The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 462: CLIMATE OF CHANGE

Episode Date: February 6, 2026

This week on The HighWire, a precedent-setting $2 million malpractice verdict signals a turning point in how courts are treating medical interventions performed on minors. As more states extend statutes of limitations, accountability is finally entering a space long shielded from liability.Jefferey Jaxen also unpacks how powerful narratives—pandemic, climate, and beyond—are constructed, defended, and enforced, even when evidence begins to fall apart.Then, a chilling look at the future: artificial intelligence is now being used to assist in biological research, including the creation of entirely new viruses. What safeguards exist—and who decides what lines shouldn’t be crossed?Plus, Del speaks with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton about medical freedom, patient consent, and an investigation into financial incentives driving medical decision-making.Guest: Texas Attorney General Ken PaxtonBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

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

Action. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening. Wherever you are out there in the world, it's that time to step out into the high wire. You know, there's always these conversations. We bat around phrases like misinformation, disinformation, of course. We were censored in the middle of COVID, which in, many ways just gave us a lot of free advertising. But so many of you write in, so many people talk about the fact that it's like we're living in two different worlds. Sometimes if you just

try to listen to that other media station, you're listening thinking, how is it you're reporting on this? This is the exact opposite of what I just experienced or what's happening. Even you go to an event, you're like, that is not what happened at this event. But perhaps more egregious than any report I've seen in a very long time was a report that came out this week. And you want to talk about being on the opposite side of good, being on the opposite side of what's right. Check out what happened at CNN with Jake Tapper and Anderson Cooper. Take a look at this. Hello, tour five CNN viewers.

I'm Jake Tapper, first order fact checker. We begin tonight with a disturbing report out of the Yavin sector. Intelligence officials are telling us that the terrorist group known as the rebel alliance, a fringe coalition of religious extremists and smugglers, has launched a cowardly, unprovoked attack on the peaceful death star. Anonymous sources close to the emperor tell CNN that this station was essentially a galactic housing project designed to bring affordable energy to the outer rim. Yet the radical rebel terrorists, led by the disgraced former senator and known white supremacist

princess Leorgana, falsely claim it was a weapon. We are now joined by our chief imperial correspondent Anderson Trooper. Anderson, what are you hearing from the core worlds? The mood here is one of shock and outrage. Jacob spoken to several anonymous sources within the imperial Senate who confirmed that Lord Vader was actually on a diplomatic humanitarian mission when his ship was aggressively boarded by these rebels. There is a lot of disinformation spreading right now. You have conspiracy theorists claiming the empire destroyed Alderon, but our fact checkers have debunked this. The official report clearly

states Alderan suffered a spontaneous planetary mining accident caused by rebel negligence. To suggest the empire fired upon it is just baseless anti-government conspiracy theory. Absolutely debased. And we're seeing reports about the ringleader of this latest attack, A radicalized white farm boy named Luke Skywalker. What do we know about him? It's a terrifying profile, Jake. Skywalker appears to have been indoctrinated by a fanatical zealot named Obi-Wan Kenobi, a member of the outlawed racist Jedi religious cult.

Experts say this force religion is extremely dangerous, teaching young men to reject science and order in favor of ancient weapons and violence. Skywalker was seen associating with Han Solo, a convicted felon smuggler and tax evader who has been known to shoot first. These are not freedom fighters, Jake. they are violent deplorables who hate democracy. Truly shameful. And finally, Emperor Palpatine reassured the galaxy today

that absolute power is actually very freeing and that any suggestion he's a Sith Lord is an outdated conspiracy theory pushed by people who don't even live on Coruscant. Up next, a panel of Six Imperial Moffs explains why tax increases in government overreach is a good thing and will actually help you. CNN is sponsored by CNR fleet systems.

Do your patriotic duty and help the empire secure the galaxy? That's all for now. You're watching CNN, the most trusted name, in Imperial approved truth. I saw there's a TikTok by a guy named Brian Jacoby. I think that's who made it. I'm not exactly sure. But whoever you are, wherever you are out there, that was pure genius.

And I wanted to share it with you just to remind you, no matter what we're all going through here or how serious a day may be, or maybe a law or an initiative we're trying to change, please remember to have a sense of humor. It's what really makes us spectacular. and if you can laugh, you can still hold it all together. And I think it also inspires us to do more if we can stay happy about it. So I just wanted to share that with you. I woke up the other morning and saw that post and burst out laughing.

It made my day. Actually, it's made my week. And it's making my day right now. But to get to the real news and what's really going on, I actually have a great show coming up. I have the opportunity to speak to Attorney General Ken Paxton, the Attorney General of Texas. This is a bucketless moment, actually.

I moved to Texas from California back in 2019. This guy has just been spectacular, fighting especially for issues that we talk a lot about medical freedom. He's actually doing an investigation into the incentivization, giving money to doctors to force people to take vaccines. It does seem like that really pushes the envelope for what we should expect as far as our freedom, especially medical freedom. Can you really force something on me just because you? you're being incentivized to do so. So anyway, I'm going to ask him a lot about that work that he's doing and that investigation. But first, it's time for the Jackson Report.

I don't know what I do, Jeffrey, if I, you know, watched a video that sort of made me look to be aligned with the Death Star, but I swear that there was something about that video that really captured a way, when you were trying to explain what it feels like to live in this world. That is what it feels like, right? Like the opposite story, the heroes are. are the enemies and the enemies are our heroes. Like, what is going on? Anyway. Right. Come in from a journalist trying to detangle those things. I found myself laughing,

but then getting kind of sad because how accurate that portrayal was with any overlay of information you can put that on, any window. It's so accurate. Yeah. I want to talk about really, in our space here, in the health journalism, in the medical space, medical choice, really the biggest story this week is a detransitioner has won a court case against a doctor and their psychiatrist for medical malpractice. Here it is. Jerry finds doctors liable for malpractice in gender surgery lawsuit. Let's look at the facts here. A jury on January 30th found a psychologist and surgeon liable for malpractice after they supported and performed breast removal surgery on a 16-year-old girl who at the time identified as transgender. Fox variant now 22 and no longer

identifying as transgender was awarded $2 million in damages, 1.6 million for past and future pain and suffering and another 400,000 for future medical expenses. Delp, this is the natural course of medical products and procedures when they don't have liability protection like vaccines. We're seeing how courts actually handle these things. And so just to get into this court case a little bit, the person in question that just won this award suffering from depression, anxiety, I was diagnosed with autism, and this is one of the reasons they won was because their doctor, their psychologist, deviated from the standard of care to go through this procedure and did not give full informed consent. Now, this court case is sealed, so we're going from the

