protein. It absolutely does express the spike protein,

and it absolutely does express the spike protein for a relatively long period of time. But it does so in a way that's more like a viral infection. So the levels of spike protein gradually come up and then they gradually go down whereas with the mRNA the levels of spike protein come up really fast and in really quite hard and you end up with more spike protein that gradually tapers off more spike protein than you get with a natural infection so the the J&J product in the other UK adenovirus product that was, I think, developed in Oxford, as I recall, both of those were also associated with many of these same spike-associated protein problems, like the blood clotting. That's how we can kind of show easily in humans. We can infer

that when we see the same kinds of toxicity with the viral vector, the adenovirus technology that we see with the mRNA technology, then those things are probably due to the payload, which was spike in this case. And when we see different types of toxicity, those are probably due to other components like the lipid nanoparticle. So the J&J, that's interesting that the Wall Street asserted that, I would be cautious about that. I think that all of these genetic vaccines have very similar issues. And unfortunately, the adenovirus vector tech, which has kind of been the darling of the vaccinology field now for quite a while, has just not fulfilled its promise. And that's been the case in the current situation. And I think that it's reasonably likely that we may not see that technology move forward much more than it already has been. It's really had very few successes. Why is it? In this case, it seems to have not been compellingly better over doc why is it that uh traditional

vaccine technologies and forgive me you're you're the scientist i'm a layman in this space oh i'm doing my best with the vocab here but you're doing good traditional vaccine technology where you use a weakened or a dead well it's not a virus isn't alive in any way, but you get the inactive virus grown in some kind of, I believe, an egg type vector or something like that, some kind of organic substance or whatever. That technology, you know, that seemed to work for a lot of these other virus vaccinations that we haven't had as many issues with. What was the obstacle to that with the coronavirus? Is it the mutation rate? Is it just too expensive? So that is what you're describing. Egg-based manufacturing is kind of the gold standard for influenza virus, which also mutates very rapidly, is also a respiratory RNA virus, which also mutates very rapidly, is also a respiratory RNA virus, single-stranded RNA virus.

And so manufacturing in eggs, which is to say manufacturing in chick embryos. So the truth is that you get fertilized eggs, you allow a chick embryo to grow to a certain stage of development, then you inject it with flu virus and it will replicate in that embryo. And then you allow that to cook for a few more days in the incubator. And then basically, this is a little blunt, you suck out the contents of the egg, including the embryo, and chop it up and purify the influenza virus proteins from that. That's the standard influenza or one of the standard influenza technologies for vaccinology. Those types of approaches with coronaviruses in humans have failed, but the truth is that every coronavirus vaccine for humans has failed up until the present time. There's only a couple of coronavirus vaccines that are on the market

and they're veterinary. So it's been a longstanding frustration. And one of the problems is with all of these coronavirus vaccines is the problem of, you know, we can call it, well, bottom line is that the vaccinated individuals have typically a higher probability of becoming infected or getting disease through one of many different mechanisms. This is the vaccinologist's nightmare. And the most prominent example of that happened with respiratory syncytial virus, where they developed a RSV vaccine for children in the 60s and administered it in clinical trials. And the children that received it had a higher incidence of death than the ones that didn't receive it. So this can happen in vaccinology, and it has absolutely been a common problem with coronavirus vaccines. And there are, by the way, many traditional vaccines for coronaviruses for SARS-CoV-2 that have been licensed or otherwise allowed by the World Health Organization, for instance.

