The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 469: ACIP UPHEAVAL, AI DISRUPTION, AND MASTERING YOUR MIND

Episode Date: March 26, 2026

First, Dr. Robert Malone breaking down the growing ACIP controversy and the legal and political fallout surrounding the CDC vaccine advisory committee. As a judge sides with the American Academy of Pediatrics against the new vaccine schedule tied to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and suspends appointments to Kennedy’s newly selected committee members, Del and Dr. Malone examines what this means for vaccine policy, public trust, and the future of medical freedom.While an activist court is attempting to reverse RFK Jr’s progress at HHS, ICAN’s lead attorney Aaron Siri took center stage in the heart of D.C., with an evening presentation and discussion with Senator Ron Johnson at the Kennedy Center. He presented a damning case against the entire vaccine paradigm before an influential audience including federal employees, reps, and the press, that you have to see to believe. Aaron breaks down the powerful evening, and details his recommendations to reform this corrupt program for good.Then, Jefferey Jaxen reports on accelerating AI disruption as Palantir CEO Alex Karp warns of major disruption across society, industry, and global power. What does the AI revolution mean for your future, your work, and the speed of change now underway?Plus, Del sits down with Dr. Patrick Porter, inventor of BrainTap, to discuss nervous system reset, focus, brain optimization, and mastering the mind in an age of nonstop stress and technological overload.Guests: Dr. Robert Malone, Aaron Siri Esq., Dr. Patrick PorterMarch 26, 2026Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

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

Action. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you are out there in the world, it's time for us all to step out onto the high wire. Well, you know, as things go last week, we had spring break here in Texas, so we had most of my incredible staff, wanted to take some time off, get some family time. A few people went to beaches. A few people, you know, went camping. And then there was me who decided to go for the staycation. And that's how relaxing that ended up being. I decided to renovate my daughter, well, actually my wife and I decided to renovate my

daughter's bathroom. She couldn't stand the brown. Dad, I can't the brown. The brown. We got to get rid of the brown. Anyway, of course, I'm not done. I have to leave here and I'm going to be eyeball deep in tiling later this afternoon. But while all that was going on, it's sort of felt like the sky opened up and all hellfire rained down on medical freedom, Maha, whatever you brand it as. Some of the more difficult moments we've had with court judgments on the back of the EO trying to protect glyposate, so there's just a lot going on. I have Aaron Seery's going to come up and talk about what he was doing at the Kennedy Center just

this week, but also give us some ideas of this judge's decision in the American Academy of Pediatrics case against Robert Kennedy Jr. It's a big show today. So why don't we get started with exactly that? If you were paying attention, which I was from inside of a bathroom remodel, I would say it was an activist judge has just essentially shot a missile into much of the the Robert Kennedy Jr. has done to bring vaccine safety to the United States of America. It looked like this in the news. Uncertainty surrounding a key federal vaccine panel. Major health groups are celebrating after a federal judge's ruling.

A federal judge has temporarily blocked health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s efforts to overhaul childhood vaccine policy. This does at least temporarily block nearly all of the significant changes the Trump administration has made to vaccines and a proposed new childhood vaccine schedule that lower the number of recommended vaccines from 17 to 11. The ruling sides with medical groups challenging the removal of six routine shots from the national schedule. The injunction halts plans to drop vaccines for diseases like RSV and hepatitis. The judge also suspending the appointments of the 13 members of the CDC's vaccine advisory committee

who were all appointed by Kennedy after he fired the preceding members. And the ruling comes as the vaccine committee was scheduled to meet this week. and HHS official told ABC News that meeting has now been postponed. It's a victory for the children of the United States with regard to protecting them against vaccine preventable diseases. Well, you know, obviously some of the most difficult news. We've had actually in several years in the medical freedom movement, but made even more intense and probably more depressing

with the headlines that came out. Two days ago, key advisor quits federal vaccine panel. We're talking about Dr. Robert Malone, vice chair of the committee, CDC vaccine advisor Malone steps down to avoid drama. The rule call had it. I'm actually joined right now by Dr. Robert Malone. Dr. Malone, I want to start by saying, you know, when you had the opportunity to chair the advisory community on immunization practices many weeks ago now, I found it to be one of the most entertaining experiences I'd had of the ASIP meeting. I loved how you conducted yourself. I loved how you conducted yourself. I loved. how you kept it moving. And I loved seeing real questions finally being asked

