The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 403: THE POLITICS OF POLIO

Episode Date: December 19, 2024

Del Calls Out The Dogma; Jefferey Jaxen Reports on the Drone Saga, more push for dangerous weight loss injections, and HHS extends the COVID public health emergency?; Del and Jefferey Launch a blockbuster New Series ‘Jefferey Jaxen Investigates’ on HighWire+, starting with 2-part series decoupling the Polio dogma; ICAN is at the center of a Misinformation Campaign centering around ICAN’s 2-year old IPOL polio vaccine petitionGuest: Aaron Siri, Esq.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Have you noticed that this show doesn't have any commercials? I'm not selling you diapers or vitamins or smoothies or gasoline. That's because I don't want any corporate sponsors telling me what I can investigate or what I can say. Instead, you are our sponsors. This is a production by our nonprofit, the Informed Consent Action Network. So if you want more investigations, if you want landmark legal wins, If you want hard-hitting news, if you want the truth, go to ICan Decide.org and donate now. All right, everyone, we ready?

Yeah! Action. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening. Wherever you are out there in the world, it's time for us all to step out onto the high wire. Well, today is a very special high wire because I know we've got some new viewers that are watching. I'm not just talking about your average people that heard about the high wire. wire right now at this moment as you're watching this screen so are reporters from CNN MSNBC ABC CBS the New York Times Washington Post NPR they're all watching right now well at least let me

say their production assistants or their associate producers are because I doubt any of the people up there actually do their own research but what are they researching today they're researching the high wire why because of this headline from the New York times on Friday. Kennedy's lawyer has asked the FDA to revoke approval of the polio vaccine. Now, of course, this is an article about a petition that we at the informed consent action network submitted through our lawyer, Aaron Siri. In the quote, they mention us briefly, I mean, in the article, I love Aaron Siri, Mr. Kennedy said in a clip played on a recent episode of a podcast hosted by Del Beatree, who is Mr. Kennedy's former campaign communications director and the founder

of the informed consent action network. I want to talk about that name just for a second. Our name that we started with back in the very beginning, actually the very end of 2016, I started a nonprofit called the Informed Consent Action Network. I want you to look at that for a second. We didn't name ourselves down with the vaccine program, the let's eradicate vaccines from the Planet Corporation,

nothing of the sort. Yet every time you read about us, that's what they try to tell you. But what is very clear is right in the heart of our name. What we are here for is to uphold the entire concept of informed consent. What does that come from? Informed consent comes from the Nuremberg trials after Nazi doctors were tried and proven to be guilty of testing on innocent people and testing vaccines and drugs and surgeries.

They had no consent. They were just submitted to it. And after that trial, they ended up saying and making a statement that every Democratic nation in the world signed the very first rule the Nuremberg Code, the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. It doesn't say on some things. There are some things that are exempt that you can just do to people in a hospital that they have no choice over. It doesn't say, well, if it's vaccines, the government then does get to inject you without any decision whatsoever. That is not what the Nuremberg Code says. It says the voluntary consent.

And it goes on to say that any use of coercion or force should be considered illegal. What is coercion? Well, is it mean when you're actually told you're not allowed to go to work if you don't vaccinate? You're not allowed to have the public education that your tax is paid for if you don't take the vaccine? No, informed consent is supposed to be complete and true for every free citizen. in this world and that's what we stand up for. The informed consent action. What does the action mean?

It means when we see that laws are being broken, or that consent is not being granted, or perhaps that the product itself and its dangers are not being pointed out to the public, but hidden from the public, the exact opposite of informed consent, then we go into action. What is that action?

Well, we're America's public health watchdog. We then go to our lawyer, Aaron Siri, and his team of lawyers, and we do things like file Freedom of Information Act request, demanding transparency on certain subjects from our government when we think they're hiding something from us. And then sometimes they hand that information over, but sometimes they break the law.

Remember, the government works for us. We are the citizens watchdog. That government works for us. And so when we ask for their emails or ask to see what evidence do you have about the safety of that vaccine, they have to hand it to us. And when they don't, when they break the law, we bring a lawsuit against the government of the United States. We've won lawsuits against virtually every health agency, FDA, CDC, Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health.

I've read so many times about the misinformation that Dell Big Tree spreads or ICAN spreads, I always say the same thing. Really? You ought to try winning lawsuits against the government in the United States using misinformation. That's right. It's impossible. But today we're going to get into the details. We're going to get into details of the polio vaccine. I am going to talk to Aaron Siri in a little while. I was coming up just around the corner. But before we do, I want to talk about why I'm here.

Of course, I made a documentary called Vaxed that at the center of it was a whistleblower inside the CDC, Dr. William Thompson, who came forward and said they had committed scientific fraud on the most important vaccine autism study. the measles monster, rebella vaccination study, and autism. They cook the books, if you will. They kicked kids off the study after they were already in the middle of it because it wasn't giving them the results that they had hoped for. You can watch Vax, which is on our website for free, any time that you want.

But while I was touring the country with Vax, we started doing interviews of people with vaccine injured children, and sometimes the children themselves. and very specific to this conversation today, which every single headline, if you're watching your news, the panic is over polio. The politics of polio is afoot. And we always hear about, well, you know, Del Bigtree and Robert Kennedy Jr. or Aaron and Syria want to go back to the iron lung. They want to push you back in an iron lung. I want you to hold on to that thought and ask yourself in this next interview that happened on the Vax tour, did we get rid of the iron lung?

Or did we just improve it and shrink it down, hang it around your neck, and poke a hole into your throat? Yes, that is what the iron lung looks like now. And you know who's wearing it? Oftentimes, vaccine injured children and people. This is a video of Colton. Take a look at this. Colton was a 13-year-old, healthy, strong boy. He loved anything that has to do with an adrenaline rush. Motorcross was his passion.

We went to the doctor's office and the doctor says, hey, he's the age that you should get the HPV vaccine. I said, okay. So he was administered the vaccine. And on the third round, two weeks after, he started having a really bad neckache. And then this is the last day he got to ride that big butt. boy bike and that day he came home he was

kale starting to feel nauseous, really sore neck. It didn't feel good. He went to bed and the next day I checked on him. He still didn't want to get out of bed. I just thought man you're just really weak and exhausted. And that evening when he sat up to take a drink of water he said, Mom can you can you give that to me in my left hand? I can't use my right arm very good. It's weak. And he tried to lift up and all of a sudden he just flopped back.

And his head just hit the pillow and I went, The Colton, are you going paralyzed? They immediately took him down to primary children's hospital in Salt Lake. When the doctor came out and asked me questions, they said, well, has he been sick? Has he had any changes or any things? I said, no, he hasn't been sick. He had the HPV vaccine on February 1st and they went, oh, well, we'll be reporting that to Vars.

And they did. I did do a lot of sports. He was the favorite. But now I have the sudden sideline to watch everybody. I'm angry that they're still getting out vaccine. They don't care that people are getting hurt. Mm-hmm. It's a joke.

Got to do your research. You can't just trust a doctor anymore. Fortunately, we lost Colton in 2018 when he took his own life. I think he felt like he was a burden on his family. It was unfortunate. But his story has forever stayed on my heart. And I know this is difficult, especially for all of you reporters right now. I know what's going on inside of you.

I start, I worked at CBS. I get it. You're saying to yourself, well, I mean, it's rare. It's rare when that happens. I mean, okay, I suppose that does happen. I mean, his own doctors wrote it down. They knew it was the HBV vaccine. But you see, I toured the country and did thousands of interviews like that.

Thousands. I drove around in a bus with a team of people that said vaxed on the side of it, and thousands signed their names of injury, autistic children, you name it. Sure, you can sit here and I know you're trying to say to yourself, but I've been told the vaccines don't do that. injuries are really rare. Well, I just want to ask you really quickly, just because it's rare, does that mean they deserve it? I mean, do we not study rare cancers in children? Do we not study rare diseases all around the world? Well, only a few kids are suffering from it, so just let them

die. And then think about this. This isn't a disease. These are perfectly healthy children that were forced to take a product in order to go to school, and somehow you're making it okay, that on a rare occasion they are paralyzed or they are killed or they have a brain swelling incident but let me make this clear about Colton because this was the shocking moment it really was I was standing there my partner Polly Tommy was doing the interview and as I heard the machine going fill his lung so he could talk say a few words again I realized oh my God we didn't get rid of the iron lung It is hung around this kid's neck in a little backpack that's keeping him alive.

And when we say, oh, we got rid of paralysis and polio, did we? Did we really? Did you know that right after the polio vaccine was introduced at that moment, everything that had been categorized in one giant group as polio, many different causes of paralysis, they were all called polio before the vaccine. Right after it, they broke it up, and they only went with polio, Here's the other ones. Acute flaccid paralysis, Bell's palsy, transverse myelitis, Guillain-Barray syndrome, introviral encephalitis, traumatic neuritis, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis.

Look at that for a second. Every one of those paralytic conditions are written as side effects of the vaccines we are giving our children. And if this happens to you and you end up being paralyzed, you get a walkable iron lung. So don't tell me that, oh, Del Bigtree is going to bring back the iron lung. No, the vaccines do a plenty good job doing that themselves. In his case, it was Gardasil, the human papillona vaccine. And in it, where does it list? One of the side effects, nervous disorders, acute disseminated.

Look at this. This is in the marketing information. This is why the doctor said, oh, my God. We know why he's paralyzed, acute disseminated encephiomyel and myelonitis, dizziness, potentially Guillain-Barre syndrome, paralysis, and in his case, transverse myelitis. If that's the first time you're seeing that, then you know why the informed consent action network exists. It shouldn't be.

It should be showed to you before you get involved with this product. You have the right to know that there is a potential to have this side effect. How rare is it? Is it rare enough? Is it zero? It's definitely not zero. In fact, take every one of those side effects and each one of them's rare and there's like 20 of them on every single vaccine.

Are they still rare when you put them all together? Well, the CDC once asked Harvard Medical School to look into how rare are they? injuries happening from vaccines. In fact, when we look at VERS, the vaccine adverse events reporting system, which is what the mother of Colton said, the doctors reported it to VERS, this is what that page looks like. All right? Now, when Harvard Medical School was paid a million dollars to look at this, they said, you know what we're going to do? We're going to look into our own Harvard Pilgrim Health system. Our HMO, we're going to do a study on it and see and track doctors and see, and see, how many of the injuries they're actually going out of the way, very complicated system,

in a very busy day, how many of them are reporting the actual injuries that you just read there? What percentage do you think that is? Do you think it's, now, then they'll say, well, I mean, look, not every one of those cases is proven. That's true. I will concede that. But here is what Harvard Medical School found when they looked into it. Likewise, fewer than one percent of vaccine adverse events are even reported. That's a mic drop moment. Wait a minute, what? Fewer than 1% when they did that study, I believe it was back in 2014. Now, maybe it's more now. Maybe we're more aware, but every doctor I meet keeps telling me vaccine injury doesn't exist. Every reporter that's watching right now has made a habit of saying to the public,

vaccine injury is one in a million. Really one in a million? How do you know that? From the 1% of total reporting that we now know is going on based on Harvard Medical School. And what happened when Harvard Medical School, after being paid a million dollars, said, here's what we found, CDC. And guess what? You know what they said? We found a way to automate the VAIR system so that we get rid of this error, so that they automatically, the injuries or potential injuries automatically go in the system. What do you think, CDC? You know what the CDC thought? This is what they wrote in the end of this study, unfortunately, there was never an opportunity to perform system performance assessments because the necessary CDC contacts were no longer available. And the CDC consultants responsible

for receiving data were no longer responsive to our multiple requests to proceed with testing and evaluation. They gave us a million dollars, but when we told them the truth, they never picked up their phones again. And so now mainstream media will tell you, vaccines have been tested extensively, says it even in the New York Times article. So tested, one of the most tested products we have on the market. They are so safe. We know it mountains of evidence, which if you've been watching the high wire since the beginning of 2017, you know, is total baloney. That's what all of our FOIA requests and all of our lawsuits have proved. They don't have. barely any evidence at all. But don't just take my word for it. Take Bernadine Healy's word for it,

former head of the NIH, the most important and best-funded research science facility in the world, making Bernadine Healy during her tenure one of the greatest scientists the world knew. When she was interviewed by CBS, what did she say about the mountains of evidence showing how rare vaccines, injury is. This is the time when we do have the opportunity to understand whether or not there are susceptible children, perhaps genetically, perhaps they have a metabolic issue, mitochondrial disorder, immunological issue that makes them more susceptible to vaccines plural or to one particular vaccine or to a component of a vaccine like mercury. The fact that there is concern that you don't want to know that acceptable group is a real disappointment to me.

If you know that susceptible group, you can save those children. The reason why they didn't want to look for those susceptibility groups was because they're afraid that if they found them, however big or small they were, that that would scare the public away. In every single crime you need a motive. You need a motive that makes sense. Why would they do it? Why would the scientists, the CDC, and the FDA and the NIH not do

proper studies, Dell. Why would they tell us there's mountains of studies if they're not there? She just said it. Because they're so concerned if they even did a study of those that had been injured like Colton. Like let's track Colton and everyone like him that's walking around in a walking iron lung right now. Why do we study them? What did they eat that day? What was there, Is there any genetic something going on? Is there a study we could do? Maybe we could find, if we did a blood test, we could find out, wait, they have a susceptibility, and maybe this vaccine is a better form of it than this one. Or maybe this child should have them spread apart. All things that would be totally sensible in a modern world that have never happened in the United States of America. Why? Because

as Bernardine Healy said, they're so terrified that even looking into it, some of you would start to wake up and say, wait, what? You mean vaccines aren't perfectly safe? They're not as safe as water that I drink. So then everyone in media has been lying to me. You see, media thinks you're too stupid to know. It doesn't matter that you still will see all of those side effects on every drug that you take. For some reason, we can't do that with vaccines. And so let me be perfectly clear about this New York Times article before I bring Aaron on here in just a few minutes. Their headline is not actually what our petition was about. Our petition was about the fact that this particular polio vaccine, just one of many, several, was only tested for three days. A three-day safety test.