I think there's something 10 or a dozen different vaccines. But for whatever reason, our FDA and, frankly, Tony Fauci, really wanted to emphasize genetic vaccines. They fast-tracked those. And in particular, they fast-tracked the mRNA product for a variety of reasons. And the main reason is that the government and people that think about this, you know, Bill Gates, whatever, he's the god of this, I don't know. But the logic that I had floated long ago has kind of become the standard belief that we need to be able to go direct from gene to vaccine and really shorten the cycle for development. And if you do kind of the traditional egg-based or other formulations, you typically have a lot of developmental work to come up with a

standardized process that's reproducible. And the idea behind the RNA is that you can come up with a standard formulation, and RNA is RNA chemically. And so you can swap out one RNA for another RNA and produce a new protein. And that's why they're so enamored of it, is that it'll potentially shorten the timeline and standardize the manufacturing process. shorten the timeline and standardize the manufacturing process. But in their enthusiasm, let's say unchecked enthusiasm, I'm afraid they may have destroyed the technology's utility because nobody's going to trust an mRNA vaccine, I think, for the next couple of decades after all this. Yeah, Doc, I'm one of those guys. I mean, I was a federal agent before this. We traveled overseas. And I've told my audience candidly, I never questioned vaccines.

They wanted to jam you for typhoid or whatever. You went into the health unit. They stuck a shot in your arm. You were a little sore for a few hours and you went home. I had no reason to question any of this. I'm one of those people. That's a great example. And you're a great example.

question any of this. I'm one of those people. That's a great example, and you're a great example. The tech is actually probably best used for special forces. As you know from what you just said, the new battlefield in terms of kinetic weapons is more, well, we'll see what happens in Ukraine with tanks. But for the most part, it's about small strike forces going in to neutralize a specific local threat. And if that threat happens to involve a biologic agent, you want to be able to produce a product that can be administered to your special forces. You know, so this is SOCOM stuff. and produce an immune response fairly quickly so that they can be inserted in field to the mission area. And it never really, to my knowledge, and I've been in a lot of these discussions, I don't recall this ever being suggested as something for mass deployment, but- Just to be clear, you're speaking of the mRNA technology here,

correct? Correct. So am I hearing you correctly that you do think the technology has some kind of potential, but this specific vehicle for COVID-19 was rushed? Am I misreading you? vehicle for COVID-19 was rushed. Am I misreading you? That has always been my position, is the tech has applications that make some sense. But this is what got me so pissed off, frankly, is they've destroyed the potential value of the tech that was, to a significant extent, destroyed the potential value of the tech that was, to a significant extent, a child of my brain by their very irresponsible development path that they used here where they rushed everything. They didn't do the stuff they're supposed to do to prove that it's safe. And they rushed it through the door. And then, as if that wasn't bad enough,

they coerced, compelled, mandated people to take an unlicensed experimental product. Ethically, that's just off the rails wrong. Yeah. Doc, last question. I'll let you go. You've been incredibly generous with your time. And if you'd like to follow Dr. Malone again, his sub stack is rwmalonemd.substack.com. And please follow him on social media. If you're looking for some honesty about the situation. Man certainly has a background to speak candidly and knowledgeably about it. Doc, Peter McCullough, Dr. Peter McCullough

is a good friend of the show as well. We've had him on this, on the Fox show many times. Really great guy. His expertise, a little different from yours again, cardiology. And I had asked him rather bluntly, same question I opened up with you, Doc, I'm asked him rather bluntly, I had the same question I opened up with you, doc, I'm very concerned. I said, I got this shot. I listened to medical

experts. I don't think it worked out for me in the long run, but is there a time and understanding we're not providing anybody medical advice? I get all that. We, the standard disclaimers, because they're true. You, everybody's sui generis in their own way. But is there a time you feel like if you haven't had any side effects from say an initial two-shot regimen, never got any boosters, became kind of skeptical after that,

is there a time you feel that where people may be kind of in the clear or do you feel like, listen, you're going to be dealing with this the rest of your life? And Peter is one of the people that has really led on discussing this is myocarditis is myocarditis cardiac damage it carries long-term

risk and you said some key words when you teed that up and i don't mean to be a debbie downer here but subclinical myocarditis, you may not have detected, your doc may have not detected, your sports medicine physician, if you're at the Buffalo Bills, may not have detected it. And yet it could be there like a little bit of a ticking time bomb. And that's the honest truth, I'm sorry to say. In general, after you take the jab, if you're going to do that, and I suggest you don't, but if that's something that you feel like you have to do or your employer has forced you to do, don't do heavy exercise for at least a month or so. If you feel healthy after having taken the product, and there seems to be a lot of lot-to-lot variability in terms of the risk of these products, so you may have rolled the dice and got double six, and good for you.