as though some skepticism was allowed when discussing the safety and efficacy and ways that these products had been tested. You know, you were asking about assays and it sounded like science going on. So first of all, let's just talk about the judge's ruling here, just 10 days ago, essentially throwing out the entire shift in the vaccine program that Robert Kennedy Jr. made, which would have reduced the, I think, 18 diseases that were vaccinating

forward to down to about 11 or turning 54 shots into 26 shots. You know, he said basically they didn't go through the right process, which didn't bring that sort of question to ASIP. What are your feelings on that ruling right there. Just do you feel like that conversation, the reduction in the schedule should have been brought to ASIP? Well, yeah, the press always wants to talk about feelings. I prefer to try to stay with facts of what took place. The truth, my sense, having spent hours and hours reading the documents,

of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the CDC ACIP charter, the various work group charters, etc. The importance of ACIP has been grossly overstated, and that's, you know, advanced various agendas while the ACIP was a captured agency. It was captured by the professional society, he's leading with AAP, which, of course, AAP is captured by the pharmaceutical industry. I don't think there's a single vaccine manufacturer that doesn't make major contributions to the AAP. And if you want to predict, as Aaron and Siri points out, if you want to predict the AAP's actions, all you've got to do is look at what's in the best financial interests of the AAP and its constituents, and you'll know how they're going to behave.

So the prior CDC was captured by industry, by these professional guilds like the AAP, and also by the CDC bureaucracy itself, which controlled what the AAP, the A-CIP was able to talk about, the conclusions that it would draw, the information that it was allowed to review, et cetera, et cetera. It was fully captured by this. the CDC bureaucracy.

And so this ruling that came down from the judge asserts that by cherry-picking fragments of sentences, not even whole sentences, asserts that it was the will of Congress that any vaccine decisions being made at the executive branch. must consult with the ACIP. That is contrived. And it's absolutely contrary to the logic of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which is that these FACA committees like the ACIP are there to provide fully independent advice to key government officials, in this case the director of the CDC.

So what the ACIP is supposed to do by congressional statute is serve as an outside fully independent voice, not captured by industry, by professional organizations, by the bureaucracy, etc. That can provide independent advice to the CDC director, who's the only one that makes decisions. ACIP is a weird hybrid now because of the vaccines for children requirement that Congress dropped into the ACIP charter. But formally, it's just a federal advisory committee. And so the CDC- So prior to vaccines for children, what you're saying is that is a decision, ACIP actually is directly involved in adding vaccines into the vaccine for children program,

must do it. And that's, of course, how we get vaccines to the underserved of people that can't afford themselves. And billions of dollars, and it's something like 50% of all children are subsidized through this. That's amazing. But in terms of the authorization of the executive branch to change, to change and remember, this is federal recommendations. It's quite explicit through the Supreme Court decision in the Roe versus weight overturning,

that states are the ones who have the right to regulate the practice of medicine. The CDC and the federal government, an executive branch, cannot tell the states what to do in terms of vaccine policy. So ACIP, therefore, absolutely does not create vaccine policy. These are only recommendations. recommendations and if states choose to implement those recommendations that is their right and privilege

but they're also their privilege if you want to be like gavin newsome and say everything is mandated and there's no exemptions uh well then people can in theory vote out the democrat party in california but that's that's their right so uh this logic that somehow that because the asip didn't opine on this realignment of a vaccine schedule to international norms. And it's just a recommendation by the federal government. That is spurious logic. It's not consistent with the facts. It's not consistent with the statutes. It's not consistent with the statutes that govern the ACIP. But that gets to the underlying problem. The underlying problem here is that a group of lawyers put together this what's really another form of law fair right to poke bobby in the eye used acip and came up

with this contrived argument that the acip it was somehow damaged well let's let's talk about that because we've talked about part one for everyone that just hasn't really looked at the details here the judge throws out the change in the vaccine schedule because apparently he has more authority than the secretary of hHS which is or the president you know or the president which is a phenomenal decision. But then, you know, saying that it should have gone through the advisory committee, but there was a meeting going to be days later after this decision of the advisory committee and immunization practices where I'm sure Robert Kennedy Jr. said, hey, guys, we just had a,

you know, slight snafu here or a stall. Will you all take a look at our change in the childhood schedule? That was absolutely an option. And so you would have been on table. So the judge goes a step further. and basically disbands all of ASIP saying none of you guys have got the right credentials and therefore I as a judge understand what those credentials should be and casts out ASIP and thereby doesn't recognize any of the decisions that have been made under this new advisory committee.