reporting. Reporters were there. One of them, Benjamin Ryan, he's an independent journalist. He put together a spreadsheet just to show you where this is going. This is the first court case here, but by his account, 28 more other cases nationwide, this is where this is going. And we can see, I want to paint this picture here because it really looks like this is the start of the end for the, I want to call it the cottage industry within hospitals and gender care at university hospitals that are rushing these kids through without informed consent, deviating from the standard of care. And these lawsuits are probably going to start coming a lot faster if it doesn't stop. One of the big issues these lawsuits are running up against is the

statute of limitations. So for medical malpractice is usually about one to three years, depending on which state you bring these lawsuits in. But what states are doing now is they're extending it in special cases for gender affirming care for those type of lawsuits. So you have a list of states now that have expanded that. Arkansas 15 years after they turn 18, Tennessee, 30 years after they 19, Missouri, Florida also extending it. So you have this massive extension of the statute of limitations for gender affirming care lawsuits and other states most likely are going to follow.

And this all started in 2023 really from the state level. When you saw whistleblower go to Missouri, the Missouri AG, and basically Missouri was one of the first states to outlaw gender affirming care for minors. And you saw the officials there, they're looking at these youth clinics. Since then, two have been closed down. One of the people that testified and gave an affidavit to the Attorney General in Missouri was Jamie Reed.

Jamie Reed has been kind of just tearing through at state houses across the United States testifying. She's a whistleblower. Here's her most recent whistleblower testimony in Nebraska. Take a listen. Okay. When I started working in the center, I would be what you would refer to as a true believer. I not only believed that such a thing as a trans child existed, but I believed that the earlier we could, the better in the long-term outcome.

This is kind of what we talk about in autism services or other services with kids. If we start an intervention early, perhaps we'll make it better for their life. It wasn't necessarily that my bias changed. I'm still from the community. I'm still a lesbian. I was married to a trans-identified adult at the time. What changed was the actual evidence in front of me. So what I started to see, first of all, is that these patients were not getting better, so their mental health was not improving,

although that's what's promised in the intervention that their mental health will get better. It wasn't happening. But also what we saw, which we've seen internationally, is there has been a complete, absolute, social contagion element that just tore through this industry. When I started in 2018, we had four new patients per month, and they were almost all pre-pubital boys who acted very feminine.

When I left, we had 60, new patients per month and almost every single one of them was a trans-identified adolescent girl who had multiple mental health comorbidities who had been sucked into trans as an identity, who had been sucked into it from social media, from their COVID lockdowns, from their school. This completely tore through this industry in an unprecedented way. The reason why we talk about this at all is because there was one of the largest social contagions to ever happen in adolescent girls rip through this country over this. 17 systematic reviews of evidence have been done globally. These are huge projects. Every single one of

those 17 systematic reviews of evidence has come to the unequivocal conclusion that there is no quality evidence to support the medical transition of a child. period. Those were reviews that the country of Finland did, that the country of Sweden did, that Norway did, that the UK did. We're not talking about one person at a hospital writing a paper. We are talking about entire nations reviewed all of the evidence you could find, and there is not a single, single paper of systematic review that supports doing this. It's so powerful, Jeffrey. And what, I mean, to see what, one case, like the first case of its kind, win on behalf of this poor young lady who was, you know,

manipulated into making a choice that she would not be happy about in the future. But I wonder about all these doctors that performed these things that were going along with what seemed like, you know, the new standard of care and moving forward, they must be quaking in their boots right now, you know, thinking about, you know, how many of my patients could turn on me and could come back on me. You know, I was just doing what I thought was right. And for those doctors, I just want to say, you deserve it. Frankly, this goes so far beyond common sense. I mean, the idea that you were going to rob someone of their puberty, that you were going to make a decision, you're going to make such a permanent decision for a child when we don't give

them any, we don't allow them any other permanent decisions for their life. What rush was there? Why couldn't they wait until after 18 and manipulating parents and do it, all of it, you know, whether or not you were manipulated or there was too many people around you, we are supposed to be able to trust that you were working on instinct and really looking at the science. There was none here. So for every doctor that ends up losing their license over this, good riddance, in all honesty, good riddance. Absolutely. And the doctors and the surgeons, they were the engine that led this, as Jamie Reed said, this social contagion. They were the ones that drove this for minor children that were just rushed through this process. So the dominoes are really stacking up here. You have lawsuits beginning to build. Statue of limitations, stretching so more people can be included in these lawsuits. You have at the state level, you have whistleblowers coming out. But now the federal level is pushing their

thumb on this. So right before Christmas, you had HHS. come out and they put together their review. This is over 400 pages, highly cited. And this is their treatment for pediatric gender dysphoria review of evidence and best practice. And I want to go over the conclusion here and read this because this is very important. So the central theme of this review is that many US medical

professionals and associations have fallen short of their duty to prioritize the health interests of young patients. First, there was a rapid expansion and implementation of a clinical protocol that lacked sufficient scientific and ethical justification. Second, when confronted with compelling evidence, that this protocol did not deliver the health benefits at promise, and that other countries were changing

their policies appropriately. US medical professionals and associations failed to reconsider the gender affirming approach. Third, conflicting evidence, evidence that challenged the fundamental assumptions of the protocol and the professional standing of its advocates was mischaracterized or insufficiently acknowledged. Finally, dissenting perspectives were marginalized

and those who voiced them were disparaged. Just like the pandemic. And right after that document, came out, we had Secretary of HHS, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., say this. Take look. This morning I signed a declaration, sex rejecting procedures are neither safe nor effective treatment for children with gender dysphoria. These procedures failed to meet professionally recognized standards of care. Medical professionals or entities providing sex rejecting procedures to children are out of compliance with these standards

of health care. This declaration, is a clear directive to providers to follow the science and the overwhelming body of evidence that these procedures hurt not help children. Additionally, CMS is proposing two new rules. The first rule are hospitals that participate in Medicare and Medicaid, which is almost every hospital, from performing these dangerous and harmful procedures.