That's all it got. That obviously New York Times thinks that is perfectly acceptable. Why would do that with everything? This cancer drug had a three-day safety test. This lupus drug, three-day safety test, go out and get it back. The government's going to mandate on you, and New York Times is behind that 100%. Let's be honest, for every reporter watching right now, if you've never reported Anna Colton or told a story about the vaccine injuries that are listed right on the insert I just showed you, then what you're actually saying is you don't care about all kids. That it's okay to kill some innocent children in the United States of America every year. It's okay to injure some innocent children every year. See, that's what makes us.

different. That's what makes Robert Kennedy Jr. different than all of you. Because what he's done is spent his entire career as an environmental attorney fighting for the little man. Those rare instances where your career is being hurt by an industry. One of those few people that actually try to make a living off of catching fish, but the mercury in the fish and it's killing the Hudson River doesn't affect all of us. The rest of us are just fine. So what's Bobby? Kennedy's problem. Why has he got to like deal with the fishermen and all their little problems? Why does he care about some Indian tribe that's getting their forests knocked down and killed? What difference does it make to me? Well, it doesn't, does it? Because you're a reporter.

And for most of us, that river doesn't affect us. And that forest doesn't affect us. And that toxic waste spill in the middle of an African-American community doesn't really affect us. So why report on it? But Robert Kennedy Jr. is not wired that way. and neither am I. Ever since my days at CBS on the doctors, it was important me to tell everybody's story. I don't believe it's okay to destroy some children's lives so that others can be made whole.

I think that's murder. I think that's abuse. And I think we're capable with the technologies we have today, with AI, home of Apple, home of IBM and PCs and computers and computer learning, we could actually get to the bottom of this. We could actually study these children for the first time ever

and find out why is it happening to them. And let's bring up that Bears report. If you want to keep saying it's rare, is this 1%? Are we going to add 2 zeros onto the 38,000 and say that there's potentially three million deaths. By the way, I just want to double check. I'm not sure this is one year of reporting. Those numbers see high.

I don't want to get called out on this. I feel like this is a couple years with COVID included. But you get the point. But the 219,000 hospitalizations, are we going to add two zeros onto that because it's only 1%? What if it's 10% and it's just 2 million? Is that okay?

I mean, here's the point. No one in our regulatory agency cares. They're not studying what percent this is. Yet they'll tell you one child dying from COVID. One child dying from measles is too many. Boy, we're a way long ways past having that issue with the vaccine program. It's thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands. And if you include the world, millions.

And we keep giving more and more and more and more vaccines. And the New York Times keeps telling us three-day safety. trial is all that is necessary. I've got Aaron Siri coming up in a little bit to talk about this issue. But from now on, if you're a reporter and you want to say that Dell Bigtree is spreading misinformation, we're going to go ahead and prove you wrong today. And I'd really like you to report and why you just put the headline, New York Times doesn't care about rare instances of child death. New York Times doesn't care about all children. Washington Post doesn't care about all children. CNN does not care about all children, just some children, the ones that took the vaccine.

Or as Jimmy Kimmel put it, screw you, wheezy. You don't get to go into the hospital here because you didn't put yourself at risk, at rare risk, to save my child. Is that the world we live in? It's not the world that I can is fighting for. So let's get to the Jackson Report. All right, Jeffrey. First of all, just thank you, by the way. Thank you for just your incredible research all of these years. This is an incredible moment that we finally have the eyes of the world trying to attack us. I've never felt better about the work that we do than this week right now. I'm glad everybody's watching.

You're welcome, and thank you. It's incredible to stand in the truth that we know is truth and have these attacks come because there's a comfort in that knowing that we are on the right side of truth here. And we are a media organization as well. And the idea of regular programming is no longer in these new news cycles a thing. It's a wild ride every week. This week is no different. And we take a break from sometimes what we normally cover to take something and look at it that's been happening that is just captivating the United States and the world. If you know what I'm talking about, something fishy is going on in New Jersey. It's been going on for about a month now. And it

looks like this. All right. Growing mystery in the skies near nightly sightings of mysterious drones. People across New Jersey and nearby states have reported seeing drone-like objects flying low in the night sky. For almost a month, swarms of drones, the size of small cars, have been spotted over parts of New Jersey, alarming local residents.

The flying objects have been spotted over residential neighborhoods, restricted sites, even near President-elect Donald Trump's home, and critical infrastructure. An FBI official says they've received thousands of reports over the past few weeks, with less than 100 of those warranting further investigation. We had something coming at us, and as it's coming at us, it stops, you know, just like a 180 in the air, and then drives away, and then comes back and does like a giant you around us.

I look to my left and I see two big drones. They were propeller-driven, going very slowly. The White House finally has broken its silence on the topic, saying that the drones seen over the northeast, are a mix, they say, of law enforcement, commercial, and hobbyist drones. Something occurs apparently. We can check it all out. The vast majority of these drones are going to probably be recreational or hobbyist.

They're going to be commercial drones. Let me calm those nerves. We have not seen anything unusual. We have not seen any unusual activity. If there is nothing to be concerned about in any capacity, why does it require a classified briefing of such to tell us their hobby drones, their airplanes, I call nonsense. The bottom one is that the federal government is not being honest with the American people, chalking all these drones up as legally operated vehicles and aircraft and law enforcement.

If that's a case, they would not be shutting down military installations because of drone incursions. It just simply does not make sense. It's just because of my orcasters. Like, there's nothing unusual going on here. I don't know. Just the fact that, like, as of 30 days ago, a drone convention broke out in New Jersey that's never been there before. Every drone enthusiast from around the world is suddenly flying drones perpetually over New Jersey. I mean, that should be unusual enough.

This is such a crazy story. And obviously, something's going on. And if someone says they know 100% what's going on, they're probably not being truthful with you. Because look at this map here. This is in New Jersey of all the reported sightings over 5% of 5% of. thousand of them and and counting. And so it's not just a couple hobbyists that are doing this. And there's been briefings, classified briefings, but you can see people at all levels of society

from just the general public to police, FBI and even senators and congressmen. They're seeing things too. So here's the New Jersey mayor. He took to the media just a couple days ago to kind of give his view on things. Take a look. Do you have any idea what it could be or which side it could be, where it's coming from? Yeah, I can tell you what it's not. We know for a fact it's not little green men, and more than likely it's not a foreign adversary because they would be able to figure out how to

turn off the blinking lights. These drones are huge. We had a mayor yesterday on the call with the White House telling them that he had six foot drones hovering over his house. Yet they continue to tell us, we don't know what we're talking about. It's misidentification. Certainly there's some misidentification probably going on, but I could assure you that we are seeing drones in New Jersey all over the place. All right. So we're going to go for a wild ride here because... We're already on a wild ride. Okay.

All right. So the problem with what he's saying there is we know they're not whatever he was saying, but we have a news report and a local New Jersey news report that was showing something a little different than what he was saying. Take a look. All right. You know, when things like this are happening, it seems everyone starts to look up like my crew and I have been here in Mendham.

recording this video that you're looking at right now. We have no idea what it is if it's a natural phenomenon because it could be. But this is why so many municipalities are now asking people to reach out and send their videos to them or to experts who might be able to sort out what they're seeing in the skies. But I guarantee there are so many people looking up and making those recordings because this mystery is one that needs to be solved. For now we're alive here in Mendonboro. Tony 8's Channel 7 eyewitness news. Lee saying he's wondering whether or not that might be the moon Tony but you pointed out it's exactly the question people are asking what is it no yeah yeah no we're looking at the moon right now and that's nowhere near the moon okay nowhere near the moon at all so

it was interesting looking at that you see this flashing aura and that brought back a thought in my memory in 2017 we we had an article in the new york times that kind of kicked off this whole idea of you know we're being visited and glowing oras, they said, the Pentagon's mysterious UFO program. So you're connecting these, like I'm seeing a little bit of programming here, like, wait a minute, maybe they're onto something. Well, unfortunately for that news station, no, it wasn't the moon. We have a professional photographer on X. He's Andrew McCarthy. And he takes pictures of the moon and rocket launches and all types of other things with very high definition photographic technology. And he says this, because Russell Brands shared the same thing saying, what is this?

So Andrew McCarthy says, this is how mass hysteria spreads, a media outlet betraying the trust of their viewers by sharing an out of focus light in the sky and presenting it as a UAP, which then gets amplified by people who trust them. This has been shared, that video has been shared by millions and millions that's seen by millions of people. And so what they're talking about here

is if you are a photographer and you have a very powerful lens, when you start focusing in on celestial bodies like the moon, or Venus or some stars, you get to see something like this. These are out of focus planets. Here's four examples. And you can see looking pretty close to what that station was showing there. So that's one example here.

And as we're going down this conversation, the view that there's something out there beyond us. I mean, that view goes back to indigenous cultures for their inception stories. And that's for the public to come to their own own conclusions with their own experience and their own discernment. The problem I have here, or we have, is when media outlets, the government or people are making things appear as if there's something they're not. And this is what we're going to talk about. So let's go into another

video. This is another one where the biggest shared videos. And you can see this object flying around. This is supposedly over New Jersey. And this thing is this black object. It's flying over space it's it looks like a drone or it looks like something if we can that I think why we throw it why we take a look at it let's take a look at it's crazy government that's not a plane kind of look like the Millennium Falcon at sunset you know yeah I mean the Star Wars part five so you know these images again they're shared by millions of people and these have the tendency to stick in people's minds and in And really, when people think about the New Jersey story, that pops up.

Unfortunately, just a quick hop over to TikTok where that video was created by the creator. And you can see here literally in the description section, it says this video was created digitally. So there's obviously there's no saying like I was hovering above and I decided to take this video of this thing and talk at 10,000 feet. So, you know, there's a lot of obviously, what they're called misinformation, disinformation, disinformation, information going on and it's very hard to weed this stuff out. And even there's even some people that are just flying their own drones. And it's not just in New Jersey. It's spreading throughout other states as well. Here's Boston, two men arrested for hazardous drone operation near Boston airport. And then it says a third suspect fled the scene in a boat and has not been caught yet.

So I mean, this is people are perhaps seeing just hobbyists that are flying drones and reporting those as well. And maybe the people are actually harassing people that are hobbyists. But we have the National Security Council spokesman John Kirby, he took to the airwaves just a couple days ago, and he gave kind of a joint statement. And it was the concurrence of the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense. They say, they're circling the wagons here. And they're saying, we all agree on this narrative. This is what you should believe. Take a listen. Okay. You hear all of these officials. You've heard a lot of concern, a lot of coverage. Where are you tonight on this? As we look at the information we've got, Brett,

And we've now examined some 5,000 different sightings. We've added detection capabilities, additional observers. As you and I stand here today, to date, our assessment is that this is lawful, legal, commercial, hobbyist, and even law enforcement aircraft activity. Some of it's manned, some of its unmanned. We absolutely acknowledge that a lot of these are probably drones, but they're flying legally. And it is legal to fly drones in non-restricted airspace as long as you're registered with the FAA. And there's thousands and thousands of these kinds of flights every single day.

I think there's more than a million drones that are registered with the FAA just in the United States alone. Oh, Mr. Kirby. So, okay, not much really coming from that. Right. There's more mabo-jumbo-nothingness, right? Yeah. Which does just smack of not making any sense. Yeah. And so, I mean, this has been going on. And it's not just, it's not just one government official coming out and doing these press conferences. There's governors, mayors, senators, congressmen. They're all, they're all saying, we need answers to this. And it's being allowed to kind of breathe this, this chaos, this fear. And for me, first thing, because I'm looking through COVID goggles because we just went through that. I see this. This is the headline I see. Government used grossly unethical tactics to scare public into COVID compliance. So what are we being scared into?

And so Kirby is saying these are lawful. Well, this is also the stance of this headline just from last year. US shoots down unidentified flying object above Alaska. Oh, my God. Well, it turned out to be a Chinese spy balloon. And so we know over the past couple of years, there's been over hundreds, hundreds of what they're called drone incursions over U.S. military bases. And, I mean, here's just a couple of headlines here.

Key U.S. Air Force Base closes airspace amid drone sightings. That's the most recent one. And then a headline from two years ago, which is kind of interesting, adversary drones are spying on the U.S. and the Pentagon acts like their UFOs. And one of the final things I'll say here just to complete this story is in it just in November, late November, really right, I mean, we're talking about a week before these New Jersey drones really hit the mainstream news.

You had the military, the Pentagon doing drills, drone drills. And this is the headline here. You can look it up for yourself. nets, jamming, and cyberscalples, Pentagon weighs homeland counter-drone tech in mountain tests. So they're doing testing drills. And what did they find? They find this. And there's a quote here by the Northcom commander. This is one of the highest positions in the military here. By all indications, he says, USAS, these are these drones, will present a safety and security risk to military installations and other critical infrastructure for their foreseeable future,

says Northcom Chief General Gregory Giette. So not that we got it handled. These are a risk for for United States and our military and they're flying all over. So what's interesting about this story is there are two bills that are going through Congress right now. One of them is set to be, it has to be voted on by tomorrow because it's going to expire. And in this kind of in this kind of frenzy, these bills are now being forced to the forefront. Here's one of the headlines. Drone activity has gone too far. Biden must step in.