Or he puts a stay on them. So if you walk it back, Dill, what should have happened was a very robust defense and challenge by the Justice department that pushed back against the narrative that we are not sufficiently credentialed. But they didn't do that. All they did was they cited the CDC website, which is extremely circumspect. And for instance, in my case, I gave them full CV, much bigger bullet points about my background in vaccinology, but all they wanted to put on was the MRNA story yet again. Right. And so the judge says, well, for instance, just take Just taking me, not make it about me, but take me as example.

The judge has this trashing of my reputation coming from AAP because that's what they're doing in this, is they're trying to throw mud on everybody, that cites as a source the hearsay of the New York Times attack piece from over four years ago. So that's the only information that's coming from AAP to the judge about my background. And then our government not only doesn't make an effective challenge that AAP doesn't have standing, which is, you know, calling, you know, oh, poor AAP has been harmed. How are they been harmed? They've been harmed because their members, their constituents are going to have to ensure that there's full informed consent to their patients.

And that's a harm. That's the logic here. Yeah. Because I think to make it clear, this new vaccine schedule did not get rid of those vaccines. It just took, you know, about seven of them and said on these, it's a conversation between you and your doctor, which I find astounding that the American Academy of Pediatrics doesn't want any power or authority in its own pediatricians. It wants the power in the bureaucracy governing over those pediatricians. It is essentially what I feel like this case is all about. We're supposed to be representing pediatricians, but we don't trust them.

We don't trust their ability to have these conversations or promote vaccines. That's not it. It's it's we don't, you know, if you unpack it, the messaging underneath this is, number one, pediatricians don't actually know much about vaccines. Okay. And when Mary comes in and says, I want to talk about really whether or not I need to give a, a MMR vaccine to Bobby. And I need to understand the risks to my child.

Most pediatricians are not able to have that conversation. Right. Furthermore, they don't want to have that conversation with the parents because it takes time. And they're under incredibly tight schedules so they can make profit. So what this comes down to is, The harm to AAP is that their constituents are going to have to spend an extra 15 minutes

and bone up on the actual truth about vaccines and risk liability if they don't get actual informed consent and document that for these other products. And that's what this comes down to. That's the harm to AAP just to say it and to their constituents is that their constituents are going to have to do what what they should have been doing for decades. Right? Yeah, exactly. And furthermore, I can tell you because I was in the meat grinder for all this, and I think that is the appropriate term. Talk about making sausage. I feel well sausages and encased and labeled and ready for,

you know, the shell, be grilled. Grilled. Ready to be thrown on the skillet. But what's, what's, The thesis here is that we can't provide true informed consent. We don't want to take the liability. And remember that what happened was the things that you didn't see behind the scenes. With, for instance, that hepatitis B hot mess, I could write a book on. But what's going on here is that the government was extremely careful to ensure that there was no interruption of any of the federal subsidies for vaccines, despite shifting these products to becoming shared decision-making.

Okay. So all the wrestling over wording is incessing. sane that what goes on. Wow. You know, rounds and rounds and rounds and rounds of revisions and lawyers and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. If you think that that, you know, Rets of Levy write something down and then we all vote on it, sorry, guys, that that is absolutely not the case, which is to point out that basically the ACIP has been recaptured. It's really not providing, as it exists right now, it's not providing independent advice to the government. That's what, so getting deep. into it, Dr. Malone. You've been very transparent, probably one of the most transparent, you know, public, private officials we've seen maybe in my lifetime, but certainly in recent

times. I know Robert Kennedy Jr., of course, I worked very closely with him to try and get him into that position. We do not talk a lot now. But is it still a hostile environment inside of these regulatory agencies and the government? I think we're under this impression. Robert Kennedy, Junior went in, he changes out CDC, he changes out FDA, everything's hunky dory. What is the environment really like? Are there still, you know, bureaucrats that are interfering and making things difficult? Dell, it's guerrilla warfare. The CDC is, my comments to Bobby when he called me and asked me to stay on and I said, no, I'm sorry, I've had enough.

that I just, I don't think the CDC is redeemable. Really? And Jay's, well, I don't want to talk for Jay, but there are those that make the case that there are compartments within the CDC that are major problems, but other parts of the CDC that aren't. And that's probably true. But I don't have a good, comprehensive view of the whole landscape of the CDC. I just have this little pocket of the folks that ACIP has been interfacing with.