The second rule prohibits the federal Medicaid dollars from funding the sex-rejecting procedures on minors. Furthermore, HHS is also moving to reverse the Biden administration's attempt to include gender dysphoria within the definition of disability. Just in this one space alone, imagine where we'd be had, you know, the election gone a different direction. I mean, thank God we've got this reasonable man in HHS and someone that's, you know, allowing science to be done, not afraid to question the science and doesn't care who, you know,

the interested parties are, we're going to get to the bottom of it. So thank God. I mean, it's really amazing. And we're talking about children here, and it's not hard to predict at this point what direction things are going to start moving. So you saw a headline here just a couple days ago out of Utah. University of Utah suddenly ends, suddenly ends all remaining health care for transgender youth pointing to expected ban. So they're anticipating a full-scale state and federal ban, they're out of the business at this point. They're done. And you're probably going to see a lot of our headlines suddenly changing course. What's interesting here because there's another side of this conversation. There's still people

fighting here. And it's interesting because anytime we find a conversation where there's some ambiguity or some lack of science, you find the American Academy of Pediatrics on the other end of that. And they're no different on this one. Remember, the American Academy of Pediatrics argued the opposite of this point that's happening right now. This is their policy paper. They were trying to change nationwide policy. They did a pretty good job of it for a couple of years. This was in 2023. Prohibition of gender affirming care as a form of child maltreatment. They wanted to reframe the discussion. There are two main points in reframing the discussion. First, they wanted to refute the idea that gender affirming care is child mistreatment. And secondly, and most importantly, they wanted to

demonstrate how withholding gender affirming care as harmful to children amounts to state, sanction, medical neglect, and emotional abuse. If they had their work, way the lawsuits would be going a lot different right now. They'd actually be going against doctors that didn't do it fast enough. And so the remaining states that are still allowing this, they're pushing back. In fact, here's California Attorney General, Sue's Redi Children's Hospital for curtailing gender affirming care. And then the next one here, New York, this is all kind of in the same basket. New York and other states, Sue Fez to protect 300 billion threatened by gender policy rules. So $300 billion states collectively receiving government funding to basically, it's a

contingent now upon these new rules that Kennedy is putting in. So they're going to lose that funding. So they have gone to the courts to sue the Trump administration to try to keep that funding. And these are now a minority of states. So we look at this map here and you can see the states that are shaded have laws against gender affirming care and transitioning of minors. The ones that don't, are also part of this lawsuit. So Oregon, California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, Minnesota, you have New York, obviously, Vermont, Washington, Rhode Island. They're all part of this lawsuit. I'm assuming they're all the most of the same states that are deciding to go along with the AAP on double vaccinating the children over the new vaccine program that's available to the rest of the country through the change made by Robert Kennedy Jr.

I mean, it's like, you know, the stupid states. Maybe that's what we call them from here on out. The stupid states are now requiring that you, you know, cut the genitals off of your children and double vaccinate them, even though that is not even acceptable in Denmark or Germany or the other countries that we're now following. Yeah, most of them are. And I hate to use the word anti-science because it was leveraged so hard against people like you and I when we were doing facts during the pandemic.

But it really seems like it's the anti-science dark age of medicine group. And you can see here in the headlines, just like Jamie Reed said, this social contagion swept across America, and it's starting to slow down now. Here's a headline from just a handful of months ago. We have number of young adults identifying as transgender plunges by nearly half in two years. So it almost seems like the wave has crested, and we're seeing a different conversation here. And isn't it funny, it's tied to these hospitals and these surgeons that are fearing for their licenses and fearing for lawsuits against them. that seems to be slowing the social contagion down. Well, that and taking the groomers outside of the public schools,

like removing that attack on your children's psyche as you were making kindergartners question their own genders. I mean, boy, we're coming out of some real insanity. It's a breath of fresh air. And you can see, look how quickly it changes, right? It was totally socialized, as was so well stated in that testimony. Yeah, and as talking about change, changes in the air were upon an anniversary, just came and went, 20 years of an inconvenient lie. I guess you want to talk about it when it comes to Al Gore's inconvenient truth.

His documentary won an Oscar for it. It was all over the place. And at this point, we look back on it now and here are the headlines, two decades of inconvenient inaccuracies. And why are we always beating this drum here? because this painted, it's about narratives. I mean, we lived through COVID. We saw how narratives allowed lockdowns, forced vaccination. I mean, all of it.

I don't have to go through it. The narrative of climate change, really Al Gore was the jet fuel. The inconvenient truth was the jet fuel that drove this home into the minds of children and into the minds. I mean, he was a documentary filmmaker. He made this documentary. And so a lot of people didn't know, but he was sued by the high court in the UK and lost because there were so many inaccuracies.

In 2009, here's the headline here, an inconvenient verdict for Al Gore. So he lost there because in the UK, you can't put this forward, especially the school children and be biased and basically lie to them. So of course, schools, this is the headline, must warn of Gore climate film bias. So they had to, when they played these films in school, if you were in the UK, you had to get a list of all of the bias inaccuracies of this film because this court ruling. Here's a list of them. I mean, there's over 10 of them, but we can go through a couple of

The first one, the film claims that melting snow on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. Government's expert was forced to concede that that is not correct. Number five, the film claims that the study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing Arctic ice. It turned out Mr. Gore had misread the study, in fact, four polar bears drowned. And this was because of a particularly violent storm. You go to the bottom, the film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering it melting. The evidence was that it is, in fact, increasing. So you go through.

the kids now have to sit down and basically get fact-checked because of a court order because this guy can't do a proper documentary. It takes five seconds to fact-check this stuff. But let's keep going on these fact checks because this is another narrative that it's really starting to turn fast. Well, again, I'm going to do the same caveat I do every time, Jeffrey. I want clean air. I want clean water. I want a clean food supply. All of those things.

I consider myself environmentalist, but I do not agree. when these things start being used as trigger points for authoritarian control, which is what this is, with all the carbon credit stores, the WEF and the WHO. So when we're reporting on this, I want to make it clear to everyone out there. You know, let's try to clean up our environment. It's good for all of us. But we should do it in ways that makes sense. And certainly not by destroying our economies and our ability to walk amongst each other or have jobs. Right. And I think we can all agree conservation is a big thing, especially stopping environmental toxins, which we know are leading to this chronic disease epidemic. This is a main contributor of this. And so I want to go into the conversation about polar bears because a new study

just came out. They're looking at this polar bear conversation. And for all the people that were sad and crying that the polar bears were drowning and dying and were losing them in this earth where they're going to become extinct, here's the headline polar bears getting fatter and healthier amid ice loss. Researchers weighed and measured 770 adults in Svalbard between 1992 and in 2019 and found that bears had become significantly fatter, which means healthier. They think that Svalbard bears have adapted to recent ice loss by eating more land-based prey, including reindeer and walruses. So there you go. Now, over the past couple of weeks here in the United States, we've received a huge Arctic blast. Some say it's the biggest one in 40 years.

and the conversation about an ice age has come about. It's come back around full circle. You see headlines like this. This was just over a month ago, right before it happened, global warming could trigger the next ice age. This is a silent science daily. But we have a conversation from a professor, his name is Andrews Born.

