The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 409: CONFIRMATION BIAS

Episode Date: February 1, 2025

LIVE from Washington D.C., Del covers two days of the confirmation hearings of Robert Kennedy Jr. for the position of Secretary of Health and Human Services; Jefferey Jaxen joins Del in studio for analysis and reports on the influence of global banking systems on public behavior; Brownstone Institute Founder Jeffrey Tucker has been a key figure in the fight for justice and transparency in medicine and public health. This episode of The HighWire was sponsored by ICAN Legislate. Guests: Jefferey Jaxen, Jeffrey TuckerBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

This episode is brought to you by I can legislate. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you are out there in the world. It's time for a very special high wire, sponsored by I can legislate, which allows me to have a little bit more freedom to talk about what's happening here in Washington, D.C., and especially the Kennedy hearings, the HHS Secretary hearings, both the Finance Committee and today, the Health Committee, these last two days. I'm here inside of the Heritage Foundation's headquarters. I want to thank Heritage Foundation for giving us this beautiful podcasting studio.

We've been working on some workarounds trying to get their studio with our studio to all meld together, which is why we're a little bit late today. But I want to thank my team for, as always, making miracles happen. And we're here for this very special moment in time, really, moment in history. I've got Jeffrey Tucker coming up in just a little while from Brownstone Institute to talk about what he's seen in these hearings. It's going to be very exciting and interesting to get his perspective. But first, you know, lots of fireworks, a lot of interesting things happened yesterday in the Finance Committee, and this is what that looked like. I thank my colleagues and Mr. Kennedy

for being here today. Mr. Kennedy, congratulations on your nomination. Your commitment to combating chronic conditions that drive health care costs will be critical to our success. Prioritizing disease prevention will save lives, reduce costs, and build a healthier, stronger country. I'm humble to be sitting here today as President Trump's nominee, oversee the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. I want to thank President Trump for entrusting me to deliver on his promise to make America healthy again. In recent years, particularly during the COVID pandemic, there's been a lot of skepticism about our public health institutions. If confirmed, Mr. Kennedy, how will you work to regain the public's trust? Through radical transparency, the reason people don't trust the public health agencies is because

they haven't been trustworthy. The United States has worse health than any other developed nation. Yet we spend more on health care, at least double and in some cases triple as other countries. When my uncle was president, 3% of Americans were obese. Today, 74% of Americans were a piece. Today, 74% of are obese or overweight. Oh, something is poisoning the American people. That's a deliberate choice, not to study the things that are truly making us sick, that are not only contributing to chronic disease,

but to mortalities from infectious disease. And if we don't solve that problem, Senator, all of the other disputes we have about who's paying and whether it's insurance companies, whether it's providers, whether it's HMOs, HMOs, whether it's patients or families, all of those are moving deck chairs around on the Titanic. Our ship is sinking. I got a real quick question for you. Are you a conspiracy theorist?

That is a pejorative senator that's applied to me, mainly to keep me from asking difficult questions, a powerful interest. And label was applied to me because I said that the vaccines, the COVID vaccine, didn't prevent transmission, and it wouldn't prevent infection. Now everybody admits it. I was called a conspiracy theorist because I said red dye caused cancer. And now FDA has acknowledged that and banned it. The question before the Finance Committee this morning is whether Robert F. Kennedy should be trusted with the health and well-being of the American people.

The receipts show that Mr. Kennedy has embraced conspiracy theories, wax, charlatans, especially when it comes to the safe. and efficacy of vaccines. I'm also extremely concerned about your endorsement of radical fringe conspiracies that, if implemented at HHS, would put American families' lives at risks. Vaccines are one of our greatest public health triumphs. Did you say that COVID-19

was a genetically engineered bio-weapon? Do you believe, as you've said, that antidepressants caused school shootings? I said it should be studied along with other potential calls. Did you say Lyme disease is a highly likely, militarily engineered bio weapon? Your organization is making money selling a child's product to parents for $26, which casts fundamental doubt on the usefulness of vaccines. Are you supportive of these ones?

Senator, I have no power over that organization. I'm not part of it. I resign from the board. I want to know if you will commit right now that not only will you not go to work for drug companies, you won't go to work suing the drug companies and taking your rate out of that while you're a secretary and for four years after. You're asking me, Senator, you're asking me not to serve vaccine companies. No, I am not. Mike, yeah you are. That's exactly what you're doing.

If you want to move from advocacy to public responsibility, Americans are going to need to hear a clear and trustworthy recantation of what you have said on vaccinations. Are you aware of how harmful these issues could be for public health? That public health in and of itself could be affected by these kind of anti-science views. Senator, I have always been a science person, a pro-science person. I believe in evidence-based medicine and gold standard science. Here's somebody from the left, somebody I don't agree with on many issues politically, coming together with President Trump and focusing on an area of agreement,

something that the American people desperately want. What has caused autism? What is causing chronic illness? I want to say publicly, I thank you for that. I truly appreciate what you're doing here. I have found my engagements with you, both behind closed doors in my office, as well as listen to you publicly, to be very thoughtful. thoughtful and science-based.

I applaud that. I thank you for that. Mr. Kennedy, I believe for such a time as this, that you're not just one of 300 million people. I think that you are the person to lead HHS to make America healthy again. And I have no doubt that you will be confirmed, and you are going to do such a solid job for the people of this country. Should I be so privileged as to be confirmed,

we'll make sure our tax dollars support. healthy foods. We will scrutinize the chemical additives in our food supply. We will remove financial conflicts of interest from our agencies. We will create an honest, unbiased gold-standard science at HHS. We will reverse the chronic disease epidemic and put the nation back on the road to good health. Thank you. This hearing will be adjourned and Mr. Kennedy, I look forward to working with you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We're adjourned. Robert Kennedy Jr. has been through two grueling days of hearings. Today, even, which we didn't have time to cut, just happened, just finished up just over an hour ago. The Health Committee, which is the Health Committee, some of them, very grilling, difficult questions. I think most of us watching feel like Robert Kennedy Jr. held in very well. But obviously, there's a vote ahead. There's a lot of tension around this. This is probably one of the most anticipated cabinet votes. Maybe in the history of this country, certainly, certainly in the history of the health department.

I don't think we have ever seen anything as contentious, as dynamic, as talked about. As I've said many times to reporters throughout this week, as I've been in Washington, D.C., if I stopped someone on the street that was walking right here in Washington, D.C., but especially anywhere else in the country, let's say I stopped 1,000 people and said, who is the current HHS secretary? how many people would be able to answer that question? And the answer by almost every reporter is maybe in D.C., one or two, everyone else, everywhere else, zero. And then I said, now imagine I ask the question, as I stop people in the street,

who is going to be the next or is, you know, looking to be confirmed to be the next HHS Secretary of the United States of America, how many people would say Robert Kennedy Jr.? He's in the headlines of every newspaper across the country. and I think that that shows that America is now engaged in something that they have never thought about before. They're getting sicker and sicker and sicker. They're buying more and more drugs. Their kids are going on more and more drugs. We're getting fatter.

We have obesity issues. We have diabetes issues. Chronic illness is now hitting 60%. Every teacher talks about seeing the schools. No one's ever paid attention to HHS or CDC or FDA or NIH and ask themselves, wait a minute, what are you guys doing in there? Well, now they are. Call them the Maha Moms or the people, but this moment, the Make America Healthy Again moment

that happened between Robert Kennedy Jr. and President Donald Trump, this photo will go down in history as the moment that they came together. That morning before that photo, Robert Kennedy Jr., of course, stepped down in his independent run for President of the United States and said, I'm going to assist President Trump that's asked me to work with him to make America healthy again. And I think one of the most profound lines ever stated, we've got to love our children more than we hate each other. We have to find a way to do that. We're going to be talking all about that. Some excerpts from the hearings, both yesterday and today, and get into those details. But first, it's time for the Jackson Report.

All right, Jeffrey, here we are podcast styles. Kind of interesting having the microphone here, a little bit different, doing this in the podcast form. But, you've been watching these hearings too. We were both inside the hearing yesterday. What were your thoughts? I think Robert Kennedy Jr. showed eloquence, poise, given the situation he was in. And I think he, like he ran on his ticket for president, he took opportunities for low-level conversations and tried to up-level them for the betterment of really the American people.

So I thought that was really great. And the other thing I saw was the mudslingers. We all knew what we were talking about. We saw them in the clip there. The people that were basically trying to make a point using appeals to fear, appeals to authority. They were doing this with basically to get sound bites, but they had little substance behind their talking points. I talked to parents who were there. I talked to parents who were also not there watching it on TV.

And they also have the same thing. They're sick of it. And it seems like a spell has been broken. It seems like that paradigm, that old paradigm of these attacking talking points with little substance. People want depth. people want change. And it was really something because not one person said, you know what, that Elizabeth Warren, that Bernie Sanders has a really great point there. I didn't hear anything. I heard people actually wanting to turn off the TV or walk out of the hearing because they didn't want to see it.

But I thought it was interesting because you heard some of the senators, you need to recant. You know, a lot of people say the vaccine safety space when it comes to the mainstream established medical community is almost like a religion. And they were, it sounded like the crusades. You need to recant from what you said before. Before you enter our order, you need to, you need to bow down on the knee and recant and say, you were sorry for what you said against our religious pact. Yes, wild. Yeah.

Yeah. Really? Yeah. Yeah. I'm holding the evidence right here and tell me, this evidence is, I mean, it was like, I'd like to see it. I'm not sure what you're referencing. Right. It was really outside of reason. There's no way to sort of, we are in one space.

And many of them saying, I'm with you on food. I'm with you on chemicals. I'm with you on this. But when it comes to vaccines, well, why? Right. Right. Why would that be any different? Yeah.

Why would that be any different? If they've lied to the same companies are poisoning our food, poisoning our food, poisoning and all that, you know, all of these things, even, you know, too many drugs. And yes, the system's broken, but when it comes to this one issue, I need you to take back everything you've ever said. You're right about the rest of it. And we're finally admitting that. Like we didn't admit it for the last 20 years.

We fought you on that, too. But we'll give you all of that ground except on this one issue. you take it back. And retrospective and prospective. So take it back. And when you go in there, promise you won't ever say any bad things against it. And you'll never ask to do testing any more than we already are. And you're just like, wow, this is. It was a really big window into that mindset. But I think one of the final things, I know you're going to talk to Jeffrey Tucker, brilliant mind on this and go through some of the clips. What I thought was interesting was, we have Senator Elizabeth Warren. And she questioned him about his work as an activist lawyer.

Clearly before he was working with the environment, then he worked to get justice and compensation for vaccine injured children and adult. And Elizabeth Warren is saying, you promise me you won't do this anymore. She's sitting from a privileged position where the government she represents has been sitting on a broken system. They refuse to correct. He's one activist lawyer from the outside trying to work to get justice for these people. And she's saying, don't you do that, basically saying this system is fine the way it is, if you read between the lines. And I think the countermeasures injury compensation program, the CICP, these things. need to be looked at. They're broken people that have not had compensation, and this is an American

tragedy, and Warren seems to have forgotten about that. Yeah, it's really amazing. And you think about all the work that she's done going after credit card injuries, she's banking, all of whom have lobbies that are, you know, buying the politicians around her. She recognizes how hard it is to get real honest, you know, discussions around the issues she cares about. I'm sure she would argue that anyway, but one that you think you understand. I mean, it's just, and you're right. Like, you know, as he said, you're asking me to stop suing drug companies. Why? Right. You know, and so that's super, super interesting.

And, you know, we're days away from finding out with it. There are our own opinions. I'm going to share some today, but they're just our opinions. In the end, there's going to be a vote that's going to decide whether or not, you know, Robert Kennedy Jr. actually, you know, did deliver what was necessary to achieve this position. Yeah, you know, and money is a big thing. HHS is going to have a budget of larger than a lot of countries. And so you're talking a lot of power there.

And the medical system also wields power. He says something brilliant, which is an echo through time really, when he says someone that is healthy, has a thousand dreams, someone that is sick, has only one, obviously to get better. And so when people are sick, they're into this now sick care system, this broken system that everyone's talking about with chronic health leading the way. And we have really no way to get out of that if someone gets in there. They're controlled by a system that they never really wanted to be in in the first place

that is not essentially helping. And so I want to go to that, take that idea and moving to the banking system, because we have the medical system and you have the banking system. They control the currency. This is the current and it's controlled by these banks on each side, really. And it moves this energy that helps us, you know, it's really, whether we live or die in this world, that they can control that. And I want to go to Davos. Something else happened in Davos. This is the World Economic Forum.