and if you're probably six to nine months out and you haven't had major symptoms and you've had a cardiology checkup and you're not having things like what you're expressing, Dan, about the compression in your heart rate variability or other, like I have the hypertension problem now, um, as well as what you have or pot syndrome, uh, where you have, uh, um, depending on the angle of your body, uh, your blood pressure varies. That's another problem that many of these people have. Uh, if you're, if you're not having any of that stuff, uh, I think you should go about your symptoms and not one that is just like in denial that these things have any toxicity. You really got to get beyond the docs that are in denial that there's any problem here if you want to get any kind of a reasonable diagnosis and treatment

plan. Over. Yeah. Dr. Malone, thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it. We'll get that sub stack up on the screen. I hope people follow you at social media. We really appreciate it. Welcome back anytime. Thank you, Dan. And thanks for the opportunity to be here. And I wish you the best with your life. And I mean, we kind of if I can close on a thought, of course, I'm kind of of the belief system that from day to day you can seek counsel from your own death. And if if it if you know, if you ask yourself, am I dying or am I about to die? And the answer is no. Well, then let's have a good day. Let's get stuff done and live our lives, right? And someday we're all going to die. And that's just the way it is. We don't quite know when that time is. But in the meantime, let's not be victims. In the meantime, let's not be victims. That's the key point is a lot of people, even the vaccine damaged, sometimes have a tendency because of all the societal reinforcement and the gaslighting they get and everything. I mean, it's a tragedy what happens to the vaccine damaged. But they can choose to believe and wrap themselves in an identity of being vaccine damaged.

And all of us can choose to be victims. God knows there's enough to define us as victims. Or we can choose not to be victims. And I choose to be a warrior. I suspect you choose to be a warrior from everything I've heard you say. And I think that all of us can be warriors in this situation. We absolutely do not have to be victims. So don't fall into that trap.

That's my closing thought. Amen, sir. Sage advice. Thanks again for your time. We deeply appreciate it. Dr. Robert Miller. Thank you. Now, that was an interview. That's probably one of the longest ones we've ever done. We deeply appreciate it. Dr. Robert Malone. Now that was an interview.

That's probably one of the longest ones we've ever done. Now you see why. Dr. Robert Malone, comprehensive take on the problems with this. The vaccine, you know, left it on kind of a good note, but stay tuned. This is a really good interview coming up with a former special agent in the FBI, Chris Gonzalez. You're going to like it. This is a guy who left the FBI, wrote an email on the way out, highlighting some of the problems. And he covered some of those problems here because we got to fix it. Before we get to that, folks, Birch Gold, despite the U.S. blowing through the $31.4 trillion debt ceiling in January, the leftist White House still refuses to reduce spending. Our national leadership has buried their heads in the sand when it comes to fiscal responsibility.

That's why I use Birch Gold. Diversify into gold with Birch Gold, B-I-R-C-H. I've been a customer of them repeatedly. Proud to say it. Times of high uncertainty and instability, gold is dependable. Birch Gold makes it easy to convert an IRA or 401k into an IRA in precious metals. Just text Dan, my first name, to 989898. That's 989898 to claim your free info kit on gold.

And then talk to one of their precious metals specialists. They'll walk you right through it. Think about this. To dig our country out of this mountain of debt, every single taxpayer in America would have to write a check for $247,000. And it's only getting worse. Protect yourself with gold today by texting Dan to 98989. With an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau and thousands of happy customers,

Birch Gold is who I trust to protect my future and yours. Text Dan to 98989 today. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results. Message and data rates apply. All right. Welcome back to the show. That interview with Dr. Robert Malone kind of was good. I mean, it really ended on a good note, thankfully. But, you know, Guy said it. We were chatting between interviews. We were about to welcome in a former FBI agent, real American patriot here. But it was a little bit disturbing.