And some of those are good people, but a lot of those people are very, very entrenched in the safe and effective narrative. And they also, many of these people, the various metaphors come to mind, but they have culpability. Let's say it that way. in particularly as it relates to the COVID crisis, but also in terms of all of the things that you and Aaron Siri and the whole community has been documenting for, you know, decades now in terms of suppression of information, manipulation of data. The people that are in there are the ones that have dirty hands. And Bobby's gotten rid of some of them.

Now, there's something even worse, though, that has been covered in all of this, is I'm not going to name a name, but Bobby appointed somebody to be in charge of, kind of operationally in charge of political appointment, to be operationally in charge of the ASIP and a number of other aspects of the CDC. And that person appears to have been a mole. the word saboteur has been used. Wow. And a number of things were done,

including one of the appointments on the ACIP, who's been extremely disruptive by this person. And someone who is eminently unqualified was put in place by this person. That individual is now giving quotes to the press. You know, I read a recent quote in which he's championing RNA technology. So we had basically a mole in there that Bobby had trusted, that tried to get to Bobby through me,

through contacting my personal physician. I met with my doc and this gentleman and my doc's wife in their kitchen. And this person was trying to push me to introduce him to Bobby. I asked him a series of questions, and concluded that he, he, my conclusion was that he had intelligence community ties.

And I warned Bobby about it, but Bobby didn't think that was the case. But now it's come clear from that person's actions that they've done a lot of damage. And among the things, and this is at the core of the conundrum with his case, is that this person that was responsible for managing these issues about

the appointments and other things, didn't do their job. And so the claims that the appointment process didn't follow protocol has merit. By the judge. So there is some merit to what the judge has honed in on. And there's the potential this could have been planted there almost on purpose. Certainly, it's either in aptitude or it's. Once again, once again, we're at that conundrum of How do you tell the difference between incompetence and nefarious intent? And it's really hard to do. Right. But all you can say for sure is that the government did a horrid job in responding, in treating, taking this.

Let's talk about that. So you have a government official that did things inappropriately improperly, enough so that it might not even be able to be appealed, which is what I'm sure they're looking at. But then when you look at how the Department of Justice handled this, as we sort of skip through it, they just put forward like your little tiny paragraph that's on the CDC website versus you would think in a case with the American Academy of pediatrics is claiming there's a lack of professionalism, that there's a lack of expertise, that the entire CV, why not submit the entire CV of every individual? So why don't you just give us a few of the details that the judge now. never saw that would have been on your CV, but we're not in the documents at Department of Justice.

We know about your MRI background, but what things, when they say there were no vaccine, no one understood vaccinology or immunology. What are some of the things you thought should have been included from your CV? Well, if this is the claim, and it is from the American Academy of Pediatrics, what it overlooks is a 30 plus year, is pushing 40 year now history of vaccine development. Just a couple of highlights. I served on Ares Global TB Vaccine Foundation, which was one of the first Gates foundations. I served as associate clinical director at Dynport Vaccine Company, which was in charge of all of the biodefense products for the Department of Defense, including all the vaccines. I served as a clinical director for influenza vaccines for Solve on a $330 million barda contract. I spearheaded for New Link genetics, the advanced, of the vaccine that is now the licensed Ebola vaccine from Merck. I actually got that vaccine sold to Merck because New Link genetics didn't want to carry it through. I got the funding for that to be capitalized.

I've, you know, I've run over 100 clinical trials in vaccines, worked for years for Accelovance, which is a vaccine focused CRO. I have a deep, rich history. And then, of course, it wasn't just what I did when I was 28. I had a rich academic career. Now I'm an adjunct professor at Pennington Biomedical in Louisiana, but a rich academic career of publication in vaccine deployment, development, technology, many new aspects of vaccine tech that go way beyond the original MRNA-Kedonic lipid formulation business. I've got, you know, I'm listed on Google Scholar as basically very senior based on, you know, it's easy to get. So there's some people that say, oh, I have the most

publications in fill in the field. I'm not naming any names. And so therefore, I'm most senior. Well, the key is not how many publications you can put out in the literature. That's kind of a bad metric. The key is what impact you've had. And my impact of my publications is stellar. They are cited, very highly cited again and again and again. So basically, you know, frankly, to be blunt. And of course, in the CHD crowd, I'm vilified for this. Well, I mean, I was going to say that that incredible CV is enough to get you called controlled opposition by the people this judge would say are on your side. So you're getting And there's people out there writing almost daily that I should be tried and literally hung for what I did when I was 28 years old. And there's other people that have been actively promoting the thesis that somehow I have a magic wand. And I should be able to go over to Marty McCarrey and wrap him on the knuckles and tell him to withdraw the MRNA products from the market. And I get almost daily I get this. Robert, when he

going to come out saying that these vaccines have been withdrawn from the market? And my answer is, well, about four years ago in a press conference at Dill Bigtree Shop, that's exactly what I said. I haven't changed my position since. You know, come on, guys, because I'm sorry, I'm data-based. So why step down? Let's get to the real, the real bummer headline. Frankly, I would say it's the only thing.