They had their yearly meeting there. It kind of went under the radar because of Trump's inauguration on Hathke Jr. But we have Bill Winters. He's the CEO of Standard Charter Bank. And listen to what he had to say with that idea in mind. Okay. It feels as though the mood music has changed. Many of the U.S. peers have pulled out of the Climate Alliance.

Even Trump yesterday, President Trump has plans to pull out of the Paris framework. Big setback to the Green Agenda. how is this going to impact the bank's role in promoting this sustainable economy? Importantly, I think while there's been a clear shift in narrative in particular in the U.S., also some other places, as far as I know, no banks have withdrawn their commitments to supporting a transition to a net zero economy. Because in the long run, it's pretty clear that we need to disgorge ourselves from the reliance on fossil fuels. But when we set this up at Senator Trudder in the beginning, it was two prongs. One of us, we've got to do our bit to do the right thing vis-a-vis our clients because they want to transition to a net zero environment.

But it requires massive investment. That's what we do. We come up with those dollars. But two is we make money. It's a big business for us. And we gave the guidance externally a couple of years ago that we'd make a billion dollars of income by 2026. We'll be pretty close to that in 2025. It's just a big business.

and it's a profitable business. So I don't want to sound too mercantilist about it, but we do the right thing and we get paid for it. It's kind of win-win-win. I don't want to sound like a money-grubbing banker, but we make a lot of money on this green agenda, and I don't want to see it go away. And he's saying,

I don't really care what leaders do. Leaders in the countries who are elected by the people, we're making big business here. We're making money. So this is the game, baby, behind this. And so what's interesting is that's the message they're getting. The banks are making money, but the message we're getting as the people is,

You need to shut down your family farm in the UK in the Netherlands. You need to turn that over because of all the nitrogen. You're going against the net zero agenda here. Right. And by the way, we're about to give a giant loan to some solar farms, and all the loggers are going to come and cut down all of your trees and do whatever to your land and then put in solar farms. And you see the investment, right?

Yeah. If the green deal is all about, we have to go new, throw out everything that's old, start brand-new ramp-up companies. It's loans, loans, loans, loans. money, you know, investments. Of course, it's huge for banks. Every time you outlaw all of the existing technology and say, everyone has to go to the new thing. Everyone needs an electric car. You know, new car loans, the people building the cars. I mean, the whole thing. Of course, it's a cash cow for all of the elitists and the rich. Yeah. And I mean, I don't know if he was supposed to say that

out loud, but he did. Yeah. It's really interesting that's on tape. And so it's interesting because he says, you know, banks, all the banks get behind our agenda. But what happens if you are I, I, or the public doesn't want to get behind that agenda because of our conscious, our free will, our informed consent. We get treated a little different. So remember in Canada, the truckers there during the pandemic, they could not change the border from the U.S. to Canada without getting that COVID vaccine. And they said, we're done with this. We're going to protest. The banks didn't say, hey, that sounds great.

They said, we're going to take your money away with the help of the government. And they bank them. Here's some of the headlines. Just in case anybody doesn't remember this dark time, Ottawa blacklisted 201 companies, sympathetic to the freedom convoy. Another one, banks have been on freezing accounts linked to the trucker protest. That's not just an isolated incident. This is banks can debank people, and this is behavior control.

If anything they don't like about you, whether you don't want to take this medical device, medical experimental shot at the time, or anything. In fact, even your political ideology, here's Trump at that same meeting in Davos. And listen to what we had to say to the Bank of America head. We're actually doing a reduction for business and small businesses where you're going to bring it down to 15%, which is really something. And by the way, speaking of you, and you've done a fantastic job, but I hope you start opening your bank to conservatives because many conservatives complain that the banks are not allowing them to do business within the bank. And that included a place called Bank of America. They don't take conservative business. and I don't know if the regulators mandated that because of Biden or what,

but you and Jamie and everybody, I hope you're going to open your banks to conservatives because what you're doing is wrong. Mr. President, I'll say that your friend Gianni said hello, told me to tell you hello, and we look forward to sponsoring the World Cup when it comes both this summer for the club and next year, so thank you for getting that for the United States.

Talk about a diversion. Okay. Can we talk about soccer? Yeah. And more on soccer. I'll share beer with you at the World Cup. We'll talk about that later. Not here. Right. But, you know, that used to be, hey, it's a conspiracy theory. No one's getting deep banks,

especially if you're conservative. We love everybody. But in 2021, we saw these headlines starting. Calls for Bank of America boycott grow after data given to FBI. So what they were doing was giving this data, the customer data. And this isn't just a headline from some article. This is actually a report in 2024, the House. published a report. A new report exposes massive government surveillance of Americans

financial data. And it says in this report, federal law enforcement, including the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and the FBI facilitated multiple back-channel discussions with financial institutions to gather Americans private financial information. They go on and say these discussions involve

some of the largest financial institutions in the United States, such as Barclays, U.S. Bank, Charles Schwab, H.S.BC, Bank of America, and PayPal, and many others. The surveillance extended beyond criminal suspicion, likely encompassing millions of Americans with conservative viewpoints or Second Amendment interests. And this has brought about 15 AGs, have put Bank of America on notice for debanking conservatives.

And what did Bank of America do after Trump made that statement at Davos? They took to X, the popular social media platform, and tried to really just level with the people. And they posted this on their account. They said, we welcome conservatives, they say. We would never close accounts for political reasons and don't have a political litmus test. Well, a couple of people had something to say about that instantly, which is the beauty of social media. People can go right back as big business. So we have Eric Prince.

He was a former Navy SEAL, and he says this. He says, this is a complete lie. This just gives the idea how far this goes. You debanked me, my children, stepchildren, and hell. You even debanked my wife and her new husband because their account received child support payments from me. fix yourself and clear out your illegal discriminatory banking practices goes on then we have former bright bart reporter jennifer lawrence she says well she says a couple swear words there but i'll pick it up here she says you took my bank account away as well as my mother's my husband's account in 2021 for political reasons and placed us on a pep list i have evidence to prove it stf you and shove your corporate board you know where boycott blank of american finally these are just three you can you can go all day with these constitutional law professor very respectful He said, so why Pratel Bank of America? Did you cancel my and my wife's accounts after I have been a customer for nearly 40 years? And why did you refuse to tell me why? Here's the cancellation letter. So these practices clearly were out of control. I mean, we're talking like Stasi Germany style level debanking at this point. Wow. Yeah, amazing. Amazing. And that is the beauty of social media and why it was so scary when you had Biden. administration and then ultimately Kamala Harris promising to end you know end free speech on you know

we got to stop the misinformation so if the government's owned by the banks the governments owned by the pharmaceutical industry we would not be allowed to post things like that and this is you know why I think we're in a really huge transitional moment while we're watching these hearings and things taking place right and when we go pull out even further from the umbrella of control with banking we have the central bank digital currencies we talked about before and this sends everything it's not just one bank, a couple million customers because the FBI wants the data. This is everyone's data all the time every day, every night, through the central authority. And you can be turned off with a flip of a switch. In this, President Trump has signed an executive order to end the United States work on the central bank digital currency. We can see this here. And it's titled, Strengthen American Leadership, Trump banned CBDC Task Force. But he also goes into cryptocurrency. So you can read that here, this executive order. He's looking to create a big 20, stockpile. There's a lot of conversation on that. But I want to go into and just very quickly for people that maybe you're brand new, the CBDC is a central bank digital currency.

A lot of the concerns around that is now the money is basically being tracked by the government. There's even thoughts that they could, you know, in a way like tattoo your money with what it can be allocated towards. If they decide to go carving credits, you could find suddenly you cannot buy a stake at the restaurant. Some alarm comes up, you know, going through, you've already had three stakes. think that you're causing global warming. I mean, that's just one of the examples. Or you try to give your money to a nonprofit like ours. That is suing the government in the United States, which is something we've been very effective

at. All of a sudden, your money's not allowed to do that. The currency's already got it written in there in the sort of digital code that you don't see things your money is allowed to do. It doesn't matter that you made it anymore. Now they're controlling what you can do with it. Very, very scary future. I mean, basically it's like going to prison.

We're in prison now. Right. And if you add that to artificial intelligence, I mean, the sky's the limit. It becomes automated without anybody to ever look at to say, I need help or I'm going to sue you. You're not suing anybody. It's just in the ether at that point. And so this is why it's extremely important for a paradigm change. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. really represents that in the medical community because things are moving extremely fast at every single level.

And I want to just run through some of these levels that we're talking about of rapid change. Now, the Department of Justice has just put forth accusations against Walgreens. What do Walgreens do? Well, you know, you and I have been reporting on an opioid crisis. Opioids are flooding the streets. Doctors are writing prescriptions. And the pharmacists have the opportunity to not let these out on the streets. Not Walgreens.

This is what it says. DOJ sues Walgreens alleges it filed millions of illegal prescriptions. It says the suit announced on January 17th alleges the pharmacy chain violated the controlled Substances Act by knowingly filling prescriptions without a legitimate medical purpose and also violated the False Claims Act by seeking reimbursement from federal health care programs for these prescriptions. So on the front end, they were giving away like candy on the back end. They were charging the government. So they were double dipping here at no legitimate reason for these. I remember during the COVID response that people were trying to get Ivermectin for a legitimate

reason. Right. Same pharmacist stolen out these opioids are saying you can't have this. doctor's note from real doctors saying ivermectin hydroxychloroquine, budacinide, whatever it was, I'm sorry we can't fill that prescription here. If you're a drug addict with no doctor's note, we'll give you oxycontr right now if you want it. You want that? Well, no, I actually am trying to get over COVID. Right. You know what I mean?

Like it's insane. And why did they do that? Because of the regulatory agencies. You see here, I took these screenshots from the time. The CDC 2021, do not prescribe ivermectin, it says, to treat COVID-19. The FDA, same time period. why you should not use ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19. The regulatory agencies were really holding that up.

But now let's move into the artificial. By the way, just to repeat, the FDA finally said when being sued, we never told you ivermectin didn't work. Right. So, I mean, they're not standing by it. When they're in a courtroom, they've totally recanted that they were that forceful in their rebuke of ivermectin. So, and why?

I mean, why change your, if you believed in it, where was the science? You don't have science to bring in the courtroom? But that's another story. Exactly. Yeah, there it is. You are not a horse. You're not a caliscerous. You all stop it.

This is what the FDA, they brought it to court and said, what do you mean you weren't, you know, stopping the use of ivermectin? This is what you were doing right there. So, I mean, it's, yeah. And this is why, back to Elizabeth Warren, people from the outside, people that are trying to sue these regulatory agencies because government's not doing what they're supposed to do. This is why that's so important.

So when Elizabeth Warren grandstands about Kennedy or anybody else trying to force change, this is actually a positive thing. until it can happen from within the inside. Yeah. So the FDA is, the FDA and also legislators are moving to create laws. I'm going to talk about artificial intelligence because this thing's moving very fast in the medical system. Yeah. So we obviously have doctor shortages for several reasons.

We have a paradigm where doctors can't even practice the way they want to practice. The doctor-patient relationship has a lot of issues with the government getting between that. That may all change because check this out. New law would allow AI, artificial. intelligence to replace your doctor and prescribe drugs. This is what we're looking at right now, and it should be terrifying to everybody, but it goes a little further. The FDA, not just a law now, the FDA is proposing a framework to advance what they call

the credibility of AI models used for drug and biological product submissions, and you look into that, and they do talk about safety testing. So not only do we have this current paradigm of safety testing that brought us a lot of big question marks around vaccine safety, but now these same people are going to load the system with all the known data and tell us, we just push a button and it's safe for you. Go ahead and take it. You know, I'm not, I'm not so sure. I'm so terrified of this. First of all, I've been saying recently as I look at AI is about to change health as we know it. I think, you know, as they make, as the FDA, they're obviously pushing the direction to get around HIPAA or whatever issues

they're dealing with with having an AI tell you what to do or prescribe drugs. But let's be honest, doctors are going to be laid off at massive numbers. I think there'll be one of the biggest industries that will collapse under the pressure of AI first. And I believe doctors have done this to themselves. They've really just reduced themselves to drug pushers, or at least their education system has. They don't really diagnose anything anymore. I mean, what they say is, or they go, sounds like you have blah blah, and there's a drug for it. Got a drug for you. If all you're doing is giving drugs and all you're doing is basically playing Dr. Google, you're not really listening to patient 15 minutes, want to drug 15 minutes.

Oh, you can't sit still in school? Here's some ADD, ADHD medication. Oh, you're feeling a little depressed, blah, blah, blah, you know, depressed. Here is, you know, an SSRI. This is all doctors become, I'm sure AI is capable of doing that. I mean, if it's literally just going to say, what did pharmacists say we're supposed to give you, AI can do that very easily. So I think doctors have made themselves irrelevant.