But we need to hear the truth. We've been lied to enough with this stuff. We need to hear the truth. All right, now I'd like to welcome to the show another real patriot here, a man who is responsible for the website, goodtubekids.com. I love parallel economy stories. We're going to talk about that a little bit. But Chris Gonzalez, welcome to the show. Former FBI agent. Tell us your story. How did you find the FBI and what went wrong and why did you leave? Dan, you've been such an inspiration to me watching as I've followed you go through the

same difficulties, but I always wanted to be an FBI agent. I was a police officer right out of college, law enforcement's all I've ever known. And I got into the Bureau after being a police officer and an agent with Department of Defense in 09. And I was ready. I was ready to just give the FBI my all. And I've been able to be a part of counterterrorism investigations, director of intelligence as a SSA supervisor. And then finally in Anchorage doing SWAT most of my time but I kept looking around and I tried to be the change I tried to get into management and I found that unfortunately it seemed like executive managers that were career lateral climbers were practicing three things they were practicing protecting themselves promoting, and then just abandoning the programs behind them. And what it's done, it just broke the desire. It killed that desire I had

to do the investigations because I didn't feel like what I did really mattered to them. Now, there's plenty of great leaders in there and there's really great workers. There's really great worker bees. But in the end, I said, I just can't, I can't do it anymore. After 14 years at the FBI, 19 years in law enforcement, I stepped away because I couldn't focus on my cases anymore because I felt there's a leadership crisis in the FBI. And I wrote a long email when I left and I get phone calls and texts three or four days since I left on January 2nd of my colleagues saying, thank you. Thank you for writing this. Thank you for saying what needs to be said. assume that you saw in the FBI and what do you see if you had to triage the issues for this agency, the biggest problems, what would you say they are? The biggest problem to me is more the bureaucracy and the ladder climbing mentality. Corruption obviously affects everybody, and that ruins the public's trust in us. But the bureaucracy, this killing weed that's choking out the desire in good agents, that's really the problem. And so now that we have more and more headquarters positions, more and more

folks wanting to climb the ladder as high as they can, as quick as they can, it creates orphaned programs. It creates halted and retarded progress where we can't make the changes we need in the field. And it creates yes-men that are willing to say yes to whatever headquarters pushes down. Because if you don't say yes, then you won't progress. And so those three things are killing the FBI's ability to do its main and plain job. And we're not willing or they don't. We are willing. A lot of executive management isn't willing to hear the truth, to hear that the emperor has no clothes.

That's how I often say it. If you're willing, if you're going to speak the truth, you're going to receive the stick rather than the carrot. And I was on the receiving end of the stick many times. Talking to Chris Gonzalez, former FBI agent. Website is goodtubekids.com. We'll get to that. Chris. Thank you.

Yeah, of course. Listen, this show is going to be a vehicle for change agents like you, Kyle Serafin, and other people who are sincerely interested in repairing the broken image of the FBI. I know in the Secret Service, which where I worked, obviously, is by no means emblematic of perfection. Trust me, we've got more than enough of our own issues. But one of the things I always really enjoyed about being there, Chris, is they didn't really get into political stuff because if you did and you made political decisions, the president could die. I literally died,

not figured, not politically died, like could be dead. So nobody said like, well, that may not look good optics wise. So let's just let's like the president takes a chance in that alligator pit. Like it just doesn't work that way.

We didn't have the luxury, but on the criminal side, which we did as well, not to the extent the FBI does, but we had counterfeit financial crimes, you know the whole deal. I did sense politics seeping into it. Even when I got on in 1999, you'd get calls, hey, I need you to work this counterfeit check case. Well, why? It doesn't really meet the declination limits. Well, this guy knows the AUSA and so-and-so. And that's minor stuff, but it did

kind of infiltrate into our criminal cases. But when you start seeing that type of attitude, the FBI, when it comes to CT counterterrorism stuff, and you get in a portfolio on your desk of pro-life people and other things, and you start to see this pattern, that's a more dangerous form of political involvement in our legal system and with this agency that has so much power well you're absolutely correct i worked counterterrorism i never really worked domestic terrorism and that's really where we're talking about some of the very sensitive issues lie and as an agency we need to the bureau needs to be very careful. We've we've already stepped on it a few times and we need to make sure that we really respect people's rights.