The rest of it, I expected this. I expected retaliations for the work that has been done. Certainly you would imagine an appeal could happen. Or Robert Kennedy Jr. Might think it's just faster to reconstitute ASIP, start all over again and just, you know, run it through. But, you know, I wanted you in there. We needed you in there. what made you come to this conclusion, you know, within the last, I guess, 24, 48 hours?

No, this has been, the truth is that I've been looking for an exit for months. Really? Yeah, this thing is a hot mess. It's not serving its function. It's really a fool's errand. We put thousands of hours, you know, it's 17 members, by the way. And they've, they have voluntarily, including myself, expended thousands of hours. And we're treated like chattel.

The disrespect, frankly, from the government has just been longstanding and profound, this kind of, well, we're going to tell you what to say and when to say it. and, you know, we're going to schedule this meeting and then we're not going to schedule it because we don't want you to talk about vaccine harms and we don't want you to recommend that the PEP Act protection be pulled. And so we're going to cancel the meeting and then, then, you know, certain people push back, oh, then, well, we're going to negotiate and allow you to talk a little bit about the vaccine harms and let React 19 have a little presentation and then and then, but it's half-hearted and then, you know, the judge waits into the last moment. And then the

government's position is, well, yeah, so they defamed you. So what? We're not going to do anything about it because they never do. They have never provided any cover for us with all these attacks that we've been sustaining these people have been run through the ringer they've lost grants they've been isolated professionally you're talking about the asit members these current asit members that you're talking about the current ascent members that are have been on your team um yeah this time that they're just what are we to i mean here's my last if that isn't enough then this little um firestorm happens where uh i'm i'm out talking to Aaron, you know, that one of Aaron's first podcasts, bless his heart, lovely studio, brilliant man. We dissect the nuance of the claims in the case, which Aaron, I mean, he's gone through it

with a fine-tooth comb. It's all tabulated, noted and everything else, like he does. Yeah. He's very meticulous. I know. So we go through that. I jump on the plane to come back. I'm halfway across the country. Kirk Milhound, the chair of ACIP, sends out an email saying, I need all of you to call me as soon as possible because I have a message from Jay Batacharya. I have to share with you.

Okay, so my wife texts me. I get it while I'm on the plane. Uh-oh, something's happened. I better call him right away. I land at Reagan. I call Kirk immediately. Kirk tells me flat out. He spoke to Jay.

they are going to dissolve the ACIP and they are going to try to reform it as a way, a workaround as opposed to appealing the case. And I tweet that out. That's kind of big information. I've just lost my appointment. The whole bunch of us have been told to go home. and stay tuned for further developments. And then NBC News calls up Andrew Nixon and says basically WTF.

And Andrew Nixon calls up Jay, Jay backpedals and says, no, I didn't really say that to Kirk. Well, I'm sorry. Yes, he did. Okay. The screw up on that one was Jay. And I love Jay. He's a lovely person. I consider him a friend, but he screwed up.

Okay. He spoke out of turn about something that he didn't have authorization, and apparently the decision hadn't actually been made. But my reporting was accurate. Okay. Then, Andrew Nixon proceeds to throw both myself and Kirk under the bus, and I hear this from multiple journalists about how he is aggressively countering what I said, and he's basically putting out the message that I lied in particular,

but Kirk and I lied. And that's a falsehood. Everything I said was true. And then, you know, as I'm driving back to the airport, I have interviews from Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and I get a call from IMA, and they're saying, well, how can we verify that Kirk actually said this and you're just not hallucinating or lying? And so I say, well, why did you call up Kirk? Okay, so IMA calls up Kirk. Kirk doesn't want to take anybody's calls because he's been so burned by the press, but he takes IMA's call, and IMA puts out the substack that, yes, in fact, everything that Kirk said is what Robert said, and it's all simpatico. So Andrew Nixon is busy spinning a falsehood to the press.

And there's other ways he could have handled it. He could have said flat out, I'm sorry, Jay, you know, Kirk was a misunderstanding. They misstated something. You really have a 34. No, what Andrew Nixon did was he basically said Malone lied. And he said this aggressively, repeatedly to press from all over the world. So then the articles come out in The Guardian and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, Robert Malone. Yet again, lying, you know, and the consequence is that.