And AI is about to take advantage of that. And so it does get scary when AR starts doing, you know, study. but then I asked myself, I mean, if there's real human beings in those studies, maybe they'll actually analyze the data instead of burying it. I mean, are you going to get the AI? I said, sorry, no, no, bury that, bury that. Forget that death just to happen. Don't let them say, will AI lie for you? I mean, that's another question I keep asking myself with all of this.

Right. And how accurate is it right now? Well, we have a couple questions on that. I want to go to this next headline. Eating disorders, eating disorder helpline takes down its chat bot after it promotes, well, disordered eating. So we might, you know, we put that on a bigger level of. of safety of medication. We've got some question marks here.

But now I want to go into really, we're going to keep pulling back here. We're going to go kind of interesting with these studies. So we're talking about artificial intelligence. Also in that conversation, floating around is also nanotechnology, implanted nanotechnology in the bodies. And in 2021, we had a study that came out. And it was really kind of a new study, a novel study. And a lot of the control of animals, that's always been kind of a pie in the sky dream,

is we can control a biological system with computers. And here's the headline, or the study title, non-contact, long-range magnetic stimulation of mechanosensitive ion channels and freely moving animals. Well, that's pretty crazy, but that was built upon. Freely moving animals can be basically moved around if you find a way to move their ion channels.

If you find a way to stimulate their brain, we can control these animals. Well, that was a theory, but now this new study, in vivo magnetogenetics. Now, in vivo, that is in the animal. Magnetogenetics is a new term for a lot of people for cell type-specific targeting. So that's right down to the cellular level and modulation of brain circuits.

That's a fancy way. And I'm going to translate that to saying this. This is a headline says it pretty simply. Scientists use nanoparticles to remote control brains of mice. That's what they're doing. Finally, a title that makes some sense. Yeah. All this scientific jargons, tell me what they're doing.

So let's go into this stuff. because this is a world's first. And these are scientists out of Korea scientists at the Institute for Basic Science. It's actually called that. In South Korea have developed a new way to control the minds of mice by manipulating nanoparticle activated switches inside their brains with an external magnetic field. They say in the experiments, the researchers activated inhibitory neurons within specific areas of the brain to increase appetite and feeding behaviors by 100%.

By exciting these neurons, the team could conversely reduce the food, the mice ate, by 50%. And it finally says they also use the system to selectively activate receptors responsible for maternal behaviors in the brains of female mice that hadn't reproduced. In a third experiment, the researchers managed to activate brain regions responsible for boosting friendly behaviors, encouraging mice to get along with other mice in a small chamber. They had never met before. So these are intimate things these mice are doing that can be controlled by basically dead space for anybody looking. it's magic. And I mean, this is what we're moving into. So when we talk about the past failures of medicine, the future of medicine looks pretty crazy. We want someone at the helm that can really feel this with a little bit of human consciousness because are we really going to live

on a planet that looks like this at some point? If people are not regulating this, we're going to have, I mean, satellites surrounding our planets doing what to us on the ground. We don't know. these are questions. This is our future. And these are big questions we have to have open conversations about because this technology is rapidly racing to infiltrate every part of our existence, including our bodies. Amazing. Jeffrey, great reporting. Of course, all of these things, questions that we should be asking, we should be allowed to ask, which is the heart of really what was happening in these hearings today. Are there certain questions you are just never going to be allowed to ask? I think that that's what was on trial over these last two days. I'm going to be bringing. and Jeffrey Tucker in just a minute, but I want to thank you for being here. Thank you. I'm helping with all these amazing investigations. We continue to do.

It's an amazing time. The conversations are happening. We are, you know, we've got the attention of the world right now, so very exciting. Yeah, thank you. I just want to say, for those of you, they're watching right now, we never really talk about I can legislate. That's a legislative body that does the work that we do. When we want to write legislation or work on things like that, Aaron Siri, we bring his team in. A lot of times just to assist people that are out there to do that work.

This show today, because we're talking about politics and getting into an actual live hearing, there is some question of whether or not that sits inside the C3, the nonprofit. We're trying to, you know, we don't want to break any rules. So we're going to fund this show today, just this one with the C-4. So if you want to donate and make this show possible, literally today, go to www. We.I.I.conlegislate.org and donate today. That will be an anonymous donation, but with a C4, it is not tax deductible like our usual Ican Decide.org. Donations, that's sort of how this whole game works. There is the QR code. If you want to look at it, you can put in any amount you want. We really wanted to do this. I knew I would be here. It's so important. So much of the work

that we've done leads to this moment right here, right now that's happening in Washington, D.C. conversations we have wanted to have from day one. So many legislators, so many doctors have never wanted to sit across from Robert Kennedy Jr. and have a debate. Won't sit across from me. This has just been this, you know, bottled up and hidden discussion. Well, the people are demanding this discussion now because that works. So while we're in Washington, D.C., we didn't want to not do a show. So here we are. I can legislate sponsoring our first version of that legislation, high wire show. Jeffrey Tucker so many times some of the most probably the most used slide I have is Brownstone Institute.

They've been doing great research. He's been doing incredible research as entire career as a journalist and a writer writing some of the most important articles, certainly through COVID. I think many of you were introduced to him. But if you do not know who Jeffrey Tucker is or unaware of the Brownstone Institute, take a look at this. Join me now. Jeffrey Tucker. Let's talk now to Jeffrey Tucker. who's president of the think tank, the Brownstone Institute.

Jeffrey Tucker, such a pleasure to have you. It's been a very dark time from the lockdowns, through the shot mandates, the destruction of small business, the brutalization of the children with the mask mandates and the school closures. It was a very strange, you know, sort of scientific experiment that's been conducted on almost the whole of humanity.

They treated us like lab rats. We were our job. From the middle of March onward was to behave as just parts in a machine, like part of a computer model. So we're left now with this tremendous carnage. I had, for a very long time, been convinced that we were living in an age of endless and infinite progress in peace. Instead, we are living in times of growing barbarism. When you shut down an entire economy, that's usually a bad idea. And it's not usually associated with being more prosperous than you've ever been.

The price increases we've experienced over the last two years, we're stuck with. And not only are we stuck with the existing price levels, but it's getting worse right now. Jeffrey, I want to ask you, will cryptocurrency outlive the Federal Reserve? We've got better money now than the Fed is producing, and I think we need to recognize that reality. It is a reality. Nothing's going to change that. The effects of the lockdowns with the supply chain breakages, and the chip shortages and the inflation that we're facing, the debt crisis, this is going to affect everybody.

I think one of the most important voices in journalism, one that I look up to and we use materials from all the time has been so accurate and brilliant and honest, something that is almost not existing now in journalism. It's my honor and pleasure to be joined right now by Jeffrey Tucker. It was a pleasure. Yeah, thanks for coming in. I just want to show the slide I used this. The most on our show all the time is this one, a closer look at the COVID mortality rate.

Of course, you published the work of, yeah. So here it was the age breakdown of the problems with the vaccine. And this, I think, says it all. Age 60, 69, this is for the COVID vaccine, of course, or for COVID, I mean, fatality rate was 0.501%. It goes down extremely from there. I mean, you get into 0.129%. 50, but I always say below 19, this number right here. 0.003 percent. And a lot of the conversations with Robert Kennedy Jr., when they're like, why did you try to

stop the EUA? He says for six-year-olds, it was for six-year-olds. I did not think that this vaccine date had never tests on six-year-olds, and we knew the death rate is essentially zero. So just to start the conversation there, I mean, why do you do this work-wise? has been important. Now, this chart that you've just presented here is still a shock to people. People do not understand. It's five years now in. We knew this five years ago.

We had a clear indication of the case fatality rate, the infection fatality rate, more or less, the fatality rate of COVID from February 2020. So this is one of the great lies that, oh, we didn't know. We had to do crazy things because we didn't know what we were dealing with. We did know what we were dealing with. Pretty early on. Really early on, we didn't in January. But by late February, we certainly did.

And certainly by the time the vaccine came around. Oh, certainly. You know, you had to say, look, there is clearly above 65, and especially if he had comorbidities, maybe that makes sense. But for these children, as Robert Kennedy Jr. said, I think today in the hearing, there was no death of a healthy child from COVID. No, no. And the fact that he would say that, and that would shock people, is by itself a scandal.

But there are so many things that are still unknown to the public and still lots of things unknown to me. Why did we engage in this wild upheaval? The churches were closed. The schools were closed. We destroyed the businesses. We had weird agencies we didn't even know existed like Sisa was in charge suddenly of dividing the workers between essential and unessential. We didn't know that we could be classified that way as Americans. We didn't know.

You know, there's a funny... Just short of calling some of them useless eaters, right? You're a useless eater, you know, hop into this train car here. It's this strangest thing. It's like crazy people just took over the world. And we'd like to know why. And I think what we saw on the hearings today reflected the reality that we have not yet had a serious national reckoning with what's happened to us over the last five years.

We're still very traumatized by this experience. This is the backdrop that was not really acknowledged in the hearings. Yeah. The vast numbers of Americans are very confused about what happened to our country. Why did we throw away 500 years of rights and liberties and expectations? Yeah. Why did the Bill of Rights just suddenly vanish for us overnight? You know, why did we engage in this strange ritualistic hiding from an infectious disease for so long

and then have the antidote presented to us, universalized even for the people who are not vulnerable to any kind of medically significant effects from infection. Why do we conflate cases and exposure? Right. Why do we do all this stuff? And then distribute a product that was, at best, wildly exaggerated in its effectiveness.

And everything was put into this. This will cure you. This will fix us. This will get us out of the pandemic. We get one shot, two shots, three shots, five, so on it went. And then after a while, it became obvious to people that this was not just, it wasn't helping. It wasn't fixing the problem. It was actually creating a lot of damage.

So the credibility, think about it, you know that. But everything, the credibility of the whole what we call the establishment was resting on the workability of these injections. Yes. The media, big tech, public health. government, everything, academia, you know, everything you think of as the commanding heights of society. The credibility of all those things rested on the workability of this one innovative, untested product.

Decenters were shouted down. They were canceled. They were fired. Our communities were shattered. Businesses destroyed. I mean, even before the vaccine arrived. No. I mean, when you saw, like, people, like, out there, Fauci, all of them.

celebrating a vaccine that was just barely getting into phase three trial coming out of state. We love what we're seeing. I'm like, why is a regulatory agency have pom-poms out excited about a product that they're promising is going on the market before it's even gotten through its phase three, you know,

efficacy trial, safety trial, like what are we talking about? What are we talking about? And then the incantation that we all had to say that it was safe and effective. Right. So I was mentioned to you I was mentioned to earlier. earlier at some point, and by the way, I got into this whole thing because I was so outraged

by the lockdowns. Yeah. I had been writing about pandemic planning since 2005. Okay, I was going to ask you when you got into the... Well, I got into it with the initial George W. Bush scheme about how to deal with the bird flu. He gave a press conference in 2005, and he said, don't worry, we're going to shut your businesses, your schools, we're going to close everything. The government's going to deliver your groceries.

You just hide and everything's going to be fine. And I remember watching that press conference. It was an alternative CDC plan that they passed and thinking, this guy is out of his mind. Where did this crazy theory come from? And I began to write about it. I said, if they ever attempt anything like this, the government will never be the same, will never be the same. You will destroy society and you will destroy science. And I wrote that article in 2005.

Well, I had to wait 15 years for it to become a reality. But when I saw it all unfold, I thought, the crazy people have taken over. Yeah. And so I wrote my first article in January 27th, 2020. I said, do you know, I'm not saying they're going to do this, but people should know that there are some crazy people who believe that it's possible to shut down the whole social functioning to protect you from a respiratory virus. Just letting you know.

And I remember getting calls from people that had me on radio shows at the time because this sounds like an alarmist prediction, you know. But why would you say somebody like that? And I had to assure people they were saying, are you saying that they're going to throw away the bill of rights and throw us all in our homes and lock us in our homes and quarantine the whole property? I said, look, I'm not saying they're going to do that. I'm just saying that there are some crazy people who think that you can solve an infectious disease problem this way. Right. And I said, I'm not, look, I'm just saying we need to address the problem that some people believe this is possible.

Not predicting that, but just like it's weird. Yeah. Well, sure enough, that's exactly what happened. And it was about two weeks into the lockdowns that my phone, and I was screaming about this, you know, from March 8th when they shut down South by Southwest. And then from March 12th, when the travel restrictions came in, March 13th is when the National Emergency was declared. In March 16th, that's when they ordered all the bars and restaurants and public spaces closed from the CDC and a tiny footnote on a PDF. I have to say, I haven't really, like, walk through this, that much detail. It's so bad.