And there's a lot of good folks doing a lot of good work, but that's not what's highlighted. And when we make a mistake, we can make some we have a huge responsibility. We have a lot of power and we can make some big mistakes. And so unfortunately, it's hard to push back. There are good agents saying, hey, wait a second. I don't think we should be doing this. I mean, you're seeing some of the whistleblowers step out saying, this isn't what we should be looking at, or we're really starting to infringe. Golly, I hesitate to say it, but it's the truth. We're starting to infringe on people's I hesitate to say it, but it's the truth. We're starting to infringe on people's rights. And when they push back against headquarters, it's a big mountain to push against. They're just pushing forward. We need to bad casework. We need to let the cases materialize organically and properly and not not push too hard, particularly right now. The terrorism is not what it was. We I think we all agree on that.

But when you have a lot of resources and a lot of people looking for something, digging, that's when we can get ourselves into trouble. Yeah. A former colleague of yours, a man I know you know, a good friend of mine, great guy, Kyle Serafin, another former FBI agent. We did a long form, approximately hour and 45 minute interview cut into two parts. Yeah. And one of the things he had emphasized is the problem with what you just said, the use of blunt metrics and numbers to dictate performance. That's kind of a problem. This isn't like a race car where, well, you got to hit 200 miles an hour or we're going to go with a different car.

white supremacist cases are a priority. Okay, well, that's a serious threat, but is the threat to the degree the president who's making a political statement, is it to the degree on the criminal side that it is on the political side? Because if it's not, Chris, you have a really serious mismatch. You have an agency with badges and guns

looking for a political threat that's not equivalent to the real world criminal threat. And that mismatch creates some serious problems. And you said a word that's critical there, looking. What's worse is digging, right? When we're looking, when we're just being aware of something, that's what everybody expects of us.

But when we start digging into things that aren't really rising to the necessity of the FBI's investigation, that's when people start to say, rightfully so, you're starting to infringe on my rights. I think really the problem, though, is you don't have this beehive mentality of we're just going to support this or that agenda. You do have a mentality of we want to promote. agenda, you do have a mentality of we want to promote. And in order to promote, we're going to support those tasks that come down from headquarters. And those tasks that come down from headquarters come from executive management, which comes from the White House over. And I've seen it in a myriad of things where it just gets pushed all the way down before it's ever critically evaluated. And then now that's the mission. And so a lot of agents receive that and start taking their marching orders and start doing things. And this is just the ill of bureaucracy. And those who stand up and say, why are we doing this?

We've seen with Stephen Friend and Kyle Serafin, we've seen the backlash that they get for asking a question. And that's what we should be doing. We should be critically evaluating all of these things. Yeah. One of the things that was told to me by another former FBI source who was very helpful in the whole Spygate investigation, that entire debacle, he's a manager in the FBI. And he said, one of the biggest problems we have at the Bureau these days is what he called the briefers. We had a different name for them in the Secret Service, but that's for another show. But the briefers are the guys who never investigated the bank robberies, the kidnapping cases, the high-end financial crimes cases. They've never had to do the grunt

work where you're sitting there hour on end, shaking trees and sources in the street. 90% of them turn out to be useless. You're learning to discriminate between BS sources and guys who are actually good. It gives you that social IQ with a criminal case. And what they do is they've never done that, but they have the right connections. They work their way through headquarters and they check all the boxes.

As this guy told me, and then they come back down as supervisors and supervise guys like you and Kyle who did actual work. And you're looking up and saying, how is this guy my boss? And then these are the guys who wind up running the outfit at some point and are making some of these decisions that are more political that have led to some of the FBI's problems in recent years. I couldn't agree with you more. We have, I wrote in my email, and it's what I call a leadership crisis. The people that are climbing to the top are focused on climbing to the top. They're not focused on the mission in the location. They're not focused on moving forward cases for the right reasons, and they just abandoned those programs behind them. And so it happened so fast. There are solutions. These people come through so fast that they leave behind a wake of either halted progress or damage to an office or program, but they've already moved on and there's no penalties and there are solutions, pure evals before somebody promotes. And these are things I've written to them.