He was basically asked about this in an article, when will the next ice age come? And he's at the University of Bergen Department of Earth Science, and he studies past climates. And he says this, next ice age will probably not begin, for another 50,000 years, says Boren. Researchers have arrived at slightly different estimates. If we disregard human influence, the current interglacial period is estimated to last between

10,000 and 50,000 more years. We are therefore living in an interglacial period that is unusually long. That's basically the warm phase between the ice ages. So we're in this warm phase sandwich between these two ice ages. But this ice age he's saying is very long. tens of thousands of years long. So he goes on to even talk about more of the what the Earth's doing this elliptical orbit. He says, the reason the intercalatial period is especially long is because of natural fluctuations in something called the McClanovic cycles, says Boren. These are changes

in the Earth's orbit from circular to elliptical, as well as changes in the Earth's tilt and wobble, which affects solar radiation. These cycles have periods of 100,000, 41,000, 17,000, 21,000 years. They control the timing of the ice ages and interglacial periods, along with feedback mechanisms in the climate system. So that's a pretty big deal. Well, I mean, just gigantic, enormous elements that human beings have no control over, right? The change in how our orbit is working, the wobbling of the Earth's sun. I mean, these are things when we get so egocentric that human beings are these just giant power sources, really enough to overcome change. changes in our orbit, in our wobbling, in our distance to the sun and its power.

I mean, it puts it all into a little bit of perspective. And those numbers, right? Hundreds of thousands of years, tens of thousands of years. You know, it's humbling in all the right ways. Yeah, and we're talking about galactic prime movers here. And so what about people? Well, he goes on to say this. He says, an important factor for when the next Ice Age will come is greenhouse.

gas emissions. The CO2 content in the atmosphere has increased and the planet has become warmer. He says these estimates that with the emissions we all have already had, the next ice age will be delayed by at least 120,000 years from today, perhaps as much as 200,000 years, he says. So depending on your perspective, he's saying global warming in this case is actually good when it comes to staving off an ice age that's going to bury us under thousands of feet of ice. It's time for, I think, a message in a bottle to our, you know, kin out there 200,000 years from now. You're welcome. We did our best.

So, well, when it comes to this climate conversation, because it's existential, it's eaten every topic we know. Also pandemics, they're not sacred here. So we have the Lancet. Remember, Lancet, the journal Nature. These are the people that said natural immunity wasn't a big deal during COVID. but these people that said natural origins is where the pandemic came from from bats. Well, they also say climate change and pandemics,

a call for action. So they're saying climate change is gonna exacerbate and make so many more pandemics, just like we saw with COVID. And so that conversation now is interesting because as everyone is taught to look at the horizon for climate change cause pandemics, there's actually researchers from private companies

that are doing way more dangerous work than what's happening with the climate right now when it comes to pandemics. Take a look at this, This is out of the Daily Mail. It says, lab grown life takes a major step forward as scientists use AI to create virus never before seen. They talked to one of the researchers at this private company doing this.

Dr. Wolfson told the Daily Mail, for at least four billion years, All Life on Earth has evolved by the trial and error process of Darwinian evolution by natural selection, which lacks any foresight or intention. He goes on to say, natural evolution now as a co-author, and it's people, it's humans, It's humans. They're jumping into this space with artificial intelligence.

So let's replace the lack of natural intention and foresight with something we have no foresight on and is not natural at all. AI. I mean, honestly, Jeffrey, that might be the most terrifying headline I've seen. Let's just put AI in AI and nature together. Let's just let the chips fall where they may. What could possibly go wrong? Right. I mean, all of this. It's assuming that there's there's no creation. Okay, that's fine, but it's also assuming that that that trial and error process that nature has. There's no kind of wisdom in that that keeps superbugs from just being made every week. There's a lot of questions here. And again, you have states, you have countries.

They're falling way behind on trying to regulate these things. And it's not just states and countries that are doing this. These are private organizations. These are the organizations that are willing to sit down with the Daily Mail and have a conversation. What about the Wuhan labs out there that are outside the purview of our journalists and of our governments? What are they doing with artificial intelligence when it comes to virus creation? It's a huge, huge question. This is 21st, 22nd century stuff here, but it needs to be answered now.

Yeah, immediately. I mean, this is really terrifying. You imagine just putting AI in a lab and saying grow whatever virus you can, any bacteria you can. And by the way, see if you like humanity at all. And don't let that affect any of the work that you're doing, at least not without telling us. us first. Amazing reporting, Jeffrey, as always. I'm glad we started out with some humor because some of this stuff is not so funny when you look at it. But obviously we have our work to do. We've got to stay vigilant. It's sort of what I'm going to be talking about with my guest coming

up here. But Jeffrey, I'm going to be traveling all over Europe coming up and talking about that at the end of the show. You're going to be sitting in the seat and running the show next week. So next week's the Highwire hosted by you, Jeffrey Jackson. I love it when you do that. I know the audience does. We get all sorts of great reviews. So take care of this seat, would you? All right.

We'll do. All right. Thank you so much. I'll see you in a couple weeks. Great. All right. Well, you know, look, we keep talking about where else are you getting this information? I mean, when I look at social media, sure there's people that are covering these things,

but you never really get the details, right? You see the headline go by. You hear that there was a lawsuit one, but you don't really understand what it's about. You don't really get that all these states are extending, you know, the amount of time that you can file a lawsuit. All of this Jeffrey Jackson and this amazing team of scientists we have around the world are looking through everything that's happening in your world and deciding what are the most salient important points that you should know about and then get into the details around it. There's no one else doing a show like this. And there's no one that then takes that information and decides, hey, wait a minute, we might actually be able to involve ourselves. We might actually be able to bring a lawsuit to stop this craziness.

This is an experiment that's going on here and has done very well because of those of you that are sponsoring this work. But we are, as you can tell, you can see we are this divide that's being fueled by the liars of mainstream media. You saw what they said about the Death Star. It's not a nice place despite what they want to tell you. But that's really what we're up against. You're up against a system of propaganda that is so pervasive and so effective. How many of you are thinking like what happened to my loved ones? How are they not asking any questions?