And just like, oh, I can't. I mean, it was so crazy at dark times. And I didn't know what was happening to the world. March 16th was that press conference where Trump got up and said. He seemed to be a little ambiguous with the law. And he wasn't sure. He doesn't look, we're all going to unite as a nation to defeat coronavirus. Yeah.

And then Berks gets up in the end. A reporter asks, are you, are you saying that all bars and restaurants, to close. And she kind of didn't really answer the question. Fouchy shoved her off stage and then reads her the footnote and tiny print on page two of the PDF that says all best bars and restaurants and all places where people gather, meaning weddings and funerals and everything else. Church services need to close. Okay. Then he sits down and eyes her, she winks at him. They smile together like their co-conspirators. Trump. Meanwhile, somebody had distracted him in the audience. He was waving at them.

and almost like he didn't hear what Fouchy's head. Yeah. So it was a weird time, and about two weeks later, I get this phone call, and I was screaming about it. I'm sure you were, too. We all were, but we didn't know each other back in those days. And so my phone rings. And the guy in the other end of the phone was introduced himself as Raji Vankaya.

Now, I knew Raji Vankaya because he was the bioweapons defense guy working at the White House under George Doby Bush, who originally came up with the idea of lockdowns. And who was now working for a vaccine company. I should have put two and two together, Dale. I didn't. And he's on the phone. He says, you know, Jeffrey, your articles,

you really need to stop writing this stuff. Wow. You really need to shut up about the lockdowns. I said, but weird things are happening. I mean, the hometowns are being destroyed. The business has been closed. people walking around like the dress like medieval flagellants. This is insane.

You're destroying everything. Why would you do this? And he said, look, you just need to have to, you just need to trust us. We know what we're doing. And I said, well, look, I have one question for you. Just one question. Just answer my question. First of all, I'm not going to shut up.

It is free country. I have free speech and so on. At least I thought it was. Yeah. Yeah. I didn't realize how effective. Well, you were using it while it lasted. Yeah.

And so I said, look, I just have one question for you. And it's a simple question. where does the virus go? We all hide from it. Yeah. We give our press conferences. The media is against it. Fauci goes back to the planet it came from.

Hops on a spaceship. It jumps into a big hole in the ground and hides. Oh, I didn't know they were going to do that. I realized the CDC was coming after me. I better get out of here. It gets on a spaceship or something. And he said, but listen, that's a smart question. Smart question.

He said, but here's what we're going to do. We're going to drive the R-Not down below. below one and that will eventually make it fell to zero. And so, Reggie, you have confused, you're not a stupid man. You've confused cause and effect. That's like saying, I'm going to stop the rain by taking there on my umbrella.

That is a dumb thing you just said. Yeah. That's a measure of reality. It's not a causal agent causing reality to conform. That's crazy. He goes, okay, well, good point, good point. But actually, if the truth be told, just between you and me, we're going to have a vaccine.

this was two weeks into lockdowns. So I said, I laughed. I said, you're not going to have a vaccine. First of all, there's never been a vaccine. First of all, we don't need one. For the respiratory, you can mutate too quick. This is not a virus against which you can vaccinate. And if you somehow magically have some wonderful technology,

it'd do so, but take 10, 15 years to test and make sure safe and effective. And are you telling me we're going to stay locked down for 10, 15 years? Oh, my God. And he said, he said, you know, it's not going to take that long. Yeah. And I said, and there's this long pause. And I said, oh, well, thanks, thanks very much, Reggie.

And you know, Dale, here's what I thought, because I'm naive. I thought he was a crazy person. I thought he was a has-been, some pundit, you know, hanging out of some vaccine company. He had no idea what he was talking about. He was just saying crazy things and nothing better to do a Wednesday afternoon than call me. Hung the phone and dismissed it. Wow. And it took me two years to realize he told me the whole scheme.

Right there on the phone, the inventor of pandemic planning who had been hanging around these ruling class circles for the previous 15 years had just told me the whole plan. And I just dismissed it because I didn't make the connection. I didn't realize what they were doing was locking down until they could. distribute this product. I didn't know that's, I didn't know that was the scheme. And it took me a long time to figure it out. Well, once it kicked in, you did amazing work. Of course, the Great Barrington Declaration is something, what was your participation like? Because it was so important. Yeah. I was celebrating it almost every week in the show because these were the best scientists in the world. The top ones, Martin Koldorf, Sinatra, Gupta, J. Badacharya.

Yeah. How'd that come about? Well, this, you know, this came out quite late, you know, Because we locked down in March, and a lot of us at the time thought, but surely these lockdowns are going to end in a week. And then they got extended, you know, over a month. And then we had the summer of, I don't know what, where we didn't have to lock down anymore, provided we were out for the right reasons. And so the world was just getting crazy.

Yeah. And I had kind of lost my normal network of friends, because in those days, and you've probably been there, but I was part of a community of thinkers, intellectuals, And they had all gone silent. So I didn't really know anybody who was making sense in those days. And I noticed this one Harvard professor named Martin Kulorf, who had been writing on LinkedIn some good things.

And I just happened to send him a text. I said, it must be a lonely life for you. Yeah. And he said, you know, it is kind of lonely. And I said, well, why don't we hang out? So we got together. And, of course, we just talked about nothing, but. The insanity.

the insanity. And then he called me up a week later. He said, you know, I think we should have. Oh, I'm glad you're asking this question because I've always wanted to tell a story I don't think ever have. He said, do you know what the real problem here is? The media has these reporters who don't understand epidemiology. Yeah. If only we could explain epidemiology to them, right, then we could get things fixed. He said, how about a little educational conference where I bring in the top epidemiologists, and we just hold a kind of tutorial for the top virus reporters,

the top reporters on COVID in this country, and we can help them understand. And I thought, well, that's a good idea. Yeah. So, and I said, when do you want to do this? He said, well, next week. Okay, that was tough. You know, we were all locked down.

We were running out of time. Life was getting uglier and uglier. So I, and so it was up to me, you know, You know, to rally the reporters. So I sent out emails to the New York Times and Atlantic and the medical journal and the Wall Street Journal. I was really excited. I thought, hey, I get to host a great conference where we get to educate journalists. Well, I sent out, I'm going to say 45 emails to all these people.

Great news. Three of the world's top epidemiologists are going to be in one place where you can actually learn. This is your beat. You should learn from the best. This is your chance. I got no answers. Got one person answered me. And I was in a bit of a pickle because we were holding an event with no participants.

Yeah. So I just dug around and found a couple of friends. We had a, you know, David Swig from the Atlantic came and John Tammany from Real Clear Markets came. I definitely would have invited you. I mean, I don't know. We didn't know, right? Our networks were not put together, which is another subject. Yeah. Now we have a brilliant global network.

I think the Maha movement, all that, there does be more of us in communication. Biggest change ever. You said it last night very, very well. There are these moments in history where things shift and we're in that now. But back in those days, we didn't know. So it was a very small event, and they talked about epidemiology for a good part of the day, and I filmed it. But at the end of that, they were frustrated that that's all it was.

And so they said, we wanted to make a statement, and they said, we'll make an open letter to public health. And I said, well, that's kind of boring. This is called a declaration. What declaration should have been? He said, well, we're in the town of Great Barrienton. Let's call it that.

And I was worried, obviously, because while there was a Great Barantin bakery and a Great Barrienton Clothiers and some other institutions by that name, there was not a Great Baratine Declaration. Yeah. And I figured there was just could be a problem, and it was.

it was for me personally I must say but we went ahead and I knew my life would fly into upheaval after that they wrote about 750 words and our webmaster

who now works with me his name is Louiseman he works at Brownstone skipped a night's sleep bought the domain skipped a night sleep put up the website and we invited signatures

in at that the last little meeting it was interesting because Jay Jay Batacharya said they had signed it. I remember sitting back there going, it's really nice you signed a piece of paper,

but what do we do now? Yeah. And she said, here's an idea. Why don't we put up a website and invite signatures? And I said, lose that possible? And he said, yeah, I think we can work on that. Yeah.

This is about 6 p.m. all right? And we were opening, we suddenly faced a demand to open the website the next morning. Yeah. Who builds a website overnight? But anyway, especially one like that. One is going to get in this much trouble, too.

Good moment and bad moment. But then Jay said, wow, this is really exciting. And again, these guys are intellectuals. They've never been in the public spotlight. They've had their heads and books their entire lives. They're not activists, really. I wasn't either. And Jay said, wow, if we have a website and we invite people to sign it,

we'll have a million people sign it. And I remember standing there, and I said to him, I said, Jay, if a million people sign this, we're going to have other problems. And he said, like what? Those are exciting days. But anyway, it was kind of a, I would agree with you, it was an important moment.

It was a very important moment. I will forever, I just have, mad respect for you. I think it is a historical document. I think that, you know, we have a lot of work to do because, as they say, you know, history is written by the victors. I think what we've been watching in these last two days is, is that question? Are we going to be victorious? Is truth, transparency actually going to win out? I think, you know, whatever you say about President Trump, he's certainly, you know, at least in this space, is efforting to, you know, correct maybe some of the things that he was involved with. He has said he got bulldozed a bit by his bureaucracy in his last

stint at president. But let's get into it. Today, you know, as we look at this, first of all, I don't think Robert Kennedy Jr. is sitting in the chair that he sat in yesterday, you know, being grilled to be HHS secretary without COVID. I mean, I think that that pandemic did something, like woke people up in America that first of all this question is wait what is a conspiracy theorist and who was getting it right and why were the people that were telling me don't listen those people the ones that ended up getting most of this wrong so I think these hearings really start with COVID I think you're right about that and would you agree that it wasn't it wasn't overtly talked about that much like I don't know in the hearings or just during the hearings so

they didn't talk really about the lockdowns of COVID response to failure of the shots, not really. No. But that was kind of the real subject. Well, because it's interesting, right? Because in this issue of the COVID lockdowns, everyone on both sides of the panel

were locked it with it, right? It's the one place they can't be divided and yell at each other. They would only be all of them and Bobby. And I think clearly now that the chips are all on the table, he actually got this more right than anyone on that

panel did, so I think they were all avoiding that topic. But I want to jump into, I mean, we could pick so many different clips. But I just thought some interesting ones, because it really has to do with the ability to research, the ability to tell the truth, or, you know, figure out what's going on. One of them, and probably the most told story over these last two days was around measles and Samoa, the Samoa outbreak. So let's look at this clip. And I want to, I'll lay into some of the science that, or the truth that we know about. and then have a discussion about us take a look at this just look at what happened when mr kennedy inserted himself into an anti-vaccination crisis in the island nation of samoa he traveled there

himself to push his views and pour fuel on the fire of a measles outbreak that began due to low vaccination rates in the end 83 samoans died most of the kids from a disease that is easily preventable. Let me explain what happened in Samoa. In Samoa in 2017 or 2015, there were two kids who died following the MMR vaccine. And the vaccination rates in Samoa dropped precipitously from about 63 percent to the mid-30s, so they've never been very high. in 2018, two more kids died following the MMR vaccine, and the government in Samoa banned the

MMR vaccine. I arrived a year later when vaccination rates were already below any previous level. I went there nothing to do with vaccines. I went there to introduce a medical infamatic system. I would digitalize records in Samoa and make health delivery much more efficient. I never taught, gave any public statement about vaccines. You cannot find a single Samoan will say I didn't get a vaccine because of Bobby Kennedy. I went in June of 2019. The measles house started in August. Oh, clearly I had nothing to do with the measles. Not only that. Senator, not only that. If you let me finish. If you have had some time and I'm going to respond. if you let me finish, there are 83 people died.

When the tissue samples were sent to New Zealand, most of those people did not have measles. We don't know what was killing them. The same outbreak occurred in Tonga and Fiji, and no extra people died. There were seven measles outbreaks in the 13 years prior to my arrival. What was amazing about this exchange, first of all,

that was Ron Wyden. He was the ranking member of the Senate. Finance Committee. This was the first time it was brought up, but it was like three times yesterday. I think four or five times was brought up today. So by today, they should have seen and known what I'm about to say, which is what Robert Kennedy Jr. was right. Let me just very quickly go through this. In July 10th, 2018, Samoa pulls MMR vaccine after two babies died. This is the government itself there in Samoa. It was because Samoa nurses jail. This is the next headline deaths of two babies who were given incorrectly mixed vaccines. That story goes

on to say she mixed the vaccine powder with an expired anesthetic. The court was told and was sentenced to five years and six months in jail. So it was a bad batch. It was incorrectly mixed, but the head of the country, you know, of the island basically said, you know, we're stopping this vaccine. Something's wrong. Vaccines plummet, especially the MMR vaccine plummets. That's 2018, we have, I think, the president himself of Samoa, Prime Minister, put out this statement about how he was worried because his own grandson had been injured. So he was putting out the things that, like, babies are dying, I've had children injured, in grandchildren, I'm worried about this.