This is Kathy Hockel in New York. She's saying Biden must sign these bills. And these bills basically give Homeland Security Department of Defense like kind of the power position over dealing with these drones. And as we're reporting right now, as is breaking, the FAA has temporarily banned drone flights over critical sites in New Jersey communities until January 17th. So the FAA is actually using some of its authority here, not waiting for local or federal government because they do have authority to do this. I have my own theory, actually. I think it's Papa John's. I think Papa John's is working on a new pizza delivery system.

I think we should think about this. We should really think about this. And I'm partly joking here. This is one of those places where, yes, it very well could be to create up some sort of hyper scenario to regulate and take drones out of sky. Because I'm sure they don't want private citizens tracking every police arrest going on. They already have enough problems with cell phones. And God knows what else we might find out if we're able to get in the skies and look over things. But, you know, I've been to some weddings and things where you hear the drone overhead.

It's so disruptive. There's like, V-Zoo-Zoo. Can you imagine what our skies are going to be like as Amazon and pizza delivery places? Start really looking at delivering, you know, through drama. It's going to be just this mess in the sky. It's going to be loud as hell. And, you know, sitting and quietly listening to birds chirping, those days will be over. And it's right around the corner.

So if that's all this is, then, you know, I'm on the fence. Maybe the government does need to step in here. But here's what bothers me about it. And I know that there's also people saying that they're trying to find nuclear radiation and everyone's got theories out there. But I want to remind people that are like, well, I mean, the government is saying there's nothing here. But remember, that's exactly what they did with COVID too.

Remember how many times Fauci said, oh, no, no, no, no, it's a nothing virus. It's not going to affect the United States of America. That's how that started too. And when you look at when you read Matthias Desmond's book, you know, the psychology of totalitarianism, it's creating a level of confusion where you just don't know what to believe, and then somewhere in that, there's a level of anxiety that kicks up, and then the government or, you know, hands you what it is that's making you anxious, gives you something to focus on, creates an enemy that you can attack, and then suddenly you're like essentially hypnotized.

I mean, I think we have to look at all these things. Like, I don't trust any of it. I get even, you know, I even get more suspicious when it starts hitting mainstream news to tell me nothing to see here? Why are you even reporting on it? Why is this suddenly a story, especially a story with absolutely no story to it yet? The whole thing is very suspicious, and I think the timing is very suspicious. It's wild that all of this is suddenly happening. We're looking for radiation. There's a bomb missing. There may be UFOs all like just a few weeks out from the inauguration of a president that really is going after all the corruption in our government, is going to shut down the global takeover of our sanity here in the United States of America,

just seems really interesting that, you know, we've got crazy vehicles flying off the sky and people running around like, you know, an Orson Wells radio show. So anyway, we'll keep our eye on it. I'm glad we got out of the way because, I mean, every day this changes so much, and I don't feel like reporting on drones every week that we're here. Likewise. And I know people in the New York Times, Washington Post that are watching, they're going, thank God they took a moment away from their medical reporting. Because our report, on health reporting is devastated mainstream media. I mean, we have took that narrative away from them

that they tried to push on people. But we're going to go back to it now for all you viewers out there in the mainstream media and the corporate media. And there's a new study about the effectiveness of the COVID vaccine in children. Remember that was push on children in 2022 is approved by the FDA.

Here it is, protection from COVID-19 vaccination and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection among children, aged six months to four years. So it was authorized in 2022, but there wasn't a lot of real work. world data. In fact, it's still on the effectiveness of these vaccines in the age groups, it still remains kind of scarce because they were basically brought it over from the original clinical trials and say, well, working the adults, let's just move it to the children with the

EUA. Well, now we have 614 children. This study looked at from six months to four years, the same age group. And what did they find? They found this. There was no difference in risk of infection or symptomatic COVID-19 by vaccination status alone, regardless of timing of vaccination or manufacturer type. However, naive participants, that means someone who's never had COVID before, naive participants vaccinated with Pfizer Biointech were more likely to be infected and experienced symptomatic COVID-19 compared to naive and unvaccinated participants. Now there's a thing that says HR 2.59. That's a hazard ratio. So what that means is these kids, basically children, were 2.59 times more likely to have an infection or to experience symptomatic COVID-19.

than unvaccinated participants. And this is what everyone knows. It's 250% more likely to develop, you know, a COVID symptom scenario than if you had nothing at all. Okay. That's right. That's right. And I'm glad I got this straight. Yeah.

This builds on three other studies. So now we have four studies showing that not only are the vaccines not effective. They actually have a higher, you have a higher chance of developing infections or, symptoms and here's an article that really brilliantly puts it together for studies established that vaccinated individuals ultimately face a higher risk of infection compared to those who are not and at the same time you have the CDC still going out on social media mandi cohen headed the CDC goes out on social media and advertises the vaccine she writes this the single best way to risk less severe illness and do more of the things you enjoy to get

vaccinated against covid and flu have you made your plan to get vaccinated that's what what's going on. Trust the experts. Just the experts. Trust the experts. At the Jim Brewer. All right. So we have we have now, let's stand the vaccine conversation because a lot of these manufacturers like Pfizer like Moderna, they had such a great success with the COVID vaccine that they're moving on to other vaccines. Moderna is moving on to the RSV vaccine. This is a respiratory virus. It's it can have complications if you're older, immune suppressed or very, very young children. And that's where they're testing it in. They're testing it in kids in Panama five months to seven months old. So extremely small infants here for

this RSV vaccine test. And there's a problem. There's what they call a safety signal, a little bit of a roadblock. But don't worry, they'll get around that roadblock. That's what the headlines say. And you can look at this. Moderna's RSV vaccine run into safety roadblock. What kind of roadblock? Well, it's in the study. There's five cases of severe to very severe lower RSV respiratory tract infections. Those were reported among 40 of the babies who received the dose compared to just one in the placebo group. What happened to those babies, those infants? Five of them, all of them, required hospitalization. One needed mechanical ventilation. Wait, that was in the study. You mean an iron lung? An iron lung? Sure. Right. That don't exist anymore? Caused by a vaccine?

Wow, fascinating. Sounds familiar. I think I've heard that before. I'm in Del, you know what's interesting about this? As a journalist, I'm reading this, and I look, and they had to correct this article, the safety roblack article, and what did they say? Well, apparently the FDA was really looking out for us because they found this. Well, the author says, correction, December 11th, this story has been updated to make it clear that Moderna informed the FDA of the safety findings that triggered the study pause, not the other way around biospace regressed the error.

So yet another journalist is finding out the FDA is not monitoring these things. They're relying on the company to go, oops, our problem. And sometimes company doesn't say, oops, our problem. But let's look at the study, the actual study trial, because this is interesting. They had two interventions. They had two different types of RSV vaccine. They're both M RNA.

This is where these vaccine industries are going. This new technology. But you see against a placebo. So this is a very big story that they use the placebo, an inert placebo. Amazing. I mean, so just to be clear here, for everyone,

watching, guess again, all of your reporters, one of the things that you've said is misinformation is that we say no placebo-based trials were used in the pre-licensure phase of the 16 vaccines on the childhood CDC childhood schedule. And here we're being proven wrong by a brand new trial. But I mean, what's interesting, Jeffrey, is this proves our point, right? They've never done, and we have a document that you can look up and, you know, you can see, you know, whether or not There it is. That's on our website. You can click right there to see it. It shows all of the safety trials right there on the right. How long they looked at it. Did they have a placebo? None of them. None of them. There was one tiny placebo group in an HPV vaccine trial, but they hid the data on that.

That's a long story. But essentially, they've never done it. When they finally do it, when they finally do it on an RSV vaccine program, suddenly they go, whoa, stop. Kids are getting sick. People are being injured. Now, normally, if you don't have a placebo group, right, because they did show that they had one severe illness in that placebo group. So what they would all obviously say without placebo group is kids get sick. RSV, you know, it happens. Like, you know, that would be the natural that, you know, severe illness needing a respirator, needing an iron lung. That would happen whether they got the vaccine or not. That's what they argue when there's no comparator. But when you actually can compare that group and say, nope, sorry, clearly a different result of the vaccinated compared

to the placebo group. Now you know why it's so important, New York Times. This is why it's important. By the way, was that trial three days long, Jeffrey? Was it three days? Four days, five days? They found the problems from what I could see around day 85 to 141 in the trial. So, you know, several months into it that they find these problems. So look what happens when you go beyond three days, New York Times, four days, five. And then let me, I want to do a little thing here, Jeffrey, because I am really tired. I even sat down with a CNN reporter when I was in West Palm a week or so ago.

I said, I'm really tired of you guys just saying, the experts say is your response. I'm so tired of it. New York Times, all of you. I'm so tired of you calling that journalism. That's not journalism. The experts say, well, Richard Nixon, did you tap the phones over at the Watergate Hotel?

No, I did not. Well, there you have it. The experts say they didn't do it. That is what our media has turned into now. Every single news agency out there has gotten it wrong. But let me show you how hard this investigation is. Can I, Jeffrey? Because I'm really tired of people saying that, no, they've been studied.

They had placebo tests. Okay, really? All right, can we get my computer? Can you make my computer live here? For everyone reporting out there, I'm just going to show you, you know, what I'd really love to see, okay? Now, just go to Google. Yes, I use Google.

I know some of my people are really upset about that. FDA licensed vaccines. Just there it is. the FDA licensed vaccines. It's the first thing that comes up. All right, let's click on that. Vaccines license for use in the United States. There, they're all there.

Oh my God, that was so easy. They're all there. Now, let me grab my glasses here. They're all there. Let's go down to hepatitis B vaccine. This is one of my favorite stories. There's two of them, obviously. And right there, you can see the package insert.

So this is what you should have been shown if you had informed consent. This is what the doctor never hands you. And frankly, I hear if you do ask for it, then they kick you out of their practice for wanting information. But now on all of these, just go down to 6.1, the clinical trial experience. This is what they used to approve this for safety. Can you all read with me, in three clinical studies of this hepatitis B vaccine, 434 doses of recombavax HB were administered to 147 healthy infants and children up to 10 years of age.

I wonder how many of them were infants. Remember, this is given to day one old babies in America, and they call CPS if you don't give it, up to 10 years of age. So 147 kids who are monitored for five days. And there's no placebo group. So anything that happened in that five days, who knows? I mean, you just say, well, that was a natural occurrence. And there's a whole list of side effects. I'm not going to get into that they did see 100.

I'm just asking you. New York Times, Washington Post, all of you see it end. is a five-day safety review of 147 children between zero and 10 years old adequate to mandate a vaccine on every child born in America on their first day of life. I mean, if it is, then we don't come from the same plan. Then let's just do it for all of it. Cancer drug, every cancer drug, all I need is a five-day safety trial. Any lupus drug, a five-day safety trial, any X or any of the things that we see this

long, just why even bother showing the side effects? You won't have any side effects as long as you only do the study for five days. And by the way, you can go to that page and read every single vaccine. And if you can find a placebo trial, call me, I'll stop making this statement. You won't. They don't exist. So this is what we're asking for. Aaron's series right around the corner, we'll get into, but let's finish up with you, Jeffrey. I just had to make that point because journalism really just should not be that hard. Absolutely. And here's one of the biggest stories came and went last week.

And I didn't see, I saw a handful of people report on this thing. And this was the reupping of the Prep Act. This is the emergency declaration for COVID. We're still under a COVID emergency, says the Secretary of HHS, Javier Bacera. And this is the 12th time it's been renewed. Here's the adline here. And how long did they renew it for? until 2029. And we go to the, we go to the actual press release. And you can see here, it's the

public readiness and emergency preparedness act. And you go into here, it says, I, this is Javier Bucera, Secretary HHS. I have determined there's a credible risk that COVID-19 may in the future constitute such an emergency and am thus amending the Declaration to prepare for and mitigate that risk. So what's interesting here. Well, I just, can we just like just be saying for, second, why is preparing for a risk indemnifying the product maker? I mean, especially this far down. We're not rushing it anymore. We're not rushing it out in two weeks and saying, well, we know that the manufacturer would have taken more time. We're like years into this. Why is it this product

needs to be protected from liability? They made $100 billion. If vaccine injury is really one in a million, which we're proving beyond a shadow of a doubt right now today, that that's crazy, that that's obviously not true. But here's the point. If it really was, one in a million, don't you think they could afford that once in a rare lawsuit? Why is it they need indemnity? Why is it? They don't do it for drugs. They don't do it for anything else in this world. Explain to me why this product should not be allowed to be sued and especially should hold on to not be able to be sued all the way through Robert Kennedy Jr.'s tenure at HHS. Absolutely. And that's where the bigger story is. Five years, 2029, not the usual four years.