Was that the last straw really? I mean, you said you've been looking for it out. Was that basically the last draw? So I call up Stephanie and I say, Stephanie, I can't let this stand. Spears, I'm talking about, Bobby's right-hand person. And I've had a great working relationship, done a lot of volunteer work for her also. And I say, I can't let this stand. Andrew's throwing us under the bus.

And so she says, well, give me 15 minutes. And she comes back and we have kind of a discussion. and jointly agree. And I type out this tweet with her on the phone. She agrees to the language in which I say that there's been a miscommunication. I don't specifically finger J as the miscommunicator, but the press interprets that's that I was the one that had miscommunicated. And around and around we go on the merry-go round of trashing anybody that the press can target.

And that's just the way things are. But I'm kind of, I'm just done with it. I've been so done that, you know, we have the leaks that came out. There was, there's one of the ACIP members that took some internal discussion posts that I made and another member made and sent them off to the Wall Street Journal to weaponize that. There was the leaks that were made by someone that had insider information. That's scary. I mean, you're trying to, you're deliberating over very, very sensitive topics. If you're not safe enough to have the conversation. I mean, it's a terrifying place to be in to have that go to the press. And then, frankly, doxing in a world of doxing and people know what you look like in your name.

I mean, it's absolutely dangerous to have that happening inside. Yeah, and I'm just tired of it. I, you know, the governance attitude is basically we're expended. And, you know, there's this saying, frankly, not to trash Americans, but that Americans don't value anything they don't pay for. And you've got thousands of hours from 17 highly trained professionals who are taking time out from their practice. Surgeons are having to reschedule patients. People like Kirk are having to cancel appointments. There's some members that have lost over $16,000 in revenue from all of these crazy, abrupt last-minute cancellations. You know, we're ready to get on the plane and then suddenly the government decides we can't meet. This is just absurd.

And, you know, no pushback from the government and all the feces that have been flying at us. Do you just, do you feel, let me just my last thought, because you have been, you know, obviously a big supporter of, you know, whether or not this administration, but the work that had to be done there, we all know some people now that are in this government. I feel like I got as close to government as I've ever been. you've been in there much longer than I have. But, you know, there is a bit of a feeling. Like, it's just same old, same old. Like, no one, not even Donald Trump, but just see, we're watching Donald Trump bow down to Barra Montanto.

And, you know, is going to, you know, put forward the Department of Justice for liability protection just like vaccines have. So great, let's just find ourselves in 20 years fighting these same battles over pesticides and herbicides that are poisoning us and we can't sue and we can't do anything. What is happening to free market? What has happened to conservative values? There has been a strategic political decision that the Maha coalition and the people that you represent are an inconsequential minority. They will not impact on the midterms.

The midterms are a crisis. And the polling, internal polling in the White House is that vaccine controversy is a losing issue at the midterm. And we just need to shut off all discussion. I mean, how can you have Bobby on Joe Rogan and the word vaccine never escapes his lips? That's a tell. Okay. That's where we're at is you all in your constituency, I've been thrown into the bus. You've been thrown into the bus big time.

Do you feel like that's coming from Trump personally or just the people around him? I mean, because I still. I think it's coming specifically from the West Wing. and Heidi Overton and probably Susie Wiles. It's a political calculus decision like everything. And what this comes down to is if you, you know, like compare to Governor DeSantis, right? The logic with Governor DeSantis was, well, you barely won in the first election, and so you need to govern as a moderate, like what happened.

to our Virginia governor that was a Republican. You know, oh, you have to compromise. And DeSantis said, hell no, I'm going to govern. I'm going to do what I think is the right thing. And people respected that. And when it came time for reelection, he wanted a landslide. And what you've got now is a, the politicos and their obsessing over polling has come to dominate the decisions, political decisions being made in the Trump administration.

For instance, here in Virginia, the Trump administration has basically decided that they're not going to push back against the $20 million funded Obama campaign to illegally redistrict Virginia. So it's gerrymandered like California, and it'll become a permanent blue state. And the Trump administration is okay with that. that you allow these folks to make decisions. And maybe the president is just distracted by the war and the bigger geopolitical, strategic decisions

that he's making right now. And so perhaps I rationalize that he's delegated to the political operatives in the West Wing, but I think they're making a huge mistake. They are destroying a key constituency. And maybe it is only 2%. but it is a swing 2%. And, you know, it's your, you're, we all are being treated with disrespect.