And so, yes, the measles vaccine plummets. He wrote in that, as a grandfather and father, I can relate to the grief by the families for their loss. I also almost lost one of my grandson several years ago under similar circumstances. But with the grace of our father in heaven, my grandson survived with the proper treatment, but he will never be the same as he has lost the ability to speak. And then, of course, so if you're going to put this on anyone's head, it would be, you know, the prime minister of Samoa. I mean, and look, he's not a doctor or a scientist. He's expressing. He's trying to protect his people. all of that happens. And, you know, Bobby Kennedy doesn't go to Samoa until 2019. We have that headline.

John F. Kennedy's nephew joins Samoa's independence celebration on June 1st, 2019. So as you said, a year later, I'm there. This country isn't vaccinating, not because I made any statement at all. I'm coming to celebrate with them a year after you've all stopped taking this vaccine. Your vaccine rates have plummeted. And then, of course, the headline ends up being after that. by October. So a few months later, Samoa declares measles epidemic. And they are saying Robert Kennedy Jr. caused the measles epidemic. I mean, this is, this is, this is, this is, I mean, you want to talk about conspiracy theories. That is a conspiracy theory. You're taking these random events and saying, we found the culprit. A guy, by the way, if he showed up at that time, five months, what do you do? You erase immunity, like erase the vaccination program. I mean,

it just, it defies, there's no reason to whatever. And I always think what they say, Never led to the fact getting away of a great story. Well, I don't know how you've covered this whole thing, but somebody sent me in an article refuting this line against RFC and the Samoan measles thing. I almost didn't take it seriously because I thought anybody who believes this nonsense, it's just so silly. Why should I even have to address it? But we did end up publishing about it just because.

But this is how desperate they are. And how do they feel like, are they just so sure mainstream news is not going to call them out on this? Is that, I mean, how do they feel like they're going to get a little? I feel like watching the last couple of days there are a lot of people that are opposed to RFK who just can't read the room. They don't understand where we are in this country with chronic disease, but also the loss of trust that so many Americans just don't believe what they're saying anymore and they're continuing to pretend as if whatever they say, everybody's going to kind of go along, as if nothing's changed over the last five years. It's very strange. We're living in parodigmatic change, really. And there's a kind of a legacy of people in Washington who just don't want to face it.

They don't want to acknowledge it. And it's taking so long. And they don't have the clip. I think Pierce Morgan this week finally came out and said, I censored people. I'm sorry. Like basically got down his knees and saying, you know, I think he's just promoting a new show. It was a great way to get some attention. Sure.

But, I mean, why is it taking so long? Where is mainstream media? Like, where is the anger and outrage that we did your bidding? We worked with the government. We were told to Seattle, everyone you all told us, it was the best information. And now we're walking around with our pants around our ankles. And we don't know whether, you know, I mean, why is there outrage from major media? And the other thing is, you know, my friends have been litigating this issue of censorship now for years, very expensive, millions of dollars on lawyers fees and discoveries and time in the courtroom and research and writing.

and I have my own censorship working group. We have now tens of thousands of pages from court discovery. We've been here or there and the other thing. And then Zuckerberg just comes out, you know, just a couple weeks ago or whatever and says, all right, this is what happens. Says what we all knew. Yeah, we all right. We knew it.

But also what we've used years of court discovery to discover, you know, to find at so much expense. And he could have just said this. I know. Years ago. That's more effective. I want to deal with probably one of the biggest conversations. here all the time. And it really, it's around measles. Senator Wyden came back around to just say this. I want to address it. My third question to you is you made almost $5 million from book deals,

mostly promoting junk science. In 2021, in a book called the measles book, you wrote that parents had been, quote, misled into believing that measles is a deadly disease and that measles vaccines are necessary, safe and effective. The reality is, is measles are in fact deadly and highly contagious, something that you should have learned after your lives contributed to the deaths of 83 people, most of them children in a measles outbreak in Samoa. So my question here is, Mr. Kennedy, is measles deadly yes or no? The death rate from measles historically in this country in 1963, the year before the introduction of the vaccine, was one intent. I mean, this is something that I address this when you can't go to a stat, which is that is the difficulty of any of these conversations.

And I was Robert Kennedy-June's director of communications. I said there's certain arguments. If I can't pull up a chart, if I can't show you the CDC's on websites and stuff, then it becomes he said, she said, and we're going to get in this argument, and you're just going to say, you know, you believe that. But one of the ways I deal with this when reporters come to me, and they'll accuse me of the same thing. You say that measles was a, you know, benign childhood illness. It's deadly. And I always say to them, how are you asking me this question?

How are you able to ask me this question? Like, what do you mean? I said, well, you're standing here. We will agree that measles is one of the most infectious disease on the planet. If you didn't catch it. And before we had a vaccine, everyone who would sweep through and, you know, get all villages and cities or whatever counties, islands, if it had been a long time since they had reached herd immunity. So if it's deadly, we know everyone caught it.

How are you here? because your grandparents definitely had the measles, so they didn't die. And all the billions of people around us, their grandparents all had it. They didn't die. I want to bring up the stats just to show that Bobby Kennedy's right. This is from the vital statistics rates in the United States. This is what he's referring to, 1940 to 1960. In it, you can open up, you can look it up.

But it does stay in their one in 10,000 died that caught the measles. of 500 out of the entire United States every year, you know, the three to four million cases. And just to be clear, before the vaccine, this is the graph that's been shown many times. This is what happened, measles. It did start out. It used to be deadly. Probably had a lot of issues with squalor and how we were living. But by the time 1960 comes along, this thing is almost all but become a benign illness.

And then suddenly the vaccine arrives. I want to play a video because I think sometimes art, we're artists, we're writers. Art determines really the historical reference maybe more than anything else does. The artists are always expressing the world they live in. This is a dramatic, really powerful art piece that I think we have to reference because I know that Senator Wyden was alive when this particular piece is made. Where you know is that from? We'll see.

Okay. Hi. Peter. What are you doing all from someone? school. They sent me home. Measles. See, their measles are a strange case of red freckles. You have got a temperature. They told me. 101.1. What's the record?

Never mind. That's one record. You don't want to break. Right. You don't get to hold the title very long. I think you better go upstairs and get into bed. I'll phone the doctor and be right out. You measles. Let's hope all the others don't start coming down with it. Oh, that would be terrible. Right. As the ward in the state prison once said, I sure would hate to see them all break out at once. Are you sure it's the measles? Well, he certainly got all the symptoms.

A slight temperature, a lot of dots, and a great big smile. A great big smile. No school for a few days. Measles. But do you have to keep proving it? You've got a temperature, too. What do you mean, too? Peter was sent home from school a little while ago.

Oh, what was his temperature? 101.1. Oh, is that all? I'm 101.2. Oh, Greg. You on my railroad. I'll be a sport. You can ride on it free.

Thanks a lot. It's your turn, Peter. I need. Two more half of them. Six. Oh, missed it. Boy, this is the life, isn't it? Yeah.

If you have to get sick, you sure can't beat the measles. That's right. No medicine. Inside or out. Like shots, I mean. Don't even mention shots. Yes. I mean.

That's so funny. Yeah. You know, I don't know what your childhood experience was, but I think maybe we, I took the measles vaccine. I recall measles. but I do recall chickenpox. Yeah. And I had, and, of course, a chicken box party, right? Yeah.

And my parents was filled for me, and it's confusing as a child, you know. She's just, why did you do this to me? Well, you're miserable, and you look funny, and your parents are happy. Yeah. And then you realize that they had deliberately exposed to you because a child in the classroom got it, and so, of course, my parents dragged me to the party and so on. This was not a radical.

This was what the bourgeoisie did. And it was a learning opportunity for me, you know, that exposure leads to an upgrade of the immune system. Right. That's a very important lesson that was being taught in public health in those days, that your immune systems were robust, but they needed to be trained through exposure. Yeah. And I had, I had, and then, of course, later, later, of course, we had the vaccine come along for the chickenpox, which I remember feeling a sense of sadness. Well, just leave aside all questions of this effectiveness and it's mixed with all the other vaccines and everything. But it was a tremendous learning moment from me and for all my generation that we learned this counterintuitive thing that exposure to the small amount of the pathogen trains the body to be stronger so that you can stay healthy throughout your life. Yeah. And so now that lesson is going to be.

denied to people. Yeah. And I had a very famous epidemiologist in the middle of this COVID thing come to me and say, how come people don't know about natural immunity anymore? How come it seems to be this lost knowledge in the population? Yeah. What happened? Do you think it was because the chickenpox vaccine finally came along and robbed everybody that experience? Of course, it doesn't change the reality of science. It is exposure. Yeah. That transimmune system. But now we didn't have this very vivid learning opportunity when we're young. And I don't really have the answer to that. Well, I mean, you know, and I only play this clip, not because, look, it's a free country. And everyone, you know, that wants to get the measles vaccine, and I certainly don't

mean to be speaking for Robert Kennedy Jr. right now. What I'm pointing to, though, is this alarmist, this energy has clearly changed. Wyden, who was alive to, he grew up with that. I mean, I don't know he was probably maybe a little bit older than I am, so maybe he was 15 or, you know, so I don't know when that piece was out, and it re-ran for years and years. But how is it? Do you think that especially that generation? Did he forget it? It used to be a Brady's Bumpch episode.

Did he forget that everyone like himself and everyone caught it and did just fine? Have they somehow just told themselves a mantra, or did they know they're creating and, you know, a synthetic fear, if you will. You know, I, and this fear, of course, applies in the case of COVID. It was one of the great mysteries to me that when this respiratory virus came along. And there was a fear that it leaked from a lab. And it was particularly virulent, depending on your immune profile. I mean, I had a terrible case of it, you know, but then you shake it off with the right therapeutics, by the way.

Right. Which we couldn't get another subject. Yeah. But there was an ethos in the early days before the vaccine. came along that said, that said, whatever you do, don't get COVID. It's the worst thing you could do. And the people who did get COVID, it was considered to be like a mark of, like a stain, like a sin. And Dell, you probably recall this. The tech companies invented apps that you were supposed to download so that if you went and got your test, as you should, and you were

marked as positive, then your app would mark you as positive. And then other people who had the app. If they came in your presence, their phone would ding and warn. It was a digital leperbo. Yeah. Do you remember this? I do. It was crazy. And we started thinking, we're going to live in a world where we're all being tracked, how close. I mean, even apps built to just see, we found out later, we're studying how close we're coming together, how many people were breaking the social distancing rule. Didn't matter whether we were contagious or not. Just how close, if you kissed, oh my God, you know, some alarm was ringing in some center. in the CIA or FBI?

I don't know. It was crazy. And then we started, then there was a rule. Again, everybody forgets this, but this is reality that you couldn't go between states. Yeah. Without quarantining on either side by it for two weeks.

Do you remember this? And if you came from New York into Massachusetts, you would get a phone call from the sheriff in New York that said, we now know that you're in Massachusetts. better stay there for two weeks. And when you come back, you have to stay for two weeks. And like severe warnings, there are recordings, but it was scary. It was enforced by the police in many places.

And dentistry are basically vanished for a large part of the country. A lot of that. I thought maybe I needed a root canal, and I called my mother up in Texas, and I said, Mom, I can't seem to get a dentist here in Massachusetts. So maybe I'll just go to my dentist. in Texas. And she said, well, let me make a call. So she calls up to the dentist. And I said, well, you know, they say that you can't have any dentistry here unless you've quarantined in Texas for two weeks. And I said, well, Mom, here's a thought. There's a thought. You just tell

the dentist that I've been there for two weeks. And she said to me, she said to me, she said, And this is my mother, my beloved mother. She goes, son, are you asking me to lie for you? Oh, no, no, mom. I would never do that. Forget I asked. Fortunately, I didn't need the procedure anyway. But it was a little bit strange that suddenly that we had no dentistry for the first time since, you know, in hundreds of years.

And as we said, and as in that graph that you put out, the Brownsson, it said the death rate was so. But why did we think that we could? could avoid the infectious disease. And it was a mystery for me for a large parts of 2020. And actually for until 2021, too. And why do we think that we could avoid infectious disease by hiding under our sofa? And the New York Times were running articles like, well, listen, type in your zip code into this blank and then we'll tell you what you should do. So you type in your zip code. And it was, oh, well, in your neighborhood, there is community spread. So,

stay home and get your groceries delivered. Yeah. And remember washing down our groceries. Oh, yeah, yeah. But the strange thing to me was get your groceries delivered by whom? I mean, clearly not readers of the New York Times. Right? Right?