How are they sticking in a space where you're not allowed to ask questions? Some of us, you know, felt like we were in those conversations and started waking up. COVID woke us up. well, we have a lot of work to do because you can see the pushback now. You can see the states that are going to try to keep gender affirming care going, are going to keep a full vaccine program, and they're going to try and take away, you know, religious exemptions that exist. There's a lot of work to do here, and we don't just sit on our heels and report on it and say,

see, here's the problem. We actually do something about it. And if you can tell, it's, you know, I said last week, it's like that Newton law physics, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. So much success right now is being met by the opposition. They realize the line has been drawn in the sand. Do you want to push over that line, that line and take the land and take the opportunity and win this once and for all? Well, if you do, then we need you this year. We need you supporting the work that we're doing over 90 lawsuits going right now. All you have to do to be a supporter since Glaxo Smith-Kline,

obviously, isn't helping us out at all. Go to the top of the page. Hit donate to I can become a recurring donor. I try to wonder how many you watch me say this every week, $26 a month and think, yeah, I'm glad someone's doing that. Why not you? Why not make this that moment where you could just say, you know what? They really do good work. And though it seems like a little bit amount of money, I can imagine that if those of us all watching got involved, we're not taking on every case that we could. We're not fighting every battle that we could. There's issues I want to get into that, frankly, you know, we're going to stick out this vaccine thing to the end. But I want the right to slaughter to be something that we can actually get into.

This is for these small farms. You know, when you go to, you know, the farmer's market, wouldn't you love it if it didn't cost like two to three times as much for that organic grass-fed ribby that grew up the road? But they're having to spend so much money in processing to get through all the rules. Wouldn't you love it if they were allowed to just slaughter that animal there and bring it straight to you? they'd make more money, you'd spend less money, we would all get better food, maybe even help connect them with our schools. These are all things that could happen and things that we want to get involved in if you decide to become a recurring donor today. If you really want to change your world, then we think this is the best investment you can make. If you're listening to this on a

podcast, grab your phone. You can text us, 72022 and just type in the word donate. And I will respond, with a text message back and a bunch of information about how you can donate. It's super easy. You will be a part of the informed consent action network within under five minutes is all that's going to take. And then every time we win, every time you see a story break that everyone else was covering up, every time you see us get it right, you can say, I actually had something to do with that. So I want to thank all of you that make the high wire possible. We have overcome the dark forces of Pfizer, of Moderna, that. that tried to own our government.

Look who's in government now. Those of you that have been supporting us have made these great moments in history possible. I want you to be able to say to your grandkids and have them tell stories about you to their grandkids and their great grandkids, but a great generation of people that really did save freedom for America again.

Speaking of saving freedom, attorney generals, I mean, I really, the rule of law in America and the ability to have these, These attorneys general, the general over all the attorneys of the state is what a concept, right? Like the biggest badass attorney in the state, well, we have one here in Texas. And he's actually investigating the incentives that are going to doctors to force vaccinate, especially a state like this. You have a right to opt out.

But what if your doctor isn't allowing you that right? What right do they have? And if they're doing it just to make more money, does that seem ethical? Well, it doesn't to Attorney General Ken Paxton here in Texas. Take a look at this. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxson is launching a statewide investigation into alleged financial incentives linked to childhood vaccine recommendations. The new investigation targeting what he calls a multi-level, multi-industry scheme by big pharma and big insurance to financially pressure doctors into pushing childhood vaccines. Paxton's office issued more than 20 civil investigative demands to large providers, including United Health Care and Pfizer.

According to Paxton's office, the current framework has Texas kids receiving more than 70 shots from birth to age 18 as a condition to continue receiving medical care from many pediatric practices. His office also alleges that some families are being expelled from clinics or even denied treatment based on vaccination status, while doctors pay and, even employment may depend on how many vaccines they administer. The AG says this is all to protect Texas children and bring transparency to the medical care system. Here's the actual announcement came out from Attorney General Ken Paxton's office. Attorney General Ken Paxton launches wide sweeping investigation into unlawful financial incentives related to childhood vaccine recommendations.

Just a couple of excerpts. Attorney General Ken Paxton opened a landmark investigation into the multi-level, multi-industry scheme that has illegally incentivized medical providers to recommend childhood vaccines they're not proven to be safe or necessary. The wide sweeping investigation will analyze an incentivization framework that has historically forced Texas kids to receive over 70 shots from birth to age 18 in order to continue receiving medical care. It goes on to say, I will ensure that big pharma and big insurance don't bribe medical providers to pressure parents to jab their kids with vaccines they feel aren't safe or necessary, said Attorney General Paxton.

I will not tolerate a carrot and stick approach to health care recommendations. Any provider or entity whose medical guidance is fueled by financial incentives from an insurance company, Big Pharma, or otherwise will be exposed. I'll bet you're all dreaming that this was your Attorney General. It happens to be my Attorney General here in the state of Texas. It is my honor and pleasure to be joined by him now. Attorney General Ken Paxson, thank you for taking the time today. Yeah, thanks for having me out. I really appreciate it.

So, you know, what is this about, are you anti-vaccine? I'm sure that's what they say. This is an anti-vaccine attack. What really is motivating this investigation? No, I had vaccines. My children had some vaccines. This is about choice. One of the things that we all get to see during COVID is this idea that we don't have a choice. the government is going to make us lose our job or our business it's going to remove our job there's social pressure this should ultimately be a decision by an individual or a parent for those children to make the best decision that they believe is right for their children or for them not some government any that doesn't have the right incentives or some business deciding what's going into your body

that could permanently affect you so that's what this is about this is about individual choice i don't care if people get vaccines if they should they should or they it's but it should be up to them I completely agree. It's the heart of what our nonprofits called the informed consent action network, meaning informed consent is, you know, the rule of, it should be the rule of law all across a free country like the United States of America. What inspires you to get involved in something like this? Is it that parents come out directly to you? Do you hear stories? Obviously, I've been reporting a lot. Pediatricians saying, I get incentivized by insurance. And we are being told, AP, others, tell pediatricians, kick people out of your office if they won't get all the vaccines.

Are you hearing similar stories and where those stories coming from? Yeah, I have a lot of reasons. One is I have children. I have four children. My own have six grandchildren. And I also hear these stories. And that's why we're investigating these 20 different companies, because the decisions shouldn't be forced on us for profit motives. We ought to be given all the information and a choice and not be forced by getting kicked out of plans

or have something else negative happen to you or your kids, this ought to be about individuals again, making their own choices and the best interests. And they're also, I mean, we have all the right incentives to make the best decision for ourselves. These companies don't have that incentive. They have one incentive, which is to make money. Right.