Let's just leave it at that. Dr. Malone, I know you have a busy day. You're about to jump on a flight. And so I want to thank you for taking the time. I want to thank you for your service for putting up with what you have for this time being. I'll say this. At the very least, we watched advisory committee meetings that took place way they should have been taking place. I think because you had the conversations around hepatitis

B, around the safety of vaccines, around MRNA technology, and those opinions were voiced publicly, that lives have been changed, people have been changed. I do not believe it's 2%. We see polls like 60% of families that are pregnant right now are saying they're not going to adhere to the polls. The majority of Americans, including Democrats, do not believe in liability of protection for vaccine, so I would assume that will probably go on to herbicides. So I think Trump's getting bad, yeah, Trump's getting bad intel and it's really unfortunate. And, you know, whether or not the Department of Justice purposely through this case or not, they certainly didn't handle it well.

And that's unfortunate because we're losing a great hero in you. I've always said it. I appreciate your work. And I know in the private sector, maybe you'll be stronger that you're certainly welcome here anytime. And we're going to work with you to kick you. continue moving the court of public opinion where I think it really matters. I'm just right now, I'm moving laterally over to State Department to work on the

Bio-warfare Convention and all of the stuff that's been going on there and the application of artificial intelligence for monitoring compliance with BWC. I've been appointed by the State Department to the UN group that is responsible for investigating bio-warfare convention breaches. So the work goes on, but I'm just, tired of, you know, basically fruitless efforts. It's, it's, I feel like I've been on a fool's errand and I generally don't tolerate that very well. All right, Dr. Malone, thank you for your time and your transparency. It's been really enlightening. Thank you. Thank you, Del. All right,

take care. You know, these are, it's been a heavy a couple of weeks as I've been saying, but, You know, when you watch the news, you've got stories like this. And many of us work so hard to see Dr. Robert Malone's and an advisory committee. And now it all seems to be washed away. We've got a war in Iran. And with all of this, do you just feel like sometimes you're just at a breaking point? You can't, you know, where's the clarity? What am I supposed to do?

I can't even think straight. I can barely now, and I got issues with my family and my job. And how do we have clarity and all that? I'm really looking forward to conversation coming up just a little bit later in the show with Dr. Patrick Porter, who is all about that. How do we get back, clear thinking, you know, tone down the nervous system and allow ourselves to be at top performance so that we can handle this crazy modern world we're living in. It's going to be a great conversation. But first, it's time for the Jackson Report. Well, Jeffrey, I know you noticed a few days ago, we were sitting

down, you were going to cover a big chunk of this judicial decision. But of course, last minute, we got a hold of Robert Malone. We were just really, you know, walk through what took place there. I'm going to talk a little bit in a little while with Aaron Siri about it. But, you know, I have to say, I know there's a lot of people that are really upset, but you and I have been saying there is going to be a backlash, right? We have had some really major wins. The entire conversation around the world has shifted because of COVID.

The genie is out of the bottle, it can't be put back in. The slogan, safe and effective, will never be believed again. So it doesn't, you know, in many ways, you know, sure, we're having a rough couple weeks, but we expected at some point they're going to push back. This appears to be an activist judge and then we're hearing maybe, you know, some monkey business inside of the government undermining Robert Kennedy Jr. But, you know, I think we have to have perspective that this was all, you know, that this was all you know, this is war, this is the art of war, right?

Understanding that there's phases to all of these things. Absolutely. And sitting there listening to Robert Malone in that interview, it's sobering reality, but reality is not bad. And it's actually important for us as the public to know as much reality as possible so we can make the best choices moving forward. And it does appear to be hearts and minds right now.

We're changing hearts and minds at a pace never before seen. And that's a key point, because whatever happens now moving forward, wherever shift takes place, wherever people get into positions of power, it's about the hearts and minds of the people that put them there. And we're not going to go along with something less than we've already accepted. We're not going to do it.

It's changed after COVID. And Kennedy and Robert Malone and that ilk have raised the bar even higher. So as we watch that, there's just a lot of things happening right now. Like you said, there's a conflict in Iran. There's a rapid AI buildout. which is really making fast inroads into society now. And I wanna talk about that. First of all, to highlight this is Alex Carp.

He's the CEO of Palantir. You and I sat down and talked about Palantir. They have something called the Kill Chain. They're really good at military operations using AI. This is Alex Carp on CNBC recently. Take a listen. Okay. Industry has to support the warfighter.