So you had this weird class thing. It's like we will stay clean while delivering its groceries. Right. They'll take all the rest. You know, and this went on, and we wondered why the craziness, and of course, now we know, looking back. It was all to wait for the great shot. So everything was contingent upon the shot working. The whole, again, the whole credibility of every aspect of technology companies, of media, of government, of public health, every agency in the world.

And not just in the United States, but all over the planet, rested on this one great innovation. We're going to shove this into your arm and you're going to get better. And we're going to vanquish this disease. And then it came out, and you knew this. And I kind of meant, you knew it better than I do, but I intuited that this wasn't going to work. Yeah. You knew for sure. I knew it was going to look.

I mean, we had been, we were so specifically, all of our research had been on vaccines, all the vaccines. I knew how they did trials. I knew how the FDA treated. I knew how they would skip placebo trials and get out of it. So I said, this EUA is going to say everything. Yeah. And sure enough, buried right there in the EUA. Yeah.

This is your world. And it wasn't my world. So I didn't really understand. And just put frankly what kind of racket was being generated here. I thought this was a mistake by pretentious people who really had believed a lie and that they were shoving it down our throats for purposes of power and profit. But I never could have imagined the extent of the depth of the malice and the depths of the corruption that was going on. So it's been a revelation, I think, for all of us. And then when the therapeutics disappeared, you know, there was, and for a lot of us, it is personal, right?

What happened to our families, what happened to our towns, what happened in our own lives. Yeah. But when COVID finally got me, and just to be quite frank, I was never afraid of COVID, so I, you know, I looked for super spreader events early on. I couldn't find one. I'll be quiet on that. We call that just party. Yeah, right. Call it it

is. I couldn't find anybody. I mean, there was, in my community, there are flying drones over, looking for houses with cars parked out in front and reporting them to the health authorities. But when I finally got covered, I remember getting a call from,

my doctor was actually Pierre Corrie. I called him up. Oh, great. And he said, well, you know, it seems like you need some, you know, there's some ibermectin and, you know, zinc and, you know, vitamin D and that sort of thing.

And he said, what's your pharmacy? and I mentioned two very mainstream pharmacies, and he laughed on the other. I just dealt so you understand that I'm, even though I've been writing about this stuff for now 20 years, I'm still kind of naive, right? So he said, those two pharmacies will not fill this prescription. I said, what do you mean?

You're a doctor. These are normal medications. He said, no, they won't do it. He said, I think his words were something like they're part of the system. And I said something like, What system? What are you talking about? But sure enough, I tried it.

And I couldn't, I couldn't get the, I couldn't get a normal medication. I actually think that if you were going to have a trial, or if you will, or at least the investigation is defauching all of them. I don't think you can have people like, oh, the vaccine didn't work. They lied to us. They should go to jail. I don't think you can really blame them for trying to rush something on the market very quickly. Yeah, yeah. Taking medications.

Everything else off the market. Which Trump never did, by the way. And I want to say this, too, because I know a lot of people that are, you know, in this movement, if you will, medical freedom, they get upset because Robert Kennedy Jr. said, I applaud, you know, warp speed. What we forget is warp speed was not just that vaccine. It was an immediate investigation into, you know, drugs, you know, therapeutics and drugs. He was right behind hydroxychloroquine. And he promised us no matter what we find or what we develop, I would never mandate it for you. And I think he's proving that by giving the military back their jobs and saying,

Good on you for denying the vaccine that, you know, I've celebrated, but you have that right. So a lot of this coming around, I want to get through a couple of things because I know we've got to get you out of here. But another one of the things, this happened while I was Director of Communications for Robert Kennedy Jr. This story came out. It has been misrepresented from day one. It was very devastating for us on the campaign. It was hard to deal with. It has come up again during these hearings.

And so let me just play this clip because there's so much more that's important. in this conversation and it's been destroyed by terrible reporting. We're not talking about the right thing, but here it is. Take it like this. Mr. Kennedy, did you say that COVID-19 was a genetically engineered bioweapon that targets black and white people, but spared Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people? I didn't say it was deliberately targeted. I just quoted an NIH-funded and NIH-funded an NIH-H.

published study. Did you say that it targets black and white people but spared? I quoted a study, Your Honor. I quoted the NIH study that showed that certain raise. I have to move on. This was when this happened, I'll play the video in just a second. It was really the news went crazy saying that he somehow believed in this Jewish, deep state, Zionist attempt at world power and takeover. I mean, just went really crazy. But let's look at the hidden video. I guess someone would see. He thought he was in a private party.

It doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. I've never said anything. I don't think Robert Kennedy Jr. does anyway. But we have these types of dinners that you're about to see where your pontiffia has science is fascinating. And there's so many interesting ways to look at it. You know what I mean? And so this is one of those moments taken out of context.

But here's what the video that got him in a lot of trouble. And we need to talk about violence. The level I know a lot now about bio weapons because I've been doing a book up for the past two and a half years and you know what we the technology that we now have all these microbe we have we've put hundreds of millions of dollars into ethnically targeted microbes the Chinese have done the same thing in fact COVID-19 there's an argument that it is ethnically target of 19 attack certain races disproportionately the the races that are

most immune to COVID 19 are because of the of the the genetic structure of the genetic differentials among different races of the of the receptors of the ACE2 receptor COVID-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and black people. The people who are most immune are asking us Jews and Chinese. And we don't know that they were deliberately targeted that or not, but there are papers out there that show the racial and ethnic differential impact to that. We do know that the Chinese are spending hundreds of millions of dollars.

developing ethnic bio weapons. And we are developing ethnic biogeys that's where all those labs in the Ukraine are about. They're collecting Russian DNA. They're collecting Chinese DNA. Note we can target people. This is such an important conversation. And it's one that Robert Kennedy Jr. It didn't just start on this day.

These gain of function, this research that's being done all over the world, very scary. It's been outlawed and then overrated. It's a lot of what is around Tony Fauci. But just very quickly, just so I can show people, there is an NIH study. It really does exist. He was quoting from it. This is it. It was called New Insights and Genetic susceptibility of COVID-19 and ACE2 and TMRPR-S-2 polymorphism analysis.

It goes on to say, we found that the distribution of deleterious variance in ACE-2 differs among nine populations. in genome AD, specifically 39% and 54% of deleterious variants in ACE2 occur in African and African-American and non-Finnish European populations, respectively. Prevalence of deleterious variants among Latino and mixed Americans, East Asians, Finnish, and South Asian populations is 2% to 10% while Amish and Ashkenazi Jewish populations do not appear to carry such variance in ACE2 coding regions. This is a very interesting study. What they were looking at, NIH, funded by the government of the United States, are some people more susceptible to this virus than others? Really obvious and curious, you know, thing to look into.

Obviously, we are all made differently. We are all affected by viruses differently. Robert Kennedy, Jr. is referencing that we're, you know, looked at differently. But what he's pointing to, and it's so annoying that, they want to accuse him of some sort of anti-Semitic or prosemitic, I mean, thing. When what he's saying is this is what science does. They discover, look, these people have a different ACE2 receptor and wouldn't be affected by a virus that did this. Did they create the coronavirus to do that?

Doubtful. But, you know, it's something to study. And someone's now recognizing that and starting to use, can we hone in on that? Can we make a bioweapon that targets specific ethnic groups? I mean, I think the James Bond movie that that same year came out and had like that was the villain's idea of doing it. So, you know, it's so detrimental to the conversation when the media misrepresents this, when our own political officials are represented this. And you know what, what shocks me. Of course, we all know that Bobby knows, RFK knows the literature better than any of his critics.

Yeah. That's just a given. But I tell you what, I cannot help it go back in my mind to those days. in 2020, when the governor of New York and the mayor of New York City all blamed the Hasidic community for the spread of COVID. Do you remember that? And the New York Times is amplifying this stuff. Right. The Jews are spreading disease. Right. With no sense of historical irony or alarm at what they were doing, having no awareness of the hundreds of years of history of vicious anti-Semitism where you scapegoat the Jews for the spread of infectious

disease and they were doing it with the blessing of the New York Times above the fold and it's being broadcast on CNN by the mayor and the governor. And didn't just blame them put out a curfew in Rockland County, New York that basically said if you are stopped in the streets, you have to show that you've gotten your measles vaccine or you will, you know, be fined, arrested, whatever. In that moment, I will, and this, I got a lot of trouble for this. I was speaking in Austin, Texas, when that decree came out, I couldn't believe what I was reading. We are about, we're going into a Jewish community and saying, you were locked down, you now have a curfew,

you will not be allowed into your synagogues, you will not be allowed into your schools, you will not, and I just thought, this is insane. And so I was about to speak, and I told, you know, someone were going to give me some yellow felt. And I came out and I said to all of those Jewish people in New York that never believe you would see a moment like this in the United States of America where you have been targeted while you are being told you cannot walk in the streets, you cannot go into your synagogue, you cannot practice your own beliefs. And I ask you, how do you know that they're not vaccinated when they're walking down the street? Maybe they need to wear a symbol. Maybe they need to wear a symbol like this. And I held up a yellow Jewish star and I pinned it to my shirt.

And I said, for all of those that are suffering right now and this, I stand with you. I stand in your, you know, right there freedom. Now, they end up saying that I equated the, you know, Holocaust to vaccination. No, I did not. I equated to exactly what it was, was quarantine of a people in the United States of America. For infectious disease. Right.

Unbelievable. It was unbelievable. There's a long history. That's where we get the whole myth of the poisoning in the well. That's why we have that phrase and so on. I mean, it goes way back in history, back to the early Middle Ages. And here we are, and, you know, modern people, supposedly smart people, humane people, and scapegoating and demonizing the entire communities.

And one that has been so, that's to whom that's happened historically in the most vicious ways with catastrophic results. But just the fact that there was no awareness of this, you know, and that the New York Times was amplifying this. And people were saying this with no sense of what they were doing. Yeah. was completely shocking to me. I agree.

Maybe it was that moment where I realized that everything was upside down. Yeah. It really is. And it's all being driven in many ways by, I think, the money and interest, the corporate powers, which is what Robert Kennedy Jr. is up to right now. And he brought that up. Actually, today was one of the last interactions with Bernie Sanders. Who's really, you know, who's really, you know, on trial here?

Where is the corruption really take it like this? Yeah. Will you assure the American people that you will fight to do what every other major country on earth does guarantee health care to every single American? I'm going to make America healthier than other countries in the world right now. Will you guarantee do what every other major country does? It's a simple question about it. And by the way, Bernie, the problem of corruption is not just in the federal agencies.

It's in Congress, too. Almost all the members of this panel are accepting, including yourself, are accepting millions of dollars from the pharmaceutical industry. Oh, no, no, no, no. And protected their interests. Oh, I thought that that would come. No, I ran for president like you. I got millions and millions of contributions.

They did not come from the executives, not one nickel of pack money from the pharmaceutical industry. They came to workers. In 2020, in 2020, in 2020, in 2020, 2020, you were the single largest... Because I had four contributions from workers all over this country. Workers... You were the single...

Not a nickel from corporate tax. You were the single largest except for pharmaceutical dollars. No, from workers in... 1.5 million. Yeah, out of 200 million. All right. But you have not answered... Last question.

You have not answered my question? Mr. Chairman, we may ask you a question. We're making America healthy if you don't guarantee him. We're literally three minutes over here. How do you make America healthy when everyone voted you in is taking farm a dollar? You know, I don't have a perfect profit on this, but that might be the end of Bernie's political career. It's like for me, his hologram just began to flicker and fade at that moment, you know? Yeah.

He's made his his whole career has been based and being an anti-corporate populist. Similarly with that other Another I forget I don't know I know it only by Pocahontas I do

I have the same problem Every time I'm always working my team I'm like Pocahontas They're like Elizabeth Warren Thank you thank you thank you Thank you thank you

But I have the same They'll attest to that When you're out of here It's true And it turns out they're the top two And it turns out they're the top two recipients And we have that list by the way

Let's bring up that list Here you go Sanders Vermont 1.9 Warnock Raphael Georgia 1.7 Evan Warren 1.2.

Wyden, who is the obviously looked at 1.2. Bennett, 730,000. The list goes on down. But there it is. Bernie Sanders at the very, and it is shocking. This is the guy that has been screaming. He's anti-corporate interests.