The question is, is executive management at the highest levels going to critically evaluate themselves and say, do we have a problem? And unfortunately, I don't see it happening. I see lots of people across the country. I've had people reach out after writing this email and say, thank you. These are all the things that we're thinking. They're professional staff. They're intelligence analysts, accountants, and agents. Across the board, they're telling me, yes, we have a problem. Thank you for saying something. have heard that there are SESers, as you know, the higher level folks, special agents in charge of field offices who are saying there's no problem. He's completely wrong. And he doesn't know what he's speaking about and never took a moment to ask. If I'm wrong, fine. They never asked the field, does he have something here? Do you all agree with this in a way that they're not just going to hammer somebody for saying yes yeah we had the same problem in the secret service you'd have

inspectors from our inspection division who would go and evaluate people in the office who were formerly friends of theirs and colleagues so if you had an agent who said hey this supervisor isn't working out not doing the right thing you know a lot of them would kind of wink and nod at the guy. Hey, this guy doesn't like, you know, which defeats the purpose. Like you said, Chris, one last question. I want to get to your goodtubes, goodtubekids.com. So another problem Kyle highlighted in our interview, Kyle Serafin, was the FBI's newfound love affair with intelligence cases over criminal work,

which is obviously a necessity. I mean, no one would dispute the necessity of an intelligence agency to prevent terror cases. We get that. But do you think the FBI would be better served with a hard split, kind of an MI5, MI6 model where the intelligence is one separate space and criminal is another because it just seems strange. Kyle was saying that these intelligence cases become almost like, you know, bastard child criminal cases. You can just keep them open forever. There's there's no discovery. There's no judicial intermediary where a judge is in an adversarial hearing. There's no defense attorney. And it's kind of frightening to people.

They could be the subject of an FBI intel case that may never end. I worked in the directorate of intelligence as a supervisory special agent from 2015 to 2017. And when I got there, I said, I am committed to really helping and serving in a very, I think, critical realm. I mean, we talk about intelligence. The FBI's motto is that intel leads operations. But we are, Johnny, come lately to intelligence. We've worked, like we talked about earlier, gumshoe investigations, bank robberies and kidnappings and all the things that you expect the FBI to work. But when it comes to taking on intelligence analysts in a comparative role to the CIA, as we did under Mueller, I am not sure we were ready to handle that. Now, the people we hire, the intel analysts are incredibly smart and

they're able to do the job. We don't know how to use them well. We don't know how to set that CIA has done this forever. I mean, this is what they do. But I have seen in many field offices, Intel analysts moved around from squad to squad. How can they ever become subject matter experts, a word we throw around far too often in the bureau, in the realm that they're in, be it financial crime, healthcare fraud, counterterrorism, if they're moved around every two to three years and then they promote or then they move, that's not what the CIA does. They have doctorate level academic backgrounds in the realm they're working and then they're committed to that realm for a long term in their career. And we don't know how to use the assets that we have in that

intel role. They'd be much better if they better utilized for a lot of the cases, particularly in the criminal sector, if they were tactical analysts, if they were allowed to do tactical analysis on the cases, which is what we critically need. But we now have this golden calf that we can't sacrifice or cut up of this is internal analysts and we're going to do it the CIA way. And it's not working. And it does lead to, we don't really know what to do with some cases. Sometimes they stay open for six, seven years because the purpose of a case is either to prosecute or disprove the allegation. But some of those allegations are so nebulous,

prosecute or disprove the allegation. But some of those allegations are so nebulous, you can't disprove it. And now you're kind of stuck. Kyle had kind of implied the same thing that, you know, you could be the subject of some vague allegation from some rando on Twitter and you find yourself in an FBI investigation. So, Chris, I'm fascinated with the parallel economy. Guys like yourself, entrepreneurs. I'm happy to announce that you've taken on your own entrepreneurial endeavor. The website is goodtubekids.com. What is it? How'd you get into that out of the FBI? I mean, what happened there? Tell everybody what it is so the audience can support you. Tell everybody what it is so the audience can support you. Thank you so much. GoodTube Kids was born out of my own son trying to watch YouTube and learn about the sizes of planets. And then some terrible video came up and I was sitting right next to him. And so finally, I looked to YouTube Kids and the video recommended for my son, an eight-year-old boy, was what's it like to be a transgender boy?