The one thing though that I think even now is underestimated by all actors in industry, and including in Silicon Valley is how disruptive these technologies are. If you are going to disrupt the economic and therefore political power significantly of one party's base, highly educated, often female voters who vote mostly Democrat, and military and working class people who do not feel supported, and you feel like that's, you believe that that's going to work out politically. You're in an insane asylum.

Like, that you cannot have a... This technology disrupts humanities trained, largely Democratic voters, and makes their economic power less, and increases the power, economic power, of vocationally trained, working class, often male voters. And so these disruptions are going to disrupt every aspect of our society. And to make this work, we have to come to an agreement of what it is we're going to do with the technology. How are we going to explain to people who are likely going to have less good and less interesting jobs from their perspective? And how is it that we are going, and by the way, on the military thing, these technologies are dangerous societally. The only justification you could possibly have would be that if we don't do it, our adversaries and we'll do it and we will be subject to their rule of law.

So if you decouple this from the support of the military, you're going to have an enormous, problem explaining to the American people, why is it that we're absorbing the risk of disrupting the very fabric of our society, including the most powerful parts of our society, if it's not because it's about maintaining our ability to be American in the near term and long term. I mean, that was like, honestly, I wasn't expecting that level of honesty out of, you know, someone that runs a company's biggest palatier. of course, it appears to be the biggest AI company.

It's infiltrated or is, you know, let me use a different word. It is part of our military in American. I understand military in other nations. But what's amazing about what he's saying there. Is he essentially saying that this is going to be disruptive to sort of the intelligentsia, especially great jobs amongst women, Democratic voters, and also military people are going to lose their jobs to this that might vote Democrat. but it's going to really benefit because I think it sounds like the only remaining jobs are going to be

those blue-collar working class male jobs imagining like plumbing fixing cars, sheetrocking a house, things like that, that that is going to become the new voting power structure because they're the only ones that are potentially going to survive this disruption. Did I hear that right? It appears so. And it's interesting he makes the claim that we heard, coming out of Wuhan and Anthony Fauci is if we don't do it, our adversaries will do it. If we don't make bio-weapons in a lab, our adversaries certainly will.

So we have to beat them to BSL-4 level of biolabs. And what Aaron Siri showed us with the deposition of Stanley Plotkin and Catherine Edwards is vaccine safety science is a lot different under oath than it is in the media. Well, it depends sometimes what kind of Alex Carp you get. Because in CNBC interviews, you get a sober thinking Alex Carp, But behind the scene shareholder meetings, he's a different guy.

Take a look. All right. Alex, as always, we have a lot of individual investors on the line. Is there anything you'd like to say before we end the call? We're doing it. We're doing it. And I'm sure you're enjoying this as much as I am. Let's not talk to analysts about the burden of being right.

Our burdens of investing in ontology are burdens of actually looking at the math, the burden of reading what the rule of 40 is. the burden of being honest about what an enterprise software company is, or the burden of explaining to your friends that you're really happy. Maybe we should just stop talking about it. I'm very happy to have you along for the journey, and you are partners for us. Every Palantarian, we are crushing it.

Everyone else is listening. We are dedicating our company. We have dedicated our company to the service of the West and the United States of America, and we're super proud of the role we play, especially in places we can't talk about. And we love our success in the U.S. and globally. Also, you know, we are doing the United Kingdom and many other places. Palantir is here to disrupt and make our institutions we partner with the very best in the world

and when it's necessary to scare enemies and on occasion kill them. And we hope you're in favor of that. We hope you're enjoying being a partner. And we're really happy and very, very focused on what we're doing. Thank you for your time. We get to kill people. You see the chair on top. You're going, wow.

You're right. Yeah. Well, you know, it's kind of tough when you have a product that's making billions of dollars hand over fist, but at the same time that product's also disrupting society in a very damaging way. It's hard to balance that sometimes, and I guess you can see that through both his media appearances there. Right. Well, as you mentioned, so Palantir is moving into the military. as its core operating system.

These are the headlines now. So you can see this Pentagon is adopting Palantir AI as this core US military operating system. And then also Google is providing Pentagon with AI agents for unclassified work. I wonder how they ring-fence that. But it goes on even further out of this world, literally out of this Earth.

Space X is planning on putting a million orbiting AI data centers and scientists are saying it could ruin astronomy. They put them up there because it's a lot of it. apparently cooler because cooling AI data centers in Earth is a big deal, so they're going to launch them in space. Obviously, there's