And yet he's taken more money than anyone. There it is. And welcome to the reality of American life and the truth about the fictions that we've lived in for a very long time. And this is actually the great thing about our times. And it's a great thing about the coming together with Maha and Maga and the upheaval of our times is that we're starting to see the reality.

We can see things for what they are right now. And I'm prepared to do that. It's been a difficult, a difficult, I would say, five years, I think, for all of us. But on the other side of the darkness and the upheaval and the calamities, I think we're seeing the light and we're seeing our communities come together. And we're seeing genuine progress. And I'm not sure where you feel emotionally on this spiritually, but I'm starting to feel hope again for the first time in a very long time. Let's make the last video and I'll get on some other things once you leave.

But I think Ron Johnson captured for me really the most probably the most important takeaway, certainly from yesterday's event, which was watching, you know, the Republicans, you know, ask good questions, but, you know, supporting. saying, obviously, we need change. And everyone, what was so amazing is everyone on the panel sort of admitted, yes, I know we do have the sickest kids we've ever seen. We are spending more. Our system's broken. Everyone admitted that. But there was one group that just went on attack and there's all of the Democrats. This is what Senator Ron Johnson had to say about that. Thank you for your decades-long advocacy for a clean environment, for children's health.

I can't say as I'm surprised by the hostility on the other side. I'm highly disappointed in it. I don't know if you remember when you called me up and you were contemplating, setting your political differences aside, joining forces with President Trump on an area of agreement, addressing chronic illness, trying to find the root cause of all these problems facing this nation. My first response was, Bobby, this is an answer to my prayers. We need to get to the answers of this.

But even more, we need to heal and unify this divided nation. I think that, you know, I said it to some of the reporters yesterday, watching these two groups just squabble and it appears this thing may go down straight party lines. Even after they all admit, sickest, as I said, sickest, kids recognize the corruption, know something has to be done, thank you for all your statements about food, you're right about that, you have fought, you know, titles of your career, but abortion or but, you know, some culture war issue that we're always going to disagree on. And for those reasons, we are not going to let you make America healthy again. We have to preserve the status quo.

We have to keep everything exactly the way it is. We cannot question fundamentally anything about the current system, no matter how bad it is. You're too disruptive. You're scary. You might look into the, you might discover things we don't want to know, just keep everything just the way it is. That was the message of so many of these people. They're protecting an establishment and protecting an orthodoxy that people just don't accept anymore. Right. People don't believe in anymore and they're still rallying around it. It's crazy.

It really is crazy. And as you point, it would sit there and say, you know, tell me, I want a yes or no answer. Are you going to stick with it the way it's not? I mean, even though I just listed all the, I'm agree with you with all the problems, but are you going to leave it? Are you going to actually do something to change it? But more importantly, I just sat to look at both sides and said, when did you guys forget you're all in the same team? You are on the same team. You're arguing about plays that this team is going to make, but if we win or lose is dependent on you, this country has lost its way,

it is falling apart. Our economy's shot. We're sick as hell. We cannot compete. We can't mount a military. And you guys are arguing with each other. Yeah. And we need honesty about what happened.

You know, even if that involves. For those of us that got wrong, got it wrong. Yeah. And we need some truth about the COVID years, some truth about the vaccine. I mean, just some blunt telling of truth so that we can heal, you know, as a nation. I don't want to live in a world where nobody trusts anything or anybody. Right. And RFK said repeatedly his goal is to bring back, you know, do make a confrontation.

to believe so that people come trust again. And I think that's right. And we have to have, we have to have truth. We have to have transparency. We have to have the documents. We have to have an open discussion. And this stonewalling and this bullying that we saw today was like nothing I've ever seen. And am I right that we've never seen a hearing like this before?

I think this is one of the most contentious hearings. It is certainly, and probably one of the most watched and viewed lines around the block, hallways packed. I mean, maybe there's been other cabinet hearings that were this intense or had this much focus. But I'll tell you this, health and human services has never had this much attention. And has never had this many people. And it makes sense.

And by the way, you know, it's just so brilliant because RFK played a very, very courageous role in the midst of our dark night of the soul. I mean, his book, The Real Anthony Fauci, came out in an early November. December 2021. And it was the most comprehensive, most cited, most, I mean, it was a brilliant book. I didn't even know he was preparing for it. I didn't know he's preparing it. You probably knew, but I didn't

know. When I held it in my hands, I was just, I was just cheering. I was celebrating. Then his speech on Capitol Hill, I thought, we found our leader. We've got, we've got the guy. He knows who knows what's what. And the fact that Trump was wise enough to pick him, and after the assassination attempt, for those two to come together

and how late in the day was that? Was that August or something like that? Yeah, right around August. It was a magic moment. It was. Because the people who had been seemingly at odds for decades suddenly realized that they had a common interest

in truth, transparency, and freedom. And individual rights. and that we had to come together to make this happen. And it was a beautiful moment. And for him, for Trump to pick him for this role, it's essential. I agree. And healing. It's a healing moment.

And I have not seen public opinion polls on this, but I'm feeling like he should be a beloved figure. I think he more and more is. Do you feel good about the hearings? What do you think watching him and Kenney's going to do? Well, I think he came across looking great, just fantastic. It's about what I expected because he's just such a moment. master of detail. Yeah.

And he knows the science like nobody else. And he has the right humility towards it too. You know, he's looking for the evidence. That's exactly the kind of person we need in that spot. And I just don't think we saw that from his opponents. They're dogmatic. They were shrill and

they were insulting. Yeah, a lot of times. And I just don't think that flies very well. It's not a good way to be. I agree. I want to thank you for taking the time. I'm going to deliver a message to Bill Cassie in a minute. But I want to help you get on that train. Very good.

Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Pleasure to be here. We'll take that out. But before you hop up, let me just go ahead and throw this next video. At the heart of this, really, if this does come down to party lines, it's going to really be in the hands of Bill Cassidy, who was the head of the Health Committee, a help committee that was today, also was on the finance committee yesterday. He is the Republican that is a doctor, was asking very serious questions of Robert Kennedy Jr. You can tell he is struggling with this.

conversation. I want to address some of his concerns. I'm not speaking for Robert Kennedy, Jim, speaking for I can and the work that we've done. But Bill, I want to, I would love to sit with you in a meeting and talk about your concerns because it's an important conversation, and we have to have it. This is what it's about. The context of what I'm about to ask is that there's multiple studies establishing the safety of measles and hepatitis B vaccine, and specifically that they are not a cause of autism. In this position, and you have previously said yes, but if you are approved to this position,

will you say unequivocally, will you reassure mothers unequivocally and without qualification that the measles and hepatitis B vaccines do not cause autism? Senator, I am not going into the agency with any That's kind of a yes or no question. Because the data is there. And that's kind of a yes or no. And I don't mean to cut you off, but that really is a yes or no.

If the data is there, I will absolutely do that. Now, there is the data just because I used to do hepatitis B, as I said. I know the data is there. Well, then I will be the first person. If you show me data, I will be the first person. to assure the American people to take that they need to take those vaccines. Now, what concerns me is that you've cast doubt on some of these vaccines recently, I mean, like the last few years, but the data, and I could quote some of it,

the data has been there for a long time. I've been out of the game. I've been in Congress for 16 years, and this data was in large measure generated before I came to Congress. So my concern is that if you were making those claims, being so influential. I mean, your bully pulp is incredible with that responsibility that you never acquainted yourself with anything that might contradict that what you were previously saying. So let me ask once more, if the data is brought to you and these studies that have been out there

for quite some time and have been peer reviewed, and it shows that these two vaccines are not associated with autism, will you ask, no, I need even more? Or will you say, no, just, this, this, this, I I see this. It's the test of time. And I unequivocally and without qualification say that this does not cause autism. Not only will I do that, but I will apologize for any statements that misled people otherwise. Thank you. Next. I just want to pledge you.

And I will never stick on a point if somebody shows me data that says I'm wrong. I know that's an interpretation people have, but it's absolutely wrong. I think the science-driven and evidence-driven. All right. I don't know if I'm going to have the opportunity to visit Bill Cassidy's office, but if I did, and maybe some of you could share this video with him. But Bill, first of all, I want to recognize your incredible tenure, both as a representative in the United States of America,

also as a doctor. It is so clear your heart felt concern. You tell a story of, I believe it was an 18-year-old girl, a teenager, who had liver failure because of hepatitis B, the understanding, witnessing those things, how important those are. And I am not speaking for anyone but myself in the work that I've done with our nonprofit at the informed consent action network. But I want to say this, when you say that the science and the evidence is clear that the

hepatitis B vaccine does not cause autism and are asking Robert Kennedy Jr. to state it unequivocally based on your understanding of the science, I have to jump in here because our non-profits sued the CDC on this exact issue. Hepatitis B, as was pointed out in the hearing, is given to a day one old baby on the first day of life. So when you go to the website, as you've pointed out, the CDC states unequivocally vaccines do not cause autism. This is that page, autism and vaccines. Vaccines do not cause autism by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That does not just say hepatitis B.

It does not just say measles vaccine. It is saying all vaccines do not cause autism, a statement that I believe you believe, and I know that you believe that I understand that. And you believe that that science has just been robust. And anyone that would challenge that or question that is dangerous. And I want to say that that's why we brought a lawsuit. Has the hepatitis B vaccine proved that it does not cause autism? Well, this is the lawsuit that we brought. And we asked that the CDC provide us with all of the science.

All the studies, here it is. Whereas the FOIA request, it started as a FOIA request, all studies relied upon by CDC to claim that the D-TAP vaccine does not cause autism. Also, CDC, that neither injurexb, nor recombivax, HB, those are the two hepatitis vaccines that are given to babies that they do not cause autism. We went on to Prevnar, Hib, Polio, all because what we asked was the first six vaccines given in the first six months of life. If it's true, the CDC's website says these vaccines, all vaccines don't cause autism,

please give us the trials and the studies that you say exist. You said today on the penalty, you say they exist. We said if they exist, just hand them over. We want to look at them. Again, this has nothing to do with Robert Kennedy Jr. I'm not putting any words in his mouth. I'm speaking to you as Dell Bigtree, the CEO of Informed Consent Action Network. The FOIA request was not answered.

They pushed back. They wouldn't do anything. bring a year. We finally brought a lawsuit. And after that lawsuit, they conceded. The judge didn't understand what's going on. I don't understand what's going on. Just hand them what they want. And they said, well, we don't exactly have what they want. I can CDC. This is, CDC cannot support its claim that vaccines do not cause autism. Here's what we got. Here's what they did. They gave us 20 studies. 20 total studies. Here they are. One of them was the MMR vaccine. That vaccine is given between 18 months and two years old. Of course, it's the MMR. That was not the first six. It's not the hepatitis B vaccine. I could do a whole different discussion about MMR, but I want to stick with hepatitis B just to make this point. The other study they provided was an MMR plus D-TAP, when they're both given at the or involving those two vaccines. So also again, MMR, not one of them. And D-TAP was one of ours. But that study actually, if you read it, said no studies has ever been done.

with D-TAP vaccine showing its link causally to autism. Therefore, we can neither confirm nor deny whether or not D-TAP causes autism. So they admit it in that purple study. And then the other one, two, three, four are MMR and thimerosol. So a discussion and studies looking at the MMR vaccine and its connection with thimerosol, the mercury-containing adjuvant. But again, thimerosol is not in any of the first six vaccines, didn't answer a question. And the MMR, of course, is in the first six months of life.

And then thimerosol studies was the body of them, all the mercury-containing vaccines, which they actually pulled out of vaccines eventually. Mostly it's out because they recognize there may be a danger there. And I want to thank Robert Kennedy Jr. for pointing that out. I think that it was important to get thymarisol out. And lastly, it was an antigen study that if you read it says very clearly this is only about antigens. This cannot be used as a study to say that vaccines don't cause autism.

But here's the point. Not one of those studies was about hepatitis B. That is because there is zero studies that can be provided by the CDC that show that the hepatitis B vaccine does not cause autism. That's the facts that you can't, I don't know what we do, Senator Cassidy. If the CDC itself concedes, we have never used a study to determine that the hepatitis B vaccine doesn't cause autism. and you're demanding right there on the stand that Robert Kennedy Jeter say to you that you're struggling because you need him to say that the mountain of evidence that hepatitis B doesn't cause autism, that he must accept this right now.

I'm telling you a CDC lawsuit, the CDC conceded. They have zero studies on hepatitis B proving that it doesn't cause autism. That should be troubling. And it certainly means that this conversation is not over. and should we then attack the person that wants to see those studies done, wants to see, and if you have science that's better than the CDC's, Senator Cassidy, then I think that would be interesting. Why do you have studies better than the most important regulatory agency in the world, the CDC, that puts out the childhood recommendation to give the hepatitis B vaccine on the first day of life?