So it leapfrogs Trump, possibly Kennedy, if he's appointed. It leapfrogs all of them and kind of pundrels, liars, thieves, murderers, God, you guys are awful. It does covered countermeasures and covered persons. So this is what's in here. So covered countermeasures. So it's indemnifying and protecting Ramesivir, Paxlovid, ventilators. And of course, it has the countermeasures injury compensation program. This is this administrative program where people have to kind of beg and plead to get.

get any type of compensation that just basically pays your medical bills or if someone dies for the COVID vaccine. It's extremely stingy. It has nothing to do with the vaccine injury compensation program, which is somewhat of a legal process still compared to this. But what it also does is undercover persons, you can go in there and read that yourself. It adds pharmacists and pharmacy interns on there for administration of vaccines. But over the last couple of years, about 17 bills at the state level have been trying to add pharmacists and pharmacy interns to be able to inject CDC's entire schedule and children to adults at pharmacies. And, you know, there have been debates at state levels back and forth as there should be. This bill has come in. Javier Bresera,

basically with a swipe of a pen said, you know what? Pharmacist, pharmacy and interns can inject the COVID vaccine because there's emergency. And just go ahead and inject all the other vaccines ASIP recommends to. We'll give you liability protection for that too. So it's creating. an industry for pharmacists now, a brand new money-making industry. Why would they possibly do that? Well, it could be because of headlines that look like this. Why Walgreens, CVS, and Riteite are closing thousands of drug stores across America. The current pharmacy model is not sustainable. That's quoted in there. Almost 2,000 of these stores are declaring bankruptcy or are closing. Right-Aid has declared bankruptcy. So it basically buoyed an entire industry that was about to go under.

Well, let me be clear. I'm going to state it right now, which is something I'm about to do in a minute just to talk about how often we get things right before everyone else did. Let me say that we will be reading a headline, probably are you or two out based on the back of this, saying that pediatricians are shutting down, they have no business, they cannot survive, because you basically just took away the only thing that they do. I mean, if the, you know, if the drugstore is going to handle it, then our poor pediatricians have nothing left to do. So pack up your bags, you guys. You're not needed anymore.

We're just going to let the drugstore handle it. Deli, you're 100% right. And a lot of the heat comes down to here, the vaccine liability. So this COVID vaccine is protected. And why was this PEP Act created? It was created in 2005, signed into the law by George W. Bush. And we can go into this PEP Act, and you can actually see if we get in there, why was it created?

Where we look at subsection 2, to encourage individuals to consent, to basically covered countermeasures in a time. of an emergency. But part three, it says to provide individuals seeking compensation for damages related to the administration of a countermeasure with a non-adversarial administrative process for obtaining adequate and just compensation. Well, that's kind of a joke. And in fact, they knew it was a joke at that time. And the late Senator Edward Kennedy put forth his own version a year after this, after it passed, and it was S-2291. And he tried to get a real compensation program for these emergency countermeasures like vaccines that was modeled after the vaccine injury compensation fund.

He and his bill, it provided the government a right to sue vaccine manufacturers to get the recover payments made by this program because he was scared that this was going to turn to a black hole where people will never be seen again. They'll never get compensation. They'll have to deal with these injuries. Well, here we are today. Here's Reuters, a black hole for COVID vaccine injury claims. And that's where we're at with this countermeasures injury compensation program. You get the COVID shot, you get a problem with that, you have some type of injury or illness or you have to go through this program. You have one year to file after injection. That's, it's, it's, most people don't even know there was an issue. Their doctors don't even know. And we look at how many

people have been paid out here. Over almost 14,000 claims have been filed. Only 20 people have been compensated. We look at this chart here. We can go down and it's basically just medical bills, not pain and suffering. You're just being reimbursed for medical bills. But you see something there. There's a really big number. $370,376. What is that? Well, if you go into the framework, that was created. $370 million, right. Yeah, okay, got it. Yep. Yeah, yeah. You go into the framework. Oh, $3,000. $3,000.7,000. Okay, my $3,7,000. Yeah. For the COVID compensation, they created a framework for this, and they gave out the payouts,

the capping of awards, they call it. And so you get $50,000 per year for lost employment. But look at this, $370,376 for the maximum death benefit. Well, the only place I saw this reported was one substack, this was Wayne Rody, CIC did pay out its first death benefit from a COVID vaccine. Did you see that in the mainstream news? New York Times? No, did not, did not.

Keep hearing no signal, nobody dies, perfectly safe, this is misinformation. Safe and effective. Well, the effectiveness is question, the safety, They can't say that the vaccine has never caused mortality at this point because it looks like the program has just paid out a death benefit. And no one has reported on that. And this is exactly why that ICANN has put two lawsuits now together trying to get this countermeasures injury compensation program, basically ended and get these petitions, these people looking for help, seeking damages, seeking a compensation into a better program where it's actually constitutional,

but they have the right to sue and they have a legal process. And so this is what, if Kennedy gets appointed, this is what he'll be able to, he can change any part of this prep act. He can cancel the whole prep act. He can pick and choose what he wants to do. And this is what the headlines are showing. RFK Jr. Pick raises hope for vaccine injury program. Overhaul, it says that you're representative Lloyd Doggett has introduced legislation, HR 5142, to hire more special masters and move pending COVID-19 vaccine claims into the VICP. He said he received mostly, no help from the Biden administration and lawmakers afraid to stir up vaccine skeptics stood in the way. So no help is being had by your elected representative. So there is another avenue here.

Whoever leads HHSS moving forward, they can change this. They have the ability to change this. Amazing, Jeffrey. I mean, all of it is so shocking. You finally have a placebo group, but you finally have the first vaccine really being pulled because of it. God knows where we'd be, had we been doing proper science like that all along. You have a COVID vaccine being pushed by the CDC and the head of the current CDC head when we now know that increases your risk of, you know, catching the infection,

which means it increases your risk of myocarditis, which we saw of those being paid out, the heart swelling, anyone that tries to challenge that. Let's remember that what swells your heart in the virus is the spike protein. That's what you're injecting into your body with the vaccine. Only a version that doesn't do. It doesn't die in a couple of days like the original version.

It lasts for more than four months, as many of the studies have shown. So it just keeps circulating your body. Your cells keep making it and how that's okay. And how you can imagine death is a shock. Death's got to be rare. Really? In a product that's known to cause heart swelling. All of this, we could go on all day, Jeffrey.

I got to try and tighten this show up. So I want to move on to the fact that we were working on a series with you. Jeffrey Jackson Investigates. It's a documentary series. We were going to launch it brand new in January on High Wire Plus, which is our gift back to the people that donate and make our work possible. But your first episode was on polio. And since it's all in the news and it's about what I'm about to talk to Aaron about. Let's just take a look at the preview trailer for your first episode, which we are going to release tonight.

Take a look at this. Polio is a highly, highly effective vaccine. And historic victory over a dread disease. You meet people today. Right. In their 80s who were limping from childhood polio. It's good that we don't have that, and vaccines played a major role in that.

I'm grateful that we have the opportunity to have a polio vaccine, but I also want the truth. We're doing a deeper dive into the historic story of polio. Polio is a virus. It's something that's always been in human intestines. No matter how remote you go out into the countryside or to remote Indian villages, it's been there not causing any disease at all.

What was this childhood disease? Where did it come from? and how can it be treated? Rockefeller Labs was studying polio. There's documented gain of function that was going on at Rockefeller Labs. At this point, we have the rise of the chemist class. They figured out a new pesticide called lead arsenic.

They're spraying everything with DDT. There was zero concern at the time for toxicity. What we thought was polio sounds like it was actually an environmental toxin. Parents lived in fear of polio's sudden attack. Thousands upon thousands of children and adults. adults fell prey to the crippler. Would you say this disease had the best PR campaign to date of any disease known a man? Mass media never existed before this disease reached its peak.

And there would be the March of Dimes. Give every dime and dollar that you can spare to the 1954 March of Dimes. The entire nation was mobilized against polio. The medical system has this great invention and is an iron lung. There's that picture that you see with all the iron lungs and the gymnasies. gymnasium, that was actually a movie set. They now start looking for a vaccine. It was so daunting creating a vaccine for a virus.

They couldn't even see. There was something called the Cutter incident. They weren't careful about their manufacturing standards. They weren't careful about the testing. The fact that they were making vaccines with monkey kidney cells, they discovered the presence of SV40, which is a mutation that can cause cancers in animals and humans. Polio was caused by both, the injected and the oral polio vaccine. And if you think that they stop polio, you should realize that the total cases

from the year 2000 to 2017 of acute placid paralysis in India is 653,000. Polio will exist, whether we like it or not, forever. Failed regulatory oversight, contaminated vaccines, causing massive harm and even death. Imagine if the American people were told the truth, would we have had better regulatory guardrails going into the COVID response? Everybody will say, well, what about polio? And even parents that don't want to vaccinate their kids. kids. The one vaccine they gave polio. So let's talk about polio. You know, Jeffrey, I called you

just the other day after, you know, watching this down and giving a final, final notes. And I just said, this is a tour to force. It is, you know, this is information that, you know, you get pieces of it, and you heard pieces, and we've all read different books. So Levis Lozisville's investigating this, but to see it all put together the way you and the team have is absolutely mind-blowing. This is going to be, I believe the most mind-blowing documentary anyone is going to see, certainly this year, and really of all times, because this story is so pervasive in the media, and it so lacks all the same evidence of all the rest of the reporting. You know, it's not that, and I don't feel like the story is saying don't vaccinate.

What it's saying is, just know what it is you're being told you should be afraid of, and what this real story is. How has it been working on this series? Well, this is, as you know, a couple of years. years in the making this entire series. Obviously, polio is the founding myth of modern medicine as it's put in that documentary. And all eyes have been on the public spotlight on vaccination after COVID, after the COVID response.

And watching this, so many people, including myself, when this is a very similar thing that happened during the polio response, although we didn't have social media at the time. We didn't have an activated public ready report on these things. It kind of just got folded into the pages of history. So I mean, I've been burning the candle at both ends trying to create this and get it done. And this is my investigative lifeblood that went into this along with our team and our amazing guests. And it's time for these stories to be told. And I wanted to create the best one-stop shop for the polio story.

There's a lot of great books out there. And I tried to incorporate some of the authors, some of the, you guys, Suzanne Humphrey's, Forrest, Freddie. But we also go into the future series. We have a series on mental health. We go into the deep dive of the mental health crisis. We do everything from SSRIs and the homicide and suicide that's associated with those to ancestral plant medicines. We do the whole spectrum. We talk about the vaccine injury compensation.

We talked about a little of that today. And even the food industry, the entire genesis of when people say now, why are there red dyes and food, why is their high fructose corn syrup? We go into the entire history and reasoning why that was created, who did it, and how it can be changed. I'm hoping these start national conversations. That was my aim, not just for some entertainment, but to actually change a paradigm. Well, it's incredible, Jeffrey. I'm so excited for you. I hope this doesn't make you so big that you decide to leave this spot right here.

I need you, Jeffrey. Everyone, make sure you don't miss it tonight. The premiere, everyone's going to be talking about it. You just have to become a recurring donor for a minimum of $5 a month, which is less than any of the other subscribers. you have on your television, only this one is to be told the truth. Jeffrey, keep up the great work, really incredible reporting, as always. I say it all the time. There's so little that we've almost never have to apologize for what we've said, because we would, unlike mainstream media,

I'm still waiting for an apology on all that they've gotten wrong, but just really great work. I'll see you next week. All right, thank you so much, Del. All right, take care. Well, speaking of Highwire Plus, this is a perfect opportunity to actually donate to the highwire, which makes this possible. You see, part of the problem in New York Times and Washington Post and CNN is they take pharma funding. It's the advertising that goes into their product means that essentially their boss is the pharmaceutical institutions. I know it. You're all watching. Maybe some of you too young, some of you, you know, PAs that are watched this right now, taking notes going, man, I don't really, this is really shocking information. I hope it's getting through

to you because we need better reporters out there. I need reporters that don't work for pharma. We don't need any more propaganda. That was not what your, you know, what the television was made for. It wasn't to push the Biden agenda or the Trump agenda or any agenda by the government. It's actually to challenge that agenda, to bring back perspective, to challenge corporations and their interests and all their funding. But now that you're taking all of that funding, you can't tell the truth. But I can. I can tell the truth because you are my only sponsors. You out there right now. And so we decided, could we stimulate and inspire more of you to maybe just give a few dollars. a month so that we could do even more reporting, do deep dives and investigations, and send

Jeffrey Jackson around the country and around the world to get to the truth on these issues. We created High Wire Plus. Tonight is a perfect time. It's a perfect time to join because we're about to drop the most outrageous, unbelievable, mind-blowing documentary and documentary series starting tonight at 5 p.m. Pacific Time. Take a photo. Go to thehighwire.com.

You'll see it there. It'll all be obvious. Click the banner, High Wire Plus. All right. And why is this important? We're coming to the end of the year. We have so much important work to do all of the petitions that we bring, including the ones that make headlines like the New York Times, and all of the lawsuits that we've brought and won against FDA, CDC, Health and Human Services. And our work like bringing back the religious exemption in Mississippi, all of that is the action part of the informed consent action network. You make this possible.

You allow us to go into action and not just sit here and bitch and moan about the problems of the world. We go out and change them because of you. And right now, for this holiday season, we've been offered a matching donation, the $2 million legal match. Let's take a look at where we're at. First of all, take a picture of this QR code right here. If you want to make today the day that you donate so that you can watch this incredible documentary series tonight, I Can Decide.org slash legal match will get you there. Last week, I believe we're at $760,000.

So let's see where we're at now. Oh, my God. We had a really good week, you guys. $1.278 million. Thank you, New York Times. Anytime you bring us attention is great for us, so we'll take it. That's incredible.