If you watch YouTube Kids, and for the parents that are out there, there are over 300 videos on a wide range of LGBTQIA plus issues. But moreover, on drag queens, how to dress, how to dance in drag, four kids as young as six, seven, and eight. So then we looked at Disney and HBO and I said, why can't there just be something good? Why can't there just be good tube? And so I looked around and as you know, on tactical teams, when you look around and nobody's taking care of the threat, you step up and do it. And so I didn't find anybody addressing this for youth eight to 18 years old. They need a place where they can go and laugh and learn and watch and grow without your parents having to worry about what they might see. And you know, Dan, you were an inspiration. You gave a talk in 2013 at the Heritage Foundation and you said,

you asked the people, you said, what are you doing? The world has changed by action, not talk. And if you don't get involved and make a risk and how are you going to make a better tomorrow? And so you remember that? I remember that was 10 years ago. I remember that. Well, I've got it written down. Yeah. And it's, it's sitting right in front of me because you left that, that golden ring, right? That retirement, the, the, the pension, the benefits walked away from that with a wife and a son.? That retirement, the pension, the benefits, walked away from that with a wife and a son. And I said, my son deserves this and so do your children. So we're creating this new platform where we're going to have videos on how to interview for a job, how to go hunting, how to cook, all those great things that you can see on other tube channels

without worrying about parents. You have to be aware of what's out there. On GoodTube Kids, you can see every channel, Cartoon Network, Nickelodeon, Disney, YouTube. Every one of them has a pro drag queen and YouTube and YouTube kids, even worse, topics that they're pushing in front of our children. And so we're seeking to create a place that's anchored to the truth and goodness of the Christian faith, but teaches kids all that they need to know how to change a tire interview. Well, uh, all the things that I want my son to watch, uh, or, or if I had, you know, your daughter or anybody's child to have a safe place to go and then resources for parents on how to protect and prepare their kids, because it's a scary world out there.

We're working with a lot of different groups that provide resources online, how to protect your children, trusted companies, trusted books like Brave Books. We're working with all of them to put it one easy button. So parents have one place to go and we're really going to give it our all, you know, every, every breath we have to do good. Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant idea, Chris. Chris, thanks a lot. I, you know, I've been there and I think one of the reasons Kyle and I have become very close and I hope you and I as well, and Steve's part of the crew, Steve friend as well. You know, we, we, we did, we didn't talk. And we really sincerely,

I can tell from just speaking to you now and I can certainly speak for Kyle on this. Cause I've had this conversation with him. It is my, my sincere goal to lead these places, the secret service, the FBI, the DEA, these agencies better than, than when we left, they've got issues. We're all sinners, but you know, we can fix it. And burying it's not going to happen. It doesn't happen in our personal lives. And it certainly doesn't happen with a professional organization either. It's an organism full of people. Chris, goodtubekids.com is a website. Best of luck with it. We hope to have you back on the show soon. Thanks for your time.

Thank you, sir. God bless. God bless. Thanks again for tuning in, folks. I hope you enjoyed those interviews as much as I did. I appreciate all the kind words. I assume by the time I'm reading some of the feedback on the show, I'll be out of surgery and up from deep anesthesia. I will see you back here on Monday and be sure to not miss my show, Unfiltered on Fox tomorrow night. We finally have the monologue. We've delayed. We have a former mobster, reformed mobster as a guest who has a really astounding interview comparing the mob to what the government's doing now. Unfiltered Saturday night tomorrow on Fox.

Check it out. Set your DVR if you can't make it live. See you on Monday. Good day, sir. You just heard Dan Bongino.