Also, when we talk about the safety, and you said you use this, You said almost 20 years ago, it's been a while, I believe you said, 20 years since you were a practicing doctor. So it's been some time. But boy, you know hepatitis B, you said, and you know how safe it is. I want to just bring up the vaccine insert for the hepatitis B vaccine. This can be found, by the way, if you go online, just type in FDA package insert for hepatitis B. Or you can say FDA licensed vaccines and every childhood vaccine comes up and you can click on hepatitis B, the Rukkamba Vax if you want, or NGRXB, and then click on the package insert.

Either way, when you open that package insert and you scroll to 6.1, this is the trials relied upon to determine the safety of the hepatitis B vaccine. This particular trial, all subjects were monitored for four days post-administration of the vaccine. That's the reality. There's two vaccines. One, this one, EnderX has had four days safe. trial and the other one had a five-day safety trial. No placebo group, infants and children, up to 10 years of age, who were monitored for five days after each dose. I believe in one of these,

it was 147 children, not a lot of children. And that is in the insert itself. I would really recommend Senator Cassidy that you open that insert right away. You can look it up online FDA approved vaccines. But when you say it's safe and you know that it's safe and you talk about that child that had the liver failure. I want to point out that the work that I do is talking to parents that had a bad reaction. What are those reactions? Well, you have talked about the post-marking surveillance. It's written actually in this document that arrives with every single vaccine. So let's look at some of the known side effects of hepatitis B vaccine. Here they are. You have thrombocytopinia, herpes,oster, meningitis, allergic reactions, antiflactic reactions,

you know, hypersensitive in the skin, nervous system, encephalitis, encephalopate. This is swelling of the brain, migraines, multiple sclerosis, neuritis, neuropathy, including hypotheism, paristhesia, gion barretis syndrome is paralysis, Bell's palsy, optic neuritis, paralysis, seizures, syncopate, transverse myelotis, also, which can lead to paralysis. The list goes on and on, but that list right there, nervous system disorders. this is happening. This is in here. This is written in the insert, Senator Cassidy,

because you think the pharmaceutical industry doesn't want to put it there. They're told that if there's enough evidence, if enough people sort of line up on having the same reactions that at a certain point, if it can be assumed that it's probably causally related, it has to be written in this vaccine insert. So Senator Cassidy, I want to ask you this. I know that the child that you looked at with the liver failure,

very important, sad story, and certainly everyone would want to protect that child. But what about the amount of people that had the seizures, that had the Guillain Barre, the paralysis, that had multiple sclerosis, exacerbation of multiple sclerosis. These aren't things that we're making up. They're written in the warning label. Do the people suffering those things? Do they not matter? Because I've met those people.

And just like you are very sensitive about the people. patient that you met, I'm very sensitive about the patients that are written in this warning label that other doctors have met. Somewhere, we've got to find a balance here. How do we protect from hepatitis B, which is important for those that are at risk? And there's a discussion about what that risk actually is. But how do we protect those that are being injured? Do we just say unequivocally on the stand because you're asking us to say, asking me or Robert King or anyone, say it right now. It's safe and never question again. What happens to all the people that are suffering these side effects that are in there?

Should the NIH never investigate them because they're not? Should they keep telling you we did robust studies that we've proven that the hepatized B vaccine doesn't cause autism when they haven't? The CDC can't even provide that evidence? At what point is someone like Robert Kennedy Jr., if not Robert Kennedy Jr., allowed to ask these questions? Why are these side effects written in the insert of the vaccine and show up as a warning label on every vaccine? Why are we not allowed to talk to the people that are having these side effects? If you can talk about those that suffer from hepatitis B, why can't we talk about those that suffer from vaccine injury? It's probably rare.

So is hepatitis B technically. If you look at the size of the population and healthy people that contracted, doing not. not look at rare instances? Do we not figure out how to heal rare cancers? Are we not interested in figuring out how to protect these rare individuals that are having serious side effects from these products? That is my question. That is what I think is important. And I think that our population now recognizes they're opening up these inserts. The cats out of the bag, Senator Cassidy, these exist, these people exist. They're online telling their stories and they can point to the very pharmaceutical product and its insert saying we know it's happening because you're warning us about it.

We want Robert Kennedy Jr. to have the opportunity to see if he can study how to stop those injuries. Maybe it's a blood test. Maybe a study will show us what foods you shouldn't eat the day you're vaccinated, peanuts. I don't know. But we'll never know if we have to unequivocally make statements based on some blind, you know, understanding of science that I've just proven doesn't exist. That's not science. Science must be challenged. Science must evolve. And I do believe we can make better products in the future. Every product gets better. But we can't fix it if we say you're not allowed to look at it, talk about it, or question it. I want you to look at this insert, Senator Cassidy, and I want you to ask yourself, did you know that? Did you read that? Did you

read that? Did you know those side effects were real? And then my next question would be, then, do you not care? There's no way I can believe that that's true. You seem like a very caring individual. So I'm going to have to assume that you didn't know that this insert was wrapped around the vaccine, and that you didn't know it was only trialed for five days, and that you didn't know it didn't have a placebo group establishing safety, and that you didn't know that the CDC could not find a single study to show that the hepatitis B vaccine doesn't cause autism. Couldn't find one, not for us, not under oath, not under a lawsuit. So we have work to do together. I hope that you will open up to this conversation with someone that's bringing it, because I know you align with Robert

Kennedy Jr. in so many other ways. He is not asking questions that aren't important. I hope you recognize that now, as I think Senator Ron Paul, Rand Paul stated so beautifully, this is what he had to say. You know, I think the discussion over vaccines is so oversimplified and dumb down that we never really get to real truths. And it's why people up here are so separated from real people at home. So we talk about hepatitis B. It's a terrible disease. It could lead to liver failures, the chairman said.

But the reason you have distrust from people at home, why they don't believe anything you say, and they don't believe governed at all, is you're telling my kid to take a hepatitis B vaccine when he's one day old. You get it through drug use and sexually transmitted. That's how you get hepatitis B. But you're telling me, my kid has to take.

it at one day old. You're not, that's not science. These are the nuances you're unwilling to talk about because there's such a belief in submission, submit to the government, do what you're told, there is no discussion, there ought to be a debate. You're not going to let him have the debate because you're just going to criticize and say, it is this and admit to it or we're not going to appoint you. But it's more complicated than that. And this is why people distrust government, because you're unwilling to have these conversations and go home. Ask your Democrat young mothers, your Republican young mothers, if they're vaccinating their kid for hepatitis B and they're like, well, do I have to do it on day one?

It's this precious little baby. Is there science to say you shouldn't do it? Probably not, but it's my kid. You know, it's like, there isn't clear-cut science saying not to. I want to point out that, you know, Senator Ron Pau probably would not have been able to be that flippant about a very important statement if he was the one on the stand today for HHS secretary. No one wants to offend anybody. You've got to be very careful. These are sensitive issues. He already has his job, so he's able to make a point that I don't think Robert Kennedy Jr. was allowed to make today, but it is an important one. This is a vaccine given on day one of life. For a sexually transmitted disease, you really are most likely to

only catch if you're sharing needles in some way or having promiscuous sex or, unfortunately, you know, have sexual relations with somebody that's positive. And as he pointed out, we have babies that the mothers, they're tested for hepatitis B, which would be the only, you know, reason to give the vaccine. So there was a dialogue that happened right before our eyes today in this hearing that Senator Cassidy admits after that conversation, relaxed his position, actually. That was amazing to watch. This is what that looked like.

For the record, if a child is born to a hepatitis B mother, that child may have a 95% chance of becoming a chronic carrier. And we vaccinate those people and nobody's against that. But if the child, that's a very small percentage in a red herring. That is not what we're talking about. 99.9% of kids don't have a hepatitis B, mom. And could they wait a while? Could they get vaccinated three months or a year?

Yes. So again, for the record, if the mother's hepatitis B status is known, then that can be delayed. The problem is oftentimes, or at least a significant percentage of the time. The mother's status is not known. If she's hepatitis B positive, a vaccine, day one of life prevents chronic hepatitis B 95% of the time. So it really depends upon the mothers, the knowledge of the mother's hepatitis B status. And when they used to do just, okay,

we know the mother's status or not, there is mothers that snuck through. Their status was unknown. We can blame the OBs, but, yeah, Marshall. But for the record, there is an absolute rationale for that. But you're right. If the mother status is definitively known, that it can be so. safely delayed. The mother status is officially known. I have gotten calls when I was living in Los Angeles doing the high wire from mothers that were, had just given birth. And they were told at major hospitals that they had to give their baby the hepatitis B vaccine. If they didn't, they were calling child protective services. I had lawyers. I would call lawyers to go help these mothers to get the hospital. Those mothers, I guarantee you at major institutions knew that they didn't have

hepatitis B, they'd taken the test. The test showed unequivocally. So Senator Cassidy, work needs to be done here. You weren't lenient when you started this conversation, but after having some important information shared with you with Senator Rompal, you change it. This is what dialogue has to happen. This is why these conversations are important. That was science happening right before our eyes, a challenge by another doctor that pointed out a few flaws in your perspective. We don't need to be blankly giving this to everyone on day one. I maybe didn't do it myself. And you conceded, you know, under those circumstances, was that dangerous? Did that exchange right there just put the public at harm for all those mothers that are, you know, that know that know that they're not

hepatitis be positive? I guarantee you they're going to use this moment, this moment you just had with Senator Rand Paul, they're going to bring it to their doctor, may even play it and say, hey, you know, it was just said at the Senate help committee meeting that I don't know. need to have this on day one because I'm not positive. You've already done the test. Is that detrimental? You just said that should happen. This is how science needs to work. We need to get back to this. Not just a blanket. Everybody has to get it because some tiny percentage are slipping through. Then figure out how to not have them slip through. Why do we give a child a vaccine on day one and even a preemie when they're this big? Because some moms are slipping through. Then let's fix that part of this

program. See, there's solutions that we can come to that will give everybody what they want. You'll make sure that some baby is not, you know, at risk of hepatitis B to their mother because you're going to secure that space, but you recognize maybe not necessary to inject this on day one of life. Let this baby start to thrive, get stronger before we get involved with that. I think that makes perfect sense. I think there's a lot of reason to be had here. And I think that that's what we're appealing to. For those of that are you that are probably calling you today, Senator Cassidy, it's not the end of the world to be involved in questioning science, especially science. That as I just pointed out, unless you can show me the trials that showed hepatitis B doesn't cause autism, then what were you pointing to? Confidence, assumptions, a robust expert's opinion, I went to the courtrooms and the CDC had nothing.

This is what I do in the high wire. This is what many of our nonprofits have been up to. And this is why this movement is so supportive of Robert Kennedy Jr. We're supporting him because we do have vaccine injured children. The warning that it happens is written right on the labels of every vaccine that you believe in. We want to do something about that. We want to figure out how to protect them. And we certainly don't want to gaslight them and say in any way that it is not happening at all.

If it's rare, let's make it less rare. Let's try to make it non-existent. But let's not ignore it. Robert Kennedy Jr. is here to revisit the science and make sure that all of it is accurate, that all of it is robust. The proper science is transparent and is actually being done. I believe that that would be the greatest way, as he's pointed out, to restore confidence. because once we see that robust science and can't have guys like me, Del Bigtree showing you that the science doesn't exist at all, that the CDC had nothing, that's going to continue to undermine this vaccine program.

We need to be able to say the CDC has actually done a lot of science, that Robert Kennedy Jr. forced us to do science that we said was being done but wasn't really being done. That's how you get to confidence. That's how we start restoring not only the health of America's children, but also restoring confidence in this great institution, in the greatest nation in the United States of America. We're here because we love this country. We're here because we know how much you care about our lives, our children, and we're asking you to allow Robert Kennedy Jr. To take a look, see what we have. And he said it, if you're right after sitting down with him, as I'd like to do with you, and show him science, then he'll change his mind, even say he was wrong.

So will I. Until then, the entire purpose of the scientific method is to make sure everything is safe. And at the basis of the scientific method is the question. Questioning the hypothesis, revisiting old studies and seeing if they still hold up, can they be repeated? that's what we're involved in here. It's a lot of science that can't be repeated. There's a lot of harm. Our children are the sickest in the world,

and we get more vaccines, we get more plastics, we get more forever chemicals, we get more chemicals in our food than anywhere else in the world. Please allow someone to run HHS that will change that narrative and save our children. Thank you very much. This is the high wire.

We'll see you all next week. This episode is brought to you by I Can Legislate.