All right, so look, we have just a little gap, two more weeks to go. This is really important. and that means we get to double that amount of money and continue to do the stories that the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN lied to you about. Let us keep doing this work. We want to be there for you. Now, speaking of that work, I'm just going to take a little moment here right before Aaron Siri comes on to talk about when you are vindicated. To talk about the I Told You So. I thought the high wire could be called I Told You So.com. But it just didn't quite have the ring we were looking for. But today is a huge, I told you so, because the congressional investigation of the COVID pandemic put out just a few weeks ago over a 500-page document that said, you know, like almost all the things that we said that was called misinformation.

But it looked like this on mainstream news. For two years, lawmakers on Capitol Hill have been investigating the U.S. response to the coronavirus pandemic. the COVID-19 Select Committee is now releasing their findings. The central conclusion, the U.S. response to the coronavirus pandemic was deeply flawed. The 557-page document titled After Action Review of the COVID-19 pandemic, The Lessons Learned, and a Path Forward, has determined that a lab-related incident involving dangerous gain-of-function research in China is the most likely origin of the COVID-19 pandemic.

I came to believe, and I still believe today, that it indicates that COVID-19 more likely was the result of an accidental lab leak. The report is critical of some response efforts to the virus from the government, like social distancing and masks not being based on scientific studies. The subcommittee also fault of the pandemic efforts on the World Health Organization. It said in part the World Health Organization placed the Chinese Communist Party interests ahead of its mission to help people around the world. All right, this report was officially, it was announced on December 2nd.

December 4th this year, 2024. There's a whole list of things that they got wrong. Whoops! During the COVID pandemic. And for many in mainstream news, it's been really shocking. It took all these years to get to the truth and finally understand what happened there. But it didn't take years for the high wire. We've been ridiculed. Go to my Wikipedia pages if you want to know what it looks like to have false information written about you. But you'll see misinformation spread. Like what kind of misinformation? I don't know, like something like we spoke about lab origin. What? Lab origin?

I mean, you can't imagine the amount of attacks we came under for that. But here's what the congressional hearing had to say about the final report. COVID-Cellect concludes two-year investigation issues, 500 plus page final report on lessons learned and the path forward. When it came to COVID-19 origin, which is the beginning of this whole pandemic story, COVID-19, this is now official, most likely emerged from a laboratory in Wuhan, China. We had a sense of that. The FBI already signed off on this recently. It said, yeah, looks like the lab. Looks like Tony Fauci was wrong. The expert was wrong. Looks like it was actually the lab. But, you know, it took till December 4th of 2024 for mainstream news to recognize this. When did you know if you were watching the high wire?

When would you have known that this was a possibility if you watched the highway? Well, let's go back. Let's take a look. If you're looking at this particular coronavirus, This coronavirus belongs to a family of viruses that are most closely related to the bat coronaviruses. However, phylogenetics has a hard time placing it with only 75% support. All of the other nodes you'll see on that tree, this is a phylogenetic tree of coronaviruses, actually have 100% support. So what's disrupting the phylogenetic signal of placing this into a unique monophyletic group, as it's called in phylogenetics, is, I believe, this inserted element.

I found that it actually did match a vector technology. This vector technology is a mechanism by which molecular biologists insert new genes into viruses and bacteria. Now, it's really unusual to find a vector technology sequence in a virus that's circulating in humans. And so naturally, one thing that we can say, I think, for certain, is this particular virus has a laboratory origin. So what you're saying is this technology is something scientists use to put in and insert things into the genetic coding of a virus to work with it. And what you're saying is that this is an actual product that scientists use that's now been found by you in what was said to be a wild by. How would a technology end up into a wild strained virus? Is that put clearly?

Okay. Exactly put clearly. It should not be in the wild animals anywhere. I can say I'm very, very certain it's not just a wild type coronavirus that happened to acquire this element. Very certain. So we're ruling out wild virus in the woods. Which means it's laboratory acquired somehow. It's escaped from a laboratory.

there you have that was February of 2020. That was before we even declared a pandemic. We were already on the lab origin. What did that do to us in the media? Well, if you watched Media Matters, which was an article that came out right before they pulled our YouTube channel, Facebook and YouTube are letting anti-vaccine figure Dell Bigtree pushed deadly coronavirus misinformation. What kind of misinformation? January 30th, Bigtree baselessly floated a theory that the coronavirus outbreak started with a vaccine development accident at a lab. He also suggested it is a bio weapon, which we now could go into all that this hearing looked into. Peter Dazak, EcoHealth Alliance, gain of function, developing what bio weapons right next to vaccinations?

All of this is proven to be true, yet still New York Times will reference me as being an arbiter of misinformation. Sounds like New York Times got it wrong. Watch everybody. All of you got it wrong. We got it right. But let's not get too hung up here. Shall we move on? So that was almost five years.

Just about five years ago, if you're watching the high wire, you got it right. Here's another one. Mask mandates. As it turns out, in December 2nd, on 2024, we now know there was no conclusive evidence that masks effectively protected Americans from COVID-19. Public health officials flip-flopped on the efficacy of masks without providing Americans scientific data causing a massive uptick in public distrust. Mainstream news is now aware.

of this, all of the people that you pay all the time for your cable bills to watch your television, all of it, they got it wrong. They're now no in 2024, but for us, when did we know? May of 2020 is when we reported almost exactly that statement. Take a look at this. But the mask, the mask is our badge of honor. I haven't seen any science that says that the mask has a problem at all. Really? Well, then obviously you didn't see this article by the world-renowned scientist, Dr. Russell Blaylock. Here's a couple of quotes from a brilliant article. Blaylock, but this is on, I'll go back to that title really quick so people can find it.

Face masks pose serious risk to the healthy. Listen to this. As for the scientific support for the use of face masks, a recent careful examination of the literature in which 17 the best studies were analyzed concluded to that none of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask, respirator use, and protection against influenza infection. As several studies have indeed found significant problems, however, with wearing such a mask. This can vary from headaches to increased airway resistance,

carbon dioxide accumulation, to hypoxia, all the way to serious life-threatening complications. While most agreed that the N95 mask can cause significant hypoxia and hypercapnia, another study of surgical mass found significant reductions in blood oxygen as well. In this study, researchers examined the blood oxygen levels in 53 surgeons using an oxymeter. They measured blood oxygenation before surgery as well as at the end of surgeries. The researchers found that the mask reduced the blood oxygen levels significantly. The longer the duration of wearing the mask, the greater the fall in blood oxygen levels. And lastly, studies have shown that hypoxia can inhibit the type of main immune cells used to fight viral infections called the CD4 T lymphocyte cells.

This sets the stage for contracting any infection. including COVID-19 and making the consequences of that infection much graver. In essence, your mask may very well put you at an increased risk of infections and if so, having a much worse outcome. There's actually one more. When a person is infected with a respiratory virus, they will expel some of the virus with each breath. If they're wearing a mask, especially an N95 mask or other tightly fitting masks, it will be constantly rebreating the viruses, raising the concentration of the virus and the lungs and the nasal passages.

By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves, and travel into the brain. Well, I mean, that was all the way back there in May. Again, you know, almost five years ago, if you were watching the high wire, you would have said this mask is ridiculous. I took it a step further. I even involved my own child, though, because it was pissing me off so bad how ridiculous reporting was on this. And by the way, every one of you reporters watching, how did you allow yourself to stand behind this? When you walked into a restaurant, the first time you walked into a restaurant, wearing your mask, and then they said, okay, sit over here and you sat down and said, now you can take off your mask.

Six foot safe, three feet, you know what I mean? Like, what are we talking about? Again, you know, a shout out to Jim Brewer, who's made such comedy out of this. But how did that, like, how did it not just defy your reason? How was it journalist? Did you allow this to continue saying, how does this make any sense that I can sit and talk to my friend in a restaurant for two hours without my mask on? But if I stand up to go to the bathroom, the waiter's like, what? Stop!

You did that. You were a part of the most insane, absurd dance, creating hysteria that made no sense. You did that. Every reporter watching right now, you did that. Not me. We told the truth. And I brought my son on to give this little experiment. Take a look at this.

This is my son, Ever. Ever is 11 years old. And here in Texas, the mandate right now is that 10 and over have got to wear a mask. Ever has to wear a mask wherever we go. And so we've bought this thing this week. This is, this measures the amount of CO2 that's in the air. Can we just look at the ocean numbers? Carbon dioxide levels and potential health problems are indicated below.

From 250, 350 is the background normal outdoor level, 350 to 1,000 ppm, typical level found in occupied space. spaces with good air exchange, 1,000 and 2,000 level associated with complaints of drowsiness and poor air. Obviously, I don't want ever to have drowsiness or poor air. 2,000 and 5,000 level associated with headaches, sleepiness, and stagnant, stale, stuffy, air, poor concentration, loss of attention, increased heart rate, and slight nausea may also be present, and then 5,000 ppm or more. This indicates unusual air conditions where high levels of the other gases also could be present. Toxicity or oxygen deprivation could occur, meaning do not hit

5,000. All right, here we go. Right now we're at 848. So I'm going to go ahead and just insert this right, like as he did, right? Underneath and try and keep it, that feels pretty tight right there, right? Okay, so you can breathe naturally. Let's just see what happens. Okay. All right, so we're at 1,367. We've already just passed two. So now we're in the place where he can be having headaches. He can be over at 3,786. Look at this. We've just, we've just passed two. So now we're in the place where he can be having headaches. Oh, we're at 3, 786. Look at this. We've just, we've just past 5,000 now we're in the toxic level right now we can be doing this 7,000 inside this mask of the CO2 7,000 parts per million and now he's this thing's gone off the Richter scale folks it can't even register how high the CO2 levels are inside and look how many seconds that was all right can I just yeah you want to take that off Ever since I was six foot three, by the way, about three inches taller than me. What amazing a few years can do with your children.

And by the way, I could never get a mask on him after that. Didn't matter if we were walking a whole food. He's like, screw that, dad. I got PTSD from that show you made me do. I'm never wearing that. That was crazy that you did that to our kids. And for all the parents that you, I'm sorry, you allowed your kids to go and sit for eight hours doing that. You weren't doing that in your offices.

I just don't understand how you allowed yourself to treat your children differently. than you would even treat yourself. And again, all of your reporters that did that to our kids. And now when I see people on the plane that are still wearing it, and you see the gait, you see the whole absurdity. They don't work. We know that they don't work. I proved it. With just the B-roll, the same test everybody else did. You know, I just sat there and said, well, I mean, we know smoke particles are bigger than COVID were. So why don't we just check how well smoke is doing when we are wearing a mask? And I mean, I hope you remember this next time that try to make you aware of what it says. Come on. I mean, just come on. Please. All right.

At least finally, the congressional hearings have come to the same conclusion. Let's get moving. Aaron's waiting for me. So next up, we've got the congressional hearing. What else did they come up with? Social distancing. Oh, I love this one. The six feet apart social distancing recommendation which shut down schools and small businesses across the country basically imprisoned us in our houses, like we've never been done before, was arbitrary and not based on science during closed-door testimony. testimony. Dr. Fauci testified that the guidance sort of just appeared from the guy that said, if you question me, you question the science. So Tony the science Fauci had no science. But boy, did you report like he did. Shame on you. Well, we reported on this. May of 2020, we knew this

was bull crap. How do we know? Well, there's an article about who actually came up with this idea. wasn't the NIH, wasn't the CDC, wasn't the WHO. It was a child. Take a look at this. A brilliant article came out. We've been hearing scientists say over and over again, there's really no science behind social distancing. Well, where did it come from?

Guess where it came from? A 14-year-old girl came up with social distancing as a part of a science project. This is an article that came out recently, The 2006 Origins of the Lockdown Idea. But what is this mention of a high school daughter of 14? Her name is Laura M. Glass. Laura, with some guidance from her dad, devised a computer simulation

that showed how people, family members, co-workers, students in schools, people in social situations interact. Her program showed that in a hypothetical town of 10,000 people, 5,000 would be infected during a pandemic if no measures were taken, but only 500 would be infected if the schools were closed. Well, you know, great science experiment. And by the way, Laura, congratulations for you of doing something and writing an idea

that the entire world followed. But was it a good idea? Most scientists say no. Here's a recent article by a scientist. Two meters social distancing rule was conjured out of nowhere. Professor claims he goes on to say there's never been a scientific basis for two meters. It's kind of a rule of thumb.

But it's not like there's a whole kind of rigorous scientific literature that is founded upon. But hey, let's go ahead and make the entire world do it anyway. Well, for those reasons, because it's actually not scientific, I am against social distancing, and that makes me against being on Team Coronophobia. Team Coronaophobia. Everyone in mainstream media got that wrong. You got it wrong. You got wrong on masks. You shamed people. You turned them into Nazis. You said, you had guys like Gavin Newsman people saying, here's a phone line, call in if you see your neighbor, not walking down with a piece of fabric on their

that does absolutely nothing. I mean, all of it, the social distancing, if they're having a party, they were arresting a surfer by himself out in the middle of the ocean. And you said nothing. At mainstream news, you were like, oh, this is cool.

This is cool. This is the United States of America's Outfountain fathers dreamt it. Outrageous. But to finally, the coup de grace, and I could go on, there was like 20 of these things, we decided you really wanted to talk about polio.

So let me just get in the last one. This is just such a bitch slap on all of you. I'm sorry. It is. We're right. You're wrong. Contrary to what was promised, the COVID-19 vaccine did not stop the spread of transmission of the virus. Remember that headline?