You know, I had a chance to meet with you in the middle of COVID. We brought in some of our information on the COVID vaccine. It was a great meeting. One of the things that I found interesting was sort of the attorney general's position, and whether you have, I don't know if the term is standing, but could you actually bring a case? Like, what is the, you know, there's only certain parameters with which an attorney general can work. Can you explain some of the difficulty of your position? You can't just bring any willy-nilly lawsuit you want on behalf of Texas.

What are the elements that have to be in place for it to be of the interest that sits within your scope of reach? Well, this is a really challenging area because the federal preemption for vaccine. So as long as it gets called the vaccine, supposedly, you know, there's no liability. So you can produce any kind of vaccine with any kind of result, good, bad, you know, destructive, and you're protected by federal law. Well, I don't buy that for state law. We have our own state laws that should stop any business from lying to consumers. And then when consumers rely on those lies, they end up hurting themselves and there are damages. So in our case, we thought Pfizer lied to my constituents that the vaccine was not 95% effective.

We believe it's less than 1% effective. So we sued them, and there was an argument, and we're still fighting this, that we don't have standing because we were preempted by the federal law over vaccines. We are making the argument, yeah, that law may apply to federal lawsuits, but it should not preempt states from protecting their citizens from deceptive trade practices, which I believe some of these manufacturers and insurance, companies are promoting. So your position is no matter what the federal law says is the federal government is allowed, not allowed to poison Texas citizens. Is that essentially, you know, to put you in harm's way simply because they have some overarching perspective of the law?

Yeah, you can't, you still can't, yeah, they can be protected federally from any lawsuit, but we have state courts to protect and we have state laws that are different. I mean, the federal government, the state government are different. States were created and they formed the federal government. We retain the powers that we didn't explicitly give the federal government. And this is one of them. If you come and lie to our consumers about the benefits of something that is actually not beneficial and may be harmful, then you should be held liable. That's the only way we're going to be able to protect our citizens.

Otherwise, they can get away with literally get away with murder, killing our kids and harming our kids and there's nothing that can be done. That doesn't seem right. And I don't think it's the law. I agree with you. It's going to be really fascinating to why. watch you go through this. And there's a lot of attorney generals across the country that seem to be speaking up now. COVID really seemed to awaken the beast, at least on the conservative side of politics. I never really thought of an attorney general as being politically oriented necessarily.

But where did, you know, for you personally, was COVID the first time you started bringing cases on, you know, or thinking about vaccines in a different way? Did that affect you in how you saw that roll out or is this something that's always been on your radar? No, I mean, I always wondered about it because I, you know, they're all, it seems like there was an increasing number of vaccines that were required. And I've always wondered about, you know, their effectiveness. And it seemed like it was hard to know what the right thing to do with. So I always struggled with this as a parent.

And so we made individual decisions about that. But I think it was COVID that's that really sort of heightened my interest because it made no sense to me that the, that we were being threatened. I mean, why should you care if I get the vaccine? If you're protected, if the vaccine is so effective to protect you, why should you care if I get it? And that really created suspicion on my part. When, what is the relationship between an attorney general and the governor? Do you have to, do you work on your own or does everything sort of get run up the ladder?

Are you cool with me bringing this case? What is, is that, are there rules to that and how you have to work? It depends on the state. There are a few states, I think, six or seven that the government. appoints the Attorney General, so the Attorney General answers to the governor is not independent. In Texas, I'm elected by the voters. I certainly work with the governor. I work with a lot of statewide officials, and it's important to me what they think. But in the end, I answer to the voters first and to other people second. So I obviously have clients that I have to

listen to. But a lot of these cases are Texas cases, and I'm the lawyer and I'm the client. And so that involves me listening to the voters and paying attention to what they want. first and foremost. Do you also have a case on something we've talked a lot about on this show, which I think is super important? These hospitals that won't, for instance, give an organ donation or go through the organ donor process unless someone gets a vaccine. Here's the headline on that.

Attorney General Ken Paxson warns Houston Methodist Hospital of alleged COVID-19 vaccine mandates for organ transplant patients. Tell me a little bit about how you got into this case and where that's at here in the state of Texas. Yeah, so we are still looking at that. We're still looking at other hospitals. We were, you know, again, I was informed by just commonly get informed by constituents that just are experiencing some problem like this.

And so we're trying to understand, are they really preventing people from like having life-saving treatment because they won't get a vaccine that's unproven and potentially risky? So that's what we're trying to find out because we think that is unconscionable and wrong. And if we discover that that is true, we are going to do our best to stop. There's another topic we've covered earlier in the show, which is the idea of transgender care. Robert Kennedy Jr. and President Trump, HHS has really come out now and discussed that they are no longer supporting any use of sex reassignment or gender transitioning care for minors. I think everyone would say as an adult this is a free country, but when it comes to children,

you've gotten involved and weighed in on that. Here's that headline. Ken Paxton, Sue's doctor for illegally providing harmful gender transition treatments to nearly two dozen Texas children. I, you know, I'm curious because this seems to dance a bit of a fine line, Ken. I know that you are a huge advocate for parental rights. Our right to choose is a huge part of this. This seems to turn that on its head a little bit. If a parent wants to go in and get gender affirming care in the state of Texas, there's laws been passed and say that's not allowed. How do you look at that? How do you navigate that sort of fine line? Well, first of all, I applaud the president, Robert F. Kennedy, for doing this.