Del Binkry's spreading dangerous information about the vaccine. That did not stop transmission. The rushed COVID-19 vaccine approval, the FDA rushed approval of the COVID-19 vaccine in order to meet the Biden administration's arbitrary mandate timeline to leading FDA scientists, and their colleagues about the dangers of rushing the vaccine approval process. No, duh. And the likelihood of adverse events, really? They were ignored and days later the Biden administration mandated the vaccine and years later gave it five more years of indemnification no matter how bad it is. As of yesterday. We reported that the emergency use authorization,

not in our own minds, not because we have some agenda to push, that the FDA's own writing said they had no idea if the vaccine could stop transmission. We reported that in December of 2020. We did check the source. We did take the primary source, which was Pfizer's experimental vaccine data that was submitted to the FDA for their emergency use authorization. And what did it say under Section 8.4 unknown risks, data safety gaps in certain subpopulations. There are currently insufficient data to make conclusions about the safety of the vaccine and subpopulations. such as children less than 16 years of age, pregnant and lactating individuals and immunocompromised individuals. Vaccine effectiveness against transmission of SARS-COVID-2. I thought we're talking about

ended the pandemic with this. Data are limited to assess the effect of the vaccine against transmission of SARS-COVID two from individuals who are infected despite vaccination. Before any person outside the trials had received it, we said mainstream news is lying to you today. Right now, they're lying to you. They're telling you that the experts say that they just prove this thing's 95% effective. And we said, no, they didn't. No, they're lying to you. Now, we were called the liars, but this is what they got caught saying on cameras that will live in infamy. Everyone who takes the vaccine is not just protecting themselves, but reducing their transmission to other people and allowing society to get back to normal. We can kind of almost see the

We're vaccinating so very fast. Our data from the CDC today suggest, you know, that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick. Getting vaccinated and getting a booster shot when eligible can save your life and protect you and your family and friends from getting seriously ill and spreading infection. What do you think the probability is 80%? Personally, I think it's 100%. I think that there's a reduction in transmission.

Essentially, vaccines block you from getting and giving. the virus. If enough people get vaccinated, it actually halts transmission. You're not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations. We have all the vaccines we need. We just need our people to take it, A, for their own protection, for the protection of their family,

but also to break the chain of transmission. You want to be a dead end to the virus. So when the virus gets to you, you stop it. You don't allow it to use it it to use you as the stepping stone to the next person. Now we know that the vaccines work well enough, that the virus stops with every vaccinated person. A vaccinated person gets exposed to the virus.

The virus does not infect them. The virus cannot then use that person to go anywhere else. It cannot use a vaccinated person as a host to go get more people. That means the vaccines will get will get us to the end of this. And that was what happened the year everyone in the news decided to trust the experts instead of ask a single important question. Just like the New York Times will say, the experts say they've done longer studies,

then print it, put it in your paper, show it to us. That's what we do. It's called the High Wire Protocol. We put all of our evidence in your hands. every single week. No matter what we report, it's not just our opinion, and we do not tell you the experts. Say we tell the experts, hand us your evidence, hand us your study, hand it to us, and we will hand it to the public, and we will let them decide. It's called the informed consent action network. If you want to be a part of it, if you actually want to see evidence from your

news anchors, then watch this show and sign up to our newsletter. All you have to do is scroll down the page right now at the highwire.com, and just type in your email right there. It's it. All that means is every Monday after our show, we show you our work. Remember in math? Show me your work. No one in news is doing it. We hope one day they'll follow us. It's what's decent. It's what's right, especially as after you've messed up as bad as you did throughout COVID and beyond. So as though this isn't over, we still have all the attacks that come at the highwire, come at Aaron Siri for working for us and I can. This was the headline that drove us to do the show this week.

Kennedy's lawyer has asked the FDA to revoke approval of the polio vaccine. Well, of course, what they're trying to say is since Kennedy's lawyer is also my lawyer, somehow this is on Kennedy. That's not true. I have worked with Kennedy. Aaron has worked with Kennedy, but I can tell you he is one of the most brilliant people I've ever met. And I have given to my thoughts and many times he says, I appreciate it, Dell. I'm going another direction. He has his own nonprofit called Children's Health Defense. It used to be called the World Mercury Project because for a while he really thought Mercury was the main issue in vaccines. I didn't agree with him there. We have had many conversations. Sometimes we agree. Sometimes we don't. In fact, look at any issue in the world. Do you agree with everybody all the time? Are you a Democrat? Do you all agree on what it means to be a Democrat? Are you all for war right now? I don't think so. You know, people, People have differing opinions, but not in the world of New York Times.

The only opinion that they really care about, and we know for sure, is they think a three-day safety trial is okay. What did this do in the news this week? It was pretty amazing. Take a look at this. The New York Times reported that a lawyer who's helping RFK Jr. build his team petitioned the FDA to revoke approval of a polio vaccine. One of his aides has been waging war against one of the miracles of modern medicine, the polio vaccine. Kennedy's top aide has asked the FDA, to revoke approval of the polio vaccine.

They're insinuating that RFK Jr. wants to get rid of the polio vaccine altogether. He doesn't want to get rid of any vaccines. Mr. Kennedy has made very clear. He just wants to make sure that there's transparency and that there's proper science. It was followed on behalf of a client of our firm, not on behalf of Robert of Kennedy Jr.

has nothing to do with him, never spoke to him about it. Aaron Siri has lobbied to revoke the approval of polio vaccinations. Aaron Siri asked the FDA to revoke to revoke approval of the polio vaccine. You claim the New York Times did a hit piece on you. It's totally false to say that the petition saw it to revoke the polio vaccine

as if the petition intended to make it so that Americans couldn't get the polio vaccine. It was for only one of six licensed polio vaccines. Erin Siri is a critical player in the anti-vax movement or what RFK calls the medical freedom movement. A lawyer working with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has petitioned the government to revoke its approval of the polio vaccine because it ain't Christmas without some tiny tims.

This kind of anti-vaccine rhetoric is part of a larger coordinated disinformation campaign. This is a man who wants to stop kids from getting their polio and measles shots. Republican leader Mitch McConnell, a polio survivor, issuing a blunt warning, saying efforts to undermine public confidence in proven cures are not just uninformed. They're dangerous. They knew it was false when they published it. They intended the country to be misled. And that's what they accomplished.

The outrage here should be that the FDA licensed a product for injection into children based on a clinical trial that only review take you for three days after injection. That's where the outrage should be. That should have been the New York Times headline. Well, it's my honor and pleasure to be joined by one of the greatest attorneys on the planet right now. Aaron, Siri. Aaron,

first of all, can I apologize? Like, you had such a great life. You were an incredible corporate attorney until I dragged you into this mess and boy, we got it done it

this time. So this headline basically came out Friday. What were your first thoughts when you saw it? Oh, I immediately said, come on. The New York Times

absolutely knew. Okay? that that headline was going to create a reaction that was totally false. They knew when they said revoke approval of the polio vaccine that it was going to be taken as we're taking away the polio vaccine. Nobody can get it. They knew that was false. And if they didn't know that was false, which is there's no way they didn't know.

And they're not going to be a high school newspaper, literally. It takes two seconds to figure out, okay, the petition was. for oh oh only for kids not for adults okay so even if it was granted adults could still get the vaccine a right kids because it's the license could get it off label but doesn't take a lot of work to figure out it's it's it's it's it's given a two four and six months and four years of age yeah and there are five other licensed polio vaccines that are given and available to be provided and so nobody not a single person in this entire country was going to be without a polio vaccine, even if this petition granted.

And the New York Times knew that. They knew that. There's no doubt they read the petition. And what's amazing about it is. Let me just read it really quick. Here's the action request. Number one, petition requests that the FDA withdraw or suspend the approval for iPole for infants, toddlers, and children until a properly controlled and properly powered double-blind

trial of sufficient duration is conducted to assess the safety of this product. Petitioner further requests that the FDA amend the product label for iPole to note that iPole does not prevent intestinal infection and therefore does not prevent polio transmission. This is huge. This is huge because right now, most of the reporters, I guess, don't know this. You have polio starting to sweep the planet because of the vaccine program in the Middle East and third world countries where they use a different vaccine and now vaccine strain. polio is starting to sweep the country, and we're starting to see it in this sewage in New York City, which means it's come to America. And they will, you know, poliovary variants, in rare instances, the vaccine virus may be able to circulate over time in mutating communities with insufficient immunity or immunocompromised individuals. These mutated OPEB strains can cause polio

disease. They are called poliovirus variants or vaccine-derived polio viruses. We didn't make it up. There's the CDC admitting it. And what's amazing, Aaron, is, everyone in mainstream media wants to say it's because of the anti-vaxxers that were finding it in the sewage. But the truth is, if that was the case, if anti-vaxers had caught this, just like we know now with the coronavirus study, they'd be perfectly immune. And most people, actually people don't recognize this. It'll be in the documentary. Don't realize that most people did bind with it. In fact, it was ubiquitous throughout the world for centuries before anyone even had paralysis. So it's curious. But if the unvaccinated caught it, that's not really what's going to make

spread across New York, what's going to spread across New York is all of you people that are vaccinated that can carry it and don't know you have it. That's what's going on right now. But anyway, that's a side note. It's a side note on the issue of polio vaccine, but so much is misunderstood about this topic. But let's talk about iPole. Let's talk about iPol. So when you look at iPol, Aaron, when we're looking at this, how long was the safety review since we wanted a longer safety review? How long was the safety reveal on iPol? Yeah. So iPol was licensed based on a clinical trial that reviewed safety for three days, three days after

vaccination. That's it. Now, you know, as our firm has done on behalf of ICAM for other vaccines, we sent a FOIA request to the FDA and said, come on, you got to have more than this. Right. And as you know, they wrote back and they gave us everything they have. We've tortured them a few times over it. And that's all they have.

They've got basically, they license this product for children based on a clinical trial that looked at safety for three days after injection with no control group. Now, just to be clear, just to make sure there's no misunderstanding. This is not the soft vaccine. This is not the saving vaccine.

This is not your vaccine of all. This is a new, a novel polio vaccine license in 1990. And it was based on a new technology. It was growing the polio virus. on something called Vero cells. Those are chromosomally modified monkey kidney cells and to render them immortal like cancer cells. So you grow it on that.

And then those Vero cells, those essentially cancerous monkey kidney cells, end up as an ingredient in the final formulation. So this is a totally different type of polio vaccine. And in fact, when you read the package incident, it goes to great lengths in the first page to explain how different it is of a product. And so here you have it.

you've got this new product that's coming online in 1990 and you got to test it properly. But you know, as we've talked about many times on this show, it came out after 1986. Right. And all the products that came out on or after 1986 suffer from the same issue, which is the manufacturers, they're not worried about liability for injuries. And so their incentive to conduct safety reviews in the clinical trials is basically zero. It's actually the opposite. their financial motivation is to do as little or nothing,

whatever the FDA will get away with. Why the FDA let them do it, that's another question. And that, that should have been the headline. Absolutely. The headline with the New York Times paper should have been, FDA licenses novel polio vaccine, not salt, not saving, based on a clinical trial with three days of safety review. And hey, folks, don't worry, even if they grants it,

everybody can still get vaccinated. But we should make sure this product's truly safe. Amazing. It's really outrageous. And one of the arguments is, well, it's the, if it's not the only one, it's the main one, but even that's not true, when you look at the CDC schedule, I don't know if we can zoom in close enough for me to be able to read it, but mostly at these well baby visits on the CDC schedule, what you see is these are the grouped, where it has multiple, you know, viruses and bacteria in them. And in this case, polio is amongst all of those. So let's look at the list, just. just so everyone can see it. Of all the vaccines are available for polio, one more time just to put this to bed. You've got Pediarix, Kynrichs, Kodryxel, Vaxellis, Penta cell. Look, these names already tell you, quadricell,

that it's not just a polio by itself. This is the future vaccinations, which is giving a bunch all at one time. This is what they're recommending. So iPole doesn't even affect the childhood schedule. So, I mean, the whole thing is just insane, but everyone jumped onto it. I mean, you got, I'm sure you got Robert

Kennedy Jr. up there being grilled today, probably meeting with senators over this, because they just don't know. If all you do is read the New York Times, you're totally uninformed. Like, you are an idiot. New York Times is leaving you, like, abandoned with information. Well, I'll say two things about that. First of all, I mean, we don't know. But, you know, when you Google RFK polio now, most of which comes up now is my appearance on Fox, my appearance on Chris Cuomo. The Wall Street Journal op-ed I just wrote ripping the New York Times. I love it. The Hill did a good, decent piece. The Fox News did a decent written piece. And so you've

got now all of the folks out there who realized this was a total, it was an absolute purposeful deception by the New York Times. The authors of this article should be ashamed to call themselves journalists, that they went out and misled purposefully, the entire country to believe that this petition, two, a few misrepresentations, one, that this petition would have deprive people of getting a polio vaccine, totally false. And then second, that somehow it had anything to do

with Robert of Kennedy Jr. When it was filed on behalf of I can, nothing to do with him. And I have never spoken to him ever. He didn't even know about it. So like the whole thing, it's just a whole- I'd forgotten about it. So I wasn't talking about it.

So I mean, I mean, you know, that it's an incredible deception, but it highlights the ideology, right? These two reporters in New York Times and New York Times itself, they are what I call vaccine zealots. They're truly, they're their ideologues. They cannot see past their emotions, their dogma regarding these products. They can't even view them as products, I don't think. And so they can't look at it and say, hey, wait a second. Just pause for one second.

You know what? Let me step back and say, okay, if this was. was a statin drug. And there were six other statin drugs. And somebody filed the petition to say, look, the use of this one statin drug, the clinical trial was definitely not good enough to license it, to determine it safe.

You should do a proper safety trial. The New York Times wouldn't be publishing any paper that they publish it. And others had this, as you know, of course, the whole point of this position was never to withdraw the licensure. That's not the point. You didn't want it.

I can didn't want it, right? But by the way, I'm realistic. I know they're never going to withdraw a vaccine. You just hope you can bring attention to it and say, well, you guys do a proper safety trial so that we can't keep dragging through the mud on being so pathetic as representatives for the citizens of the United States of America. We're giving you an opportunity here to actually step out and do your job. But God forbid you do that.

As we talked about, if we wanted to get the FDA to review the licensure, Right. So we have to make a request for the FDA to review an action that they took. Now, you can't ask the FDA to do a better, make them do a clinical trial. You can't make that request because the FDA doesn't do the trial. You can't say FDA do the trial. Right. The company has to do the trial. So what is the, what was the regulatory act that the FDA took?

They licensed it. So the only way to get the FDA to require the manufacturer to do a proper trial is to say, hey, you should withdraw the licensure until they do a trial. Now, in no universe, as we talked about, ever do we think the FDA would actually withdraw it, nor is that the point. Nor does it, I don't believe, you know, I can't, it wanted that.

The point was only to get them to do the trial, and this was the legal mechanism to do it. Instead of hailing ICANN's effort to try to get the FDA to make sure this product is safe, the New York time goes and just puts out a total, screed that is just totally untrue. They also attack several other petitions of ours. This is something we do.

And it's something that we don't always talk about on the high wire. They, they, they, we had a petition about the hepatized B vaccines. Very quickly, what was the basis of that petition? Super easy. This, there were two polo vaccine, excuse me, two have B vaccines at issue in this petition. And again, by the way, there are other licensed, have B vaccines, okay? Yeah. But the two at issue in this petition were licensed based on five or less

of safety monitoring after injection in the clinical trial with no control. Again, that is You would allow it in any other product. Yeah. You showed it earlier on the show. Yeah, it did. Otherwise, if you asked me to make up, and I've said this before, the most nefarious, craziest thing I could come up with about vaccines. Yeah. I wouldn't even say that. I would say nobody would believe me. That sounds so bananas. And that's the reality of those products. So all All this asks for is, hey, hey, you should require, there it is on the screen. That the FDA withdraw or suspend the approval for injurics B and recombivax, HB for infants and toddlers, until a double-blind placebo-controlled trial of sufficient duration is conducted to assess the safety of these products.

Again, New York Times thinks that four and five days with no placebo group is all that is needed for a new pharmaceutical product injected into a day-one old baby. for, by the way, a disease that only affects people that are involved in permissuous sexual relations or sharing needles. So why a day one old baby, what would be the risk to even pause this for a second is absolutely unreal. I love the fact, though, that one of the godfather of the vaccine program that you, in one of our cases that we sent you in, you got to depose Stanley Plotkin. For people that don't know he is, the textbook. with the largest book, the most important book on vaccines ever written. It's called Plotkin on Vaccines. It has co-authors with Catherine Edwards and Paul Offutt and one or two other scientists.

And when you are at the ASIP, the advisory committee on immunization practices meetings at the CDC, we were there the day they actually decided they're going to name that gavel, the Plotkin gavel. That happens to be how important this guy is. So what does he say about this level of testing? Is it sufficient enough a five-day state review? Aaron asked Stanley Plotkin that. Take a look. Dr. Plotkin, earlier you testified that there are two Hep B vaccines in the market. One by Glaxo, GSC. That's Enderix B.

And the other one is by Merck, recombivax, HB. Right? Yes. This is the product, the manufacturer insert for recombavax HB, HB, correct? Yes. And the clinical trial experience. would be found in section 6.1, correct? Correct?

Correct? Dr. Paquen? Yes. Okay. In section 6.1, when you look at the clinical trials that were done pre-licensure for KamaVax HP, how long does it say that safety was monitored after each dose? Let's see. Five days.

Is five days long enough to detect an autoimmune issue that arises? immune issue that arises after five days? No. Is five days long enough to detect any neurological disorder that arose from the vaccine after five days? No. Okay. There is no control group, correct? It does not mention any control group, no.

No. If you turn to Section 6.2, under immune system disorders, does it say that there were reports of hypersensitive reactions, including anaphylactic, anaphylactoid reactions, bronchospasms and uticaria having been reported within the first few hours after vaccination? Yes. Does it have they been reports of hypersensitivity syndrome? Yes, that's what it states. Does it reports of arthritis?

It is mentioned. It also reports autoimmune diseases including systemic lupus erythematosis, lupus-like syndrome, vasculitis, and polyteritis, nidoza, as well, correct? Yes, that's what it states. And also it states that under the nervous system disorders, it states that after that there have been reports of Guillamboree syndrome, correct? Yes. As well as multiple sclerosis, exacerbation of multiple sclerosis. Myelitis, including transverse myelitis, seizure, febrile seizure, peripheral neuropathy,

including Bell's Palsy, radiculopathy. Radiculopathy. Thank you very much. Muscle weakness, hypopheasia, and encephalitis, correct? Correct. These are events that are reported after vaccination, and as you just, we just, we just, discussed in order to establish whether it's causal between the vaccine and the condition, you need a randomized placebo-controlled study. But that was not done for this hepatitis B vaccine

before licensure, was it? No. Okay. And given that the vaccine now appears on the CDC's recommended list, isn't it true that it would now be considered unethical to conduct such a study today? It would be, yes, it would be ethically difficult. That always blows my mind, Aaron. I also sit here thinking, what were these New York Times writers thinking to mess with you? A guy that stood for nine hours against the greatest vaccine maker, scientist in the world. And you had him admitting he was lying and all sorts of things, obfuscating at the very least. I know you don't like that word lying.

We're not putting that on you. but it's an incredible deposition. We put it out in many parts. But look what he's saying there. There's no way to determine whether all these side effects that people are reporting were or were not caused because you didn't do a proper safety trial. Without a placebo group, there's no way to say that this product is safe. And there's also no way to say that these incidences are not being caused by the vaccine.

They're left nowhere. So every time the experts are saying, oh, it's been proven, the mountains of studies. Plotkin right there did not say, I have mountains of studies showing how hepatitis B is that happened after this. He just admitted you can't do a proper study after you've approved it, right? Well, three things. First, what were they thinking when they did that hit piece? They were thinking, we own the media. We have billions of dollars. And what does he got? Right. Right? I mean, look, the pushback has been, I don't have, we don't have, I don't have a media team.

I don't have a PR firm. It's just trying to get on Fox and all the media outlets, trying to get the Wall Street Journal to publish the op-ed. At some, at one point they even wrote me back, please stop to besieging us. I was like, okay, I'm sorry. But I really want to try to get, you know, the truth out there. Yeah.

And to their credit, they published the op-ed. That's right. Thank you. So thank you. And really, I will say this, the New York Times made a colossal wonder, in my opinion, because they have just now made it so that you could talk about childhood vaccines on national television, which nobody has ever let me do before. And I got to do that.

And so thank you, New York Times for that nugget. Yeah. Go ahead. Go ahead. I was just going to say, and I asked actually your question, which I didn't even answer. Yeah, you could see that you could see that. You need a placebo controlled trial or properly controlled trial. There's an existing standard of care that's been well established as safe, right?

You have a proper trial. And without that, you're not really able to show, you're not able to show whether or not a claimed reaction and the product are connected causally. All you're left with is, well, correlation, and you see what they do after that. So you see what they do all the time when a parent say, well, my child had this condition, this immune condition, this neurological condition. that's immune mediated. They'll come back and they'll say, well, that's correlation.

That's not causation. But you didn't do the clinical trial to show it's safe to begin with. And then after it's licensed, you're not really doing the post-licensure safety studies. And this claim that there's this mountain of science, as you know, is not true. It's just not there. It's amazing. The New York Times actually goes to their trusted expert, who's Stanley Plotkin, you know, and what they say, Dr. Plotkin, who was subjected to a nine-hour deposition as an expert witness

in a lawsuit brought by Mr. Siri, said having Mr. Siri in a position of influence would be a disaster. Sure would. All of my lives would come falling apart. He added, I find him laughable in many ways, except, of course, that he's a danger to public health. No, I think, Dr. Plotkin, you are the danger because you are the one that has decided to not force long-term safety trials of a product we give to our children. We have so many great quotes. We could do that all over again. We'll do it another time. The New York Times, did you have one more comment on that? Yeah, I have to make a comment on that for the day. Okay.

Okay. First of all, first of all, I'd like to point out that. So the world's leading vaccinologists, he is the world's leading vaccinologists. Yeah. In an article about, it's supposed to be about data and science, studies, science, about three petitions that in our petitions are each hundreds of pages long with supported data when we filed those three petitions. We supported them with data.

We supported them with studies. We demanded more data in studies. But yet the only thing that the world's leading vaccineologist has to say is a quick response. They couldn't have them quote any data. Right. They couldn't have a study. And you might notice something else. That entire New York Times article does not one site to a single piece of data or science for a study.

Really think about it. It's just a total, I mean, it's an unthinking. It totally lacks. Flush fees. Yeah. But it's viewed, because it's New York Times. Now, second, I'll just add this, okay? You said that, you know, you said Dr. Plotkin never provided any documents, right? To support things that went on in that deposition.

Well, I don't know if I've ever, I think I may have said this before, but I'm not sure. But, you know, after that deposition, we sent something called a, we saw the subpoena, just to a subpoena for documents, basically. Okay, yeah. Directly to Dr. Plotkin, we had it delivered to his house. After nine hours, after a nine hour deposition of getting grilled and, And we have so many videos that show how poorly he handled that and how bad his answers were, but you gave him an opportunity.

Yes. Okay. We said, look, let's, hey, you say that there's more, we said, we asked what. We say, hey, look, give us all the documents that show it's longer than five days. Give us all the documents show these clinical trials were long enough that they were properly controlled. Give us the documents to show these ingredients are safe. Give us all the things he at one point or another insisted upon. We said, wonderful.

He's the world's leading vaccinologist. If anybody's got the proof, let's get it. I mean, you know, unlike these scientists, I give I can a lot of credit that and the legal work that we do, we try not to make any a priori assumptions. We first seek out the data, seek out the studies, carefully review it, then draw conclusions. It's usually the right way to do it.

These folks don't do it that way often. And we see that from all the FOIA requests, from how we engaged with them. So yes, you are exactly right. They had no documents and not just because, but because we subpoenaed, and you know what Dr. Plotkin did after a subpoenaed him for those documents?

He brought a separate lawsuit. Literally, he brought a separate lawsuit to quash that subpoena instead of just producing. Wow. A whole other lawsuit he brought, just to quash it. Just so that there was nothing that he wasn't asked to be transparent

and show us his data and his science. And you know what? the settlement agreement was that we would never bother him again. That's what he wanted. That's what he wanted. And so, you know, it's my client's my client's case, you know, who I was representing in that case. And that's what the resolution. So he didn't have to give anything as long as we left him alone and didn't subpoena him again for him. But he didn't end up going on to the stand in the case. Right, right, right. And he didn't end. That was just the deposition. He did not show up for that case. Is that right in the end? He did not show up as an accident. Right. No, that's how strongly he believed to

what he was saying, he didn't follow through with the case. Amazing, Aaron. We had many more things we wanted to get to, but let me just, let's sum it up with the Catherine Edwards quote. I think that that's a great summation. There's plenty. Again, we could do this all day. But in the article, the other genius, the co-author of Plotkinon vaccines,

you're taking the leaders in vaccinology, Dr. Edwards said, the people that have spent their whole lives studying these vaccines and seeing their impact, you're marginalizing them and making them look like they're prostitializing. of pharma. This is what they're saying about you, Aaron. You're making them look like prostitutes of pharma. How does that make you feel? Oh, well, look, let's just look at it factually. I don't know if my feelings aren't relevant. I'll just say that one need only watch the first two hours of Dr. Plotkin's deposition and the first two hours of Dr. Edwards deposition, both of which you put up on the highwire.com. Yes. And if you watch it, I will let the, we will let, I think,

the public shall let they can draw their own conclusion of whether or not uh the facts the facts evidence that their prostitutes of pharma i didn't make them take money from pharma i didn't make them be advisors i didn't make them be consultants i didn't make them sit in advisory boards i didn't make them paid to speak about to promote their products i didn't do it i just asked questions and i had the proof when they when they when they tried to tell me oh i didn't do that i'll be like oh then what what What about this study that shows you did do that? Right. And, you know, after a while, they're like, oh, crap, he's got a, he's got a paper for everything.

So I better to start telling the truth. It takes a while, but you can sort of see that that happened over a little bit of time. But I will let the public draw the conclusion of whether or not these folks are, quote, unquote, process, pharma again, not my words. I would never say those words. Those are the words Dr. Edward said. And again, I'd like to point out that here we are again. You've got basically the two worlds leading vaccinologists. That's what she just basically said in that quote.

We're the best of the best. You are taking the world's leading vaccination, and you're making them look back. Well, great. Here's an opportunity. You know what? Don't take my word for anything. I'm just a lawyer.

Your word for it. You know, why don't you see what it looks like when you have a clash between, you know, those who are considered the world's luminary and vaccinology and, and, you know, medical freedom movement or whatever, you know, informed consent, or folks, or parents who just

have questions. They have questions about the problem. What do those answers look like from the world's leading vaccinologists? And both depositions of both of them, about eight, nine hours are on our website and folks will watch. Well, we don't have all those hours, Aaron, but we do have it. Think about two minutes of your deposition of Catherine Edwards, who is upset that you made her seem like a pharma prostitute.