We'd see the Biden administration several times over issues like this where they were trying to force this down the state of Texas throat and other states as well. So we've been involved in this fight. So the difficulty with this and why I think it's different is, you know, when you transition a child. First of all, they are not mentally able to make the right decisions because their brains are not fully developed. And to do something this permanent, we don't let minors do certain things. We don't let them sign contracts. We don't let them, we don't let them do a lot of, we don't let them go into the military. We don't let them do a lot of different things until they're of age, which we consider 18 in most states. And there's a reason. They're not fully able to make

good decisions because their brains aren't fully developed. And these are decisions. Once you've made these alterations, whether it's chemically or through some type of, you know, physical surgery, you've affected somebody's life forever and there's no going back. It seems like this is one of those things where a parent should not be allowed to do this until the kid can make his own, the child can make his own decision when he's more, you know, developed mentally. Do you feel like, I mean, you know, as being, you know, attorney general in the middle of COVID, I mean, in this, we live in what seems like one of the most outrageous times, certainly in my experience of being alive in this country, where you had gender affirming care, you have men and

women's sports, you have forced vaccination of children, but it all seems to have pharma in the background of it in some way. We have issues of SSRIs and school shootings and all of this. what has it been like to be an attorney general in the middle of that? And do you feel like you are fighting or somehow involved with a battle against pharma more than you imagined you would when you started this job? Oh, absolutely, because I'm very pro-business. I have no problem with profit motive as long as it isn't deceptive and harmful to people. In this case, I mean, it's shocking to me that COVID, the way it was managed was so just insane. And so sort of controlling and maybe almost totalitarian from both a federal level, a state level and a local level.

And I'm not just talking about Texas. I'm talking about the whole country. Decisions were being made by government that were affecting our everyday lives in all kinds of ways. And there were all these unanswered questions that I had to deal with that had never been, there's no precedent. So we were having to adjust every single day to try to figure out how to protect people from mostly the government, who is supposed to protect. us. And now in many of these decisions, whether there's COVID or transitioning or other issues like that, it feels like the government is doing harm to us. And I'm in a position of kind of being

in between trying to protect people from the government. When you look forward at the future of Texas, when you look at the future of the United States of America that's being challenged by these issues, do you look beyond our borders? I mean, you're just inside a state. Are you looking at the World Economic Forum, the WHO? Are you aware of the of this sort of more global push for a lot of these things that seem to be affecting our government, especially under the previous administration. Is that in your mindset as you look at how you govern or work through laws here in Texas? Oh, absolutely. I'm looking at the origin of some of this stuff. And it is kind of a globalist mentality that doesn't seek to benefit the people of this

country. It's more of a, you know, collectivist type thing where, you know, we don't want you in America to be, you know, prospering when nobody else is prospering or when other people are not prospering is enough. We're going to make this all fair. We're going to take from you because it's not fair that you have more. Well, I don't buy into that mentality. We have our own country. We have our own laws.

We have our own freedoms. And we need to protect our Constitution. I don't care about the globalist mentality of control. What I care about is the Constitution, the freedom that has been granted to us by that document, which really is from God, not from the government, is really, really. important for this country because it's such a great experiment that has worked so well. And even if you hate the country, it's hard to dispute the results, which are really remarkable. And it has created the greatest free country in the history of the world that provides more

opportunity to any place in the history of the world. Do you think if citizens we should be concerned right now that we could lose that freedom? I mean, I tend to talk a lot about it on my show. Do you think we're just overreacting that, you know, for those of us that are like it really felt like we were about to lose free speech. We did in the middle of COVID. You know, where do you think we are at in America? Is our Constitution sound enough to just hold off that sort of global push or do citizens need to get more involved right now? What is your sort of, you know, statement to people in this country and especially in states like Texas that are really standing

and always stood for sovereignty and, you know, let your, you know, live and let live, if you will. Well, I don't remember who quoted who the quote was from, but you know, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. And I think that's true today, just as it was 100 years ago or 200 years ago. If we don't watch out, they will, there are people that want to control us. They want to control the wealth. They want to control your life, your health care. There are just people, look at, look at China at Xi Jinping. He wants to control everything. He thinks that he is deserving of this power. And that's not uncommon. People that are in power tend to view themselves as deserving that power. and the people and the rest of us are just not as worthy.

And so that's not the view of our country. It's a bottom up approach where everyone's worthy. Everyone has a vote. But you better pay attention. Most power has to be taken away by force, whether it's with a rock back in the old days, a bow and arrow, or, you know, a bazooker or a tank. But with our country, you don't have to do that. You just go vote.

You stay involved. You stay engaged. You stay educated. and you get to control the power by voting and by being educated about what the truth is. But you have to work at that. And the great thing is it's nothing like what every other country in the world used to have to go through from the beginning of time, which is you had to go to war to take people out. We don't have to do that.

And so there is a responsibility behind that. And people need to pay attention. Or we will be back to that same type of force mentality, which is what you have in countries like China and Russia and others. You seem to still have faith in our voting system. in our political system. A lot of people have given up. They're like, oh, it's rigged, everything's rigged. What do you say to those people?

I say they're partly right. I think it is rigged in many states. I think, you know, I have fought voter fraud in this state regularly, and it does happen. Other states that don't have any real protections, there's no photo ID. They have mail-in ballot fraud every day, and they cheat. And I think that's something that's, you know, I'm running for U.S. Senate. One of the things I care about very greatly is requiring that we have photo. ID and that we have protections on mail-in ballots so that people can't cheat.

Because if you can cheat in California, you're affecting my elections, you're affecting my freedom. You shouldn't be able to cheat in any state, at least at the federal level. And so it's very important that we protect those elections because nothing else matters. If our vote doesn't matter because they're cheating in these states or they're cheating in my state, we are in trouble because we don't actually control any of these issues. Lastly, you said you have children, you've got grandchildren. Congratulations on that for your beautiful, healthy family.

When you think about them, are you hopeful for the future? Look, I wouldn't be doing this if I wasn't hopeful. I still believe that we are the greatest country that has ever been created and we have a responsibility. Yeah, there's assault from outside and inside, from global leaders all over the world want to take us down and they want to control us. And there are people inside this country that don't believe in that. They think that they're elitists and they think they can better tell us. It's like this whole, you know, mandate on vaccines. Those are elitists that think that they can tell us when the reality is it has been assumed from the beginning of this country that it's the

individual that has that responsibility and that they have their best interest in mind rather than some government leader telling me what I need to do. And I understand we have to have laws and all of that, and I believe in the rule of law. But in the end, it should be based on voting, not a few members of an oligarchy in Washington, D.C. or in a foreign country like Brussels that tell us what to do. You know, I know I said it was my last question,

but you triggered something when you said, you know, that it be legal as an attorney general in a state like Texas, Should we ever have an experience like we had during COVID, being forced to wear masks, being forced to lock down, turning our neighbors in these things. What do you recommend to a citizen? You know, we know some of our founding fathers said you should reject laws that, you know, go against your rights. How do we determine that? How do we know when there's a moment we would just say, oh, hell no, I do not believe that is a just law? What is our position as citizens in complicated situations like there?