Well, I'll let you watch it with your own. eyes. Is that what Aaron did here? Did he do that or did the facts kind of do that? Listen to this. Isn't it true that you've also been an advisor to Pfizer? Yes, sir. I have been an advisor to Pfizer and I've been working very, very closely with Pfizer, particularly with their COVID vaccines and going over lots of reactions of that or so yes, I am working and being paid by Pfizer for my assessment of vaccine safety monitoring board for the file code vaccine that's right you meant we just said that they're one of the only five members of that data safety monitoring board over the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine

right yes sir right and that's supposed to be an independent data safety monitoring board correct it is an independent data safety monitor that's the board that all of us in America are hoping on and relying on is going to independently make sure that safety is properly assessed as the clinical trial for that Pfizer COVID-19 is going, correct? That's true. And let me tell you that we have worked very hard to go over this and very hard to do that in the E class as comprehensively as we possibly can. And since it's supposed to be independent, it's critical that the members of that

independent data safety monitor board are in fact independent of the pharmaceutical companies whose product is being evaluated correct that's correct isn't it true that directly before becoming a member of the independent data safety monitor board with the fyser and COVID-19 vaccine you were an advisor to fiser Pfizer pays me to evaluate the safety of their vaccines because I'm an expert. So I do get paid to do the work that I've been doing, that I've been doing the work conscientiously and comprehensive. My question was, before you became a member of the independent data safety monitoring work

with Pfizer-Cocan vaccine, isn't it true that you were separately before you held that independent position? You are an advisor to Pfizer. Yes, sir, but I think what you're presuming is that because I've been an advisor makes me on their door or makes me going to say what they want me to say that is not and it's never been a part of my being. I say what I believe based on my expertise. So you don't think that financial incentives can sway people's judgment at all? It does not sway my judgment, sir. Why, by having an independent Datsyp.

Modern Court, why doesn't Fathers have some of its employees on it? Because we are independent. Now, that was not just the point, that was not the deposition. That was actually the cross-examination. That's right, right, right. You know, that's just that's just one tiny conflict. That's just one. You know, in the deposition, it took, I think, I think, too, I might be missed remembering this,

but something like two hours to go through literally everything she's done for every single pharmaceutical major vaccine maker out there. Right. And this too, and this is maybe the most disturbing thing, is that most vaccines have come online in it basically in the 90s, right? That's when most of the vaccines. So they went through the Verbe Act committee, the vaccine committee at FDA. and the ACEP, the vaccine committee at the CDC,

she sat on both of those committees for, I think, about five years each maybe or something like that. And during that same decade, she also was serving and was in fact a part of the Speakers Bureau was involved with pharmaceutical companies, keeping money for them in all kinds of ways, while she was doing supposedly that, again, that independent role on FDA and CDC's advisory committee.

So the people who sat on those committees that created essentially the modern vaccine schedule, right? They're just, they were funded. If she's a model, they're hopelessly conflicted. And there was that, you know, congressional report from 2000 that found that that report, that the members of that committee were just hopelessly conflicted with pharma. And in that report, they actually brought her up and like listed like three of her conflicts. they missed about 20.

Wow. Well, Aaron, once again, you're amazing. You know, I know you got to catch a plan. I want to thank you for taking the time today to sort of just clarify what happened in this story to show really how poor the journalism continues to be at the New York Times. They have the opportunity to do good work.

You'd think they would have learned from their lesson of, you know, choosing sides all through this election, watching the legacy media just take a bit of, beating by shows like the Highwire and others. They cannot figure out why the Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogans, Del Big Trees, all of us, why everyone's watching us. Well, I just proved it. You just proved it because we actually have the receipts.

I don't know what they're thinking. We have these people on the stand under oath. The very people you're quoting as an expert, you're not asking for any evidence from there, but we are. We are. We're doing what journalists used to do. We're doing what lawyers are supposed to do. We're trying to protect the American public.

New York Times has a problem with that. And so does every other, you know, news agency that tried to jump on board with this. And hopefully, hopefully we have enough representatives right now that can clear their minds, hopefully watch this show in many of the interviews that you've done, and recognize that good science should happen no matter how scary the issue we're trying to deal with, whether it's cancer or whether, you know, it's polio or smallpox or anything. It doesn't mean you get to throw away safety science. It doesn't mean you don't have to prove efficacy.

It doesn't mean you're allowed to be funded by the same company that you're supposed to have under a view. Anyway, what are your last words, Aaron? It's been an incredible week. I'm sure you need a nap. I'm just getting started. I'll be honest with you because really, a genuine New York Times made a mistake. I mean, they have now made it okay to talk about childhood vaccines, and I intend to take that opportunity.

With that said, to, you know, to your point about you get to say these things, the Highwire get to say these things, and you list of some other what I think are called alternative media outlets. This is why they want to defund ICAN and the Highwire so badly and why they constantly doing hit pieces on anybody that tries to, you know, to try and demonetize what the incredible work that happens at ICAN, that happens at the High Wire. they are desperate to do it. You know, we talked about two of the petitions. We left out the third petition that made the news too. And I'll just say that's super brief and I'll close with that.

Because maybe it's the wrap up to this entire thing. And it shows it's emblematic of how incredible what the New York Times did was. They talked about how I was trying to revoke the licensure of 13 other vaccines or pause their distribution. Well, okay, that sounds horrible. But when you read the petition, you understand. This petition was about a peer-reviewed study that came out from the world's leading aluminum expert. And what did this peer-reviewed study? Science.

Remember, science? Right. What did it find? It found that out of 13 vaccines that were reviewed, 10 of them had far too much aluminum adjuvant, and I believe four of them had far too little aluminum adjagement, as compared to what the label approved by the FDA said it had. That's serious. That's serious.

It's neurotoxic. It's cytotoxic. It's what you inject into lab animals to cause autoimmunity. None of that is controversial what I just said. You don't want too much of it in if you're worried about safety or efficacy. And you don't want too little of it in because you're worried about efficacy or safety as well for other reasons. And so this should have been a no-brainer. I mean, if I said to you, hey, you know, Captain Crunch cereal, the label doesn't match what's in the box? You'd be like, what the heck? Oh, but hey, hey, the label of the label of, of, of a product you're injecting into babies over and over and over again, doesn't match it in the vial. Nah, let's just, let's just do a hit piece and say, I want to take away polio vaccine, which is totally untrue.

I mean, I mean, you know, this is why, by the way, I was saying, I want every person in America. I wish everybody will read these three petitions.

Yeah. I hope that everybody reads them. I think, I hope I can and high wire. I hope you guys put them prominently on the homepage, and you encourage the world, read them because when people actually read them and you think about them you will see they are completely reasonable i can't think of any parent any person that would find them unreasonable when

you actually read them yeah and when you understand what they're calling for because they're critically important and they're the issue that i can's are fighting for which is informed consent good data good safety data and transparency amazing erin thank you for all the work that you do for us to get to the bottom of that to bring these petitions to bring the lawsuits to to bring the truth, to hold these people accountable under oath, all of it, incredible, incredible work. I want to thank you. I look forward to all the work that we're going to do in the years to come. These are very exciting years now, as finally the world is waking up.

Finally, we have people going into positions of authority in our regulatory agencies that I think are willing to look at the science, that actually care about the science. And hopefully, maybe some of these newspapers and news agencies will start hiring journalists that care about science too. and certainly care about journalism and proper research. But until that happens, I know you're going to keep it square and straight and right on the nose of the truth. So thank you so much for your incredible work. I'll see you soon. Thank you.

All right. Take care. Well, what an amazing show. Every once in a while we've got to do this. I know we're going a little bit long, but frankly, when you get attacked by everyone in media, it's like having a three-year-old, you know, speak with you with condescending words like you're an idiot. It's a little difficult. What are you talking about? You have no evidence. You have no science. You don't know what you're talking about. You don't even know how to do your job. But we do our job here for the people. We do it for you. I've said it before. The high wire is not going to be the place that you come to to hear the story the very first. Although we did do pretty good during COVID, I must say. But what we take most important over timing is quality. We are so obsessed with getting it right that sometimes moments before I stepped on the stage, There's even been moments where they'll say from the booth, wait, the news just broke.

We might not have this exactly right, and we don't tell that story. I want you to be able to walk out. I want you to be able to go out with the evidence that we put in your hands and say, I stand behind this. I know that Dell and his team have done the work. We have. New York Times has never, ever been able to catch us off guard. Every article has been wrong.

We just proved they were the ones that were wrong. And the entire COVID commission just proved us right. For us to do this work, we need your donations. We need you to keep funding us because as you saw this week, everyone in mainstream wants to see us shut down. Everyone that's still holding on the government for this last few weeks is going to try and stop anything that we want to do. They will try to attach Aaron Siery and make him look like a bad guy because he happens to know Robert Kennedy Jr. And make connections that don't really matter and have nothing to do with what is actually on the table. And they'll get it wrong while doing it.

In order to do this work, we need more of your help. In order to compete with New York Times that's lying to you. And all of those agencies, every news agency got it wrong. Every one of them that we showed you before, NPR, CNN, all together, they all got it wrong. We got it right. We need to be able to stand up with the power and size and continue to grow. You make that possible. And because you do make that possible, we're giving a gift back to you with High Wire Plus.

We've got a great release tonight in this polio documentary. and want to miss it. It's all about the Highwire Plus. This is our way to give back to all of those who are donating. If you're not donating, please do. Here's what Highwire Plus is all about. Welcome to Highwire Plus, the space beyond the Highwire, where we're going to explore content made just for you. Highwire Plus is our gift to monthly donors to ICAN that will have news, entertainment, reality programming, all designed for people who care more about the truth than just another story. We're also going to be curating documentaries and films from some of our favorite filmmakers

who deliver the truth just the way that we do. Highwire Plus is your place to experience and explore truth like you've never seen it before. And look out for new content coming soon from High Wire Plus. Now, I know I've said it throughout this show, and I would like to think that when all of mainstream media attacks an organization like the High Wire like I can or our attorney Aaron Siri, that they'll go and watch when we decide to talk to the world about what we did, why we did it, and what the reality and facts are around that story. But I'm probably asking too much. I mean, given the way they report, I doubt they probably do their own investigation.

They're probably not watching right now. Right now it's probably a 22-year-old PA that just got out of college, hoping to rise to be a great journalist someday. And I want to say hi to all of you. All of you APs, we all started somewhere. But I want you to think about what you watched today. I want you to think about if who you're working for is who you aspire to be. Wouldn't you rather be like on this side of it?

Wouldn't you rather have depositions of scientists and catch them lying or admitting things that they were, you know, working for the pharmaceutical industry when they say they're right on the stand or not? Would you love to be able to back up everything you wrote and put the evidence right in the hands of the people? Wouldn't you love to not have to sue to block evidence in science? Would you love to actually not be lying about, you know, the fact that maybe, you know, this is, is the only polio vaccine that exists, only to look like idiots, to the authors of this wretched piece, this horrible and embarrassing example of journalism, Kennedy's lawyers has asked the FDA one more time to revoke approval of the polio vaccine. Christina Jewett and Cheryl Gay-Stolberg,

I know I've spoken to you on the phone before. So sad for the two of you. It's really, it's really embarrassing. I hope you will aspire to do better or quit. But for all the PAs and APs that are watching right now and thinking, that is not what you aspire to be, good journalism is really important right now. We find ourselves in wars that don't make any sense. Products that are being forced under children that don't even work. In fact, make them more likely to be infected. That's the science.

If you can't report on that, you're at the wrong organization. And if you can't see that study or can't find that study or don't know how to look up the insert of hepatitis B vaccine, then you're not a journalist. Find something else you like to do. This isn't your jam. It's not your gig. You obviously don't care. And if you keep writing off those people that are being injured by the thousands,

and if you don't see that Harvard Medical School said we're only capturing 1% of the total amount of injuries. And if you keep saying the experts say, for God's sakes, go grab $1.25 or anything you can find and buy yourself a life and a career. You're in the wrong one. I am so proud of the team that I work with here on the highwire. They have had to stand through all the insults that come upon me and Aaron and I can in the highwire by the New York Times, by media matters, being insulted for daring to say that this virus looks like it comes from a laboratory only to be proven right. I got it.

You loved on, you know, Anthony, the science, Fauci. Too bad he got it wrong. Too bad he's a liar. Too bad you couldn't ask a decent question in the most important time in science in America. Instead, you let him destroy our Constitution. And then you celebrated as they set out to censor Del Bintry, Aaron, Siri, Robert Malone, the inventor of the vaccine itself. how many scientists, how many children's lives have been ruined because of you,

because of your lack of talent or care. It's gone on too long. Luckily, you're starving to death. Luckily, your agencies are falling apart. And keep aligning yourself with the party that I left because they're a disaster too. As it turns out, it's what I've said. When you speak the truth that people know it. we won this week. You lost. Thank you for bringing attention to our very important petitions.

Thank you for bringing up the conversation of polio, which you know nothing about, so that tonight Jeffrey Jackson's show will become one of the most important documentaries in the history of the world for only $5. People will get it instead of paying you to lie to them. Thank you for pointing out who is actually doing their job. I don't care that it's negative. I've said it from the beginning. Attack all you will. We're the ones holding the truth. We'll keep holding the truth.

And we'll keep fighting for the truth. And we'll keep supporting those that fight for the truth. I don't know what it's like to be a shill. And my God, I hope I never do. Keep watching the high wire. Keep supporting the highwire. We got big things to do. I'll see you next week.