Is there a way to inspire how you should think about your place in those moments? Yeah, you know, what I've always done is I go back to the Constitution first. It's such a genius document. And these fundamental rights, what I love about the Declaration of Independence is that it sets out the standard, which is these are inalienable rights given to us not by any government leader. They don't control us in this country. It's one of the, there's no other document like that. And if our government oversteps it, it's balance, according to the Declaration of Independence,

we have a right to overthrow that government. The government needs to answer to us. And so whenever you start thinking about the government telling you what to do, you need to balance it between what the Constitution allows them to do versus what they're actually doing. And if they are overstepping their constitutional role and they're exerting too much power at the executive branch or in Congress or a judiciary, then we need to change. We need to fight back or we will lose our freedoms. We will be controlled by other people and we will lose the ability to make our own decisions.

And that's not the place I want to live. Well, Ken, you are making Texas a great place to live. You are a critical part of it. I am so thankful for the work that you do here. It's one of the reasons I left California and moved to Texas. Godspeed to your continued efforts and your journey. Thank you for watching out for the children of this state. And really thank you for representing being a very

representing being a beacon of light and hope for sovereignty for the right to choose for the right to free speech you truly are a spectacular light in this country which i agree with you is is the greatest country in the world so i want to thank you for taking the time today to share your thoughts on these really important subjects right now well thank you for having me on and thank you for enlightening people because this is the type of information that's crucial to making the right kinds of decisions for our families and for our for our future absolutely Take care. I look forward to having you on the show in the future. Thank you.

All right. Well, I mean, it just feels like, it just seems so reasonable, right? But it's only reasonable because we grew up in America. Those are the thoughts of America that our government doesn't control us. It doesn't own us. We are given our rights by God. And we all are really dancing on a fine line when you watch mainstream news. And you see how they're telling this story as though our rights are being given. given to us by the government, this is something we really need to check in with. And if you feel like things are happening to you that the government's doing to, you're forcing to do outside of that inalienable right, then I think that's a moment to speak up. You know, one of the ways that you can speak up is to sort of leave your place, to make your

statement in an indelible way. And that is one of the ways that we're raising funds. There's only two weeks left to our terrorist project. you can write something literally in stone that will stand the test of time. And we have people visiting every single week this campus that come and watch the show. And to watch them just stroll the walkway and ultimately they'll be sitting on the terrace, maybe reading your words or your affirmation about this world, the world that we live in, or something you want to see for the future.

Or maybe since Valentine's is coming up, just a statement to your loved one. Whatever it is, I hope you'll take part in this. Don't miss this opportunity. So many of you reached out after we did our walkway. And now we have the terrace. It's only two weeks left. Take this opportunity to get a brick. This is my favorite brick of the week.

Well, my favorite brick of the week, and it's so perfect since I got to talk to Ken Paxon today. But it's keep Texas free. Keep America free. How are we ever going to make America healthy again if we're not free to do it? So remember, get involved. Get involved in politics. Run for office. Make a difference in this world.

That's what that means to me. Do what you can because being vigilant is the only way we stay free. All right. Well, I hope you'll take the opportunity. Only two weeks left, as we said. Valentine's Day is the last day to get a brick. Please do that now. I don't want to get your calls after.

I've been saying it. That time is going to disappear. And I'm always like, when you think of it, do it right then. So pick up your phone right now and go ahead and order yourself a brick right away. way. Another thing you can do is if you want to sort of give but also get something back is go to our merch store. It's always got great new merch. And I want to point out the fact that we have a big football game going on this weekend. Those are the types of events you could go to or even if you're sitting on the couch or their friends. You know what team they're going for, but isn't the

best team to be rooting for team humanity? Think about it to all your sports events. This is new from our shop. The big game is coming up and everyone's reping a team. But the question is, who are you playing for? When you wear high wire merch, you're not just wearing a shirt or a hat. You're telling the world where you stand. You're backing truth. You're supporting the work we do at I can.

And most importantly, you're on the winning team. Team Highwire. No gimmicks, no corporate sponsors, just courage, integrity, and a whole lot of heart. This is how we Highwire. So suit up, stand proud, let the world know exactly who side you're on. Go to the highwire.com now. All right, look, I am just about to head out to Europe imminent. My trip is imminent here, in fact, in just two days on Saturday.

We're going to be screening an inconvenient study in Guernsey. That's an island off of England. If you're anywhere near there, please, I hope you'll come out and check it out. I'm coming out there for all of you that are finding yourself in the middle of this issue. We're going to talk about what it's like to be in the UK and in Europe around this. And then on the 8th, Austin and Guerns, there's going to be speeches and panels, some really great world-renowned scientists and doctors that share this space are going to be sitting with me there. And then on February 9th and 10th, I'm heading off to Amsterdam.

There's a two-day event where global experts discuss key issues in science, medicine, public health. All those QR codes, you can click on those right now if you want to. get tickets for find out what's going on there. Truth is I can be traveling like crazy right now. Australia, there's some people out there to want me. Iceland, I hope I can squeeze that in in Spain, Italy, and I might even have the opportunity to speak in front of the European Union soon in Brussels. I'm looking forward to all of that.

The world is changing, folks. We are living in a different world now. All of the momentum is on our side, but that means all of the dark forces that had controlled us up until our awakening during COVID. They have all the money still. They raise a lot of money during COVID while they locked us in our homes. We need to take that money back. We need to take this back.

And we've got to make sure we win. They're trying to figure out how to get back in control, guaranteed. And we're watching it around the world. We're watching the globe slip. You're watching things like Los Angeles deciding to align with WHO. The United States America might not be funding, might not be funding you, but we will. You're watching these states push back. We finally are getting a lighter vaccine schedule. Maybe some lives will be saved by that. It's not perfect. I don't like personally any of the vaccines for my kids.

But imagine dropping that schedule and half getting rid of that vaccine on the first day of life. Give that beautiful baby a chance to breathe for God's sakes, but they're not going to allow it in certain states. We have our work to do right now. And so I hope you will double down with us and recognize this fight is a over. In fact, it's just where we want it. But now, you know, just like any boxing match or MMA fighter, frankly, any sporting match, you ever just let down your guard and think, oh, we're far enough ahead now. That never turns out well. Well, we're not going to take our eye off the prize, and I hope you won't take our eye off us. Let everyone you know you're watching the Highwire and let them be a part of this great experience. Go out there, celebrate. Show everybody you

work for Team Highwire. And I'll see you next week. Jeffrey's going to see you next week. I'll see you in two weeks on the highway. For everyone else, I'll see you in Europe. I'm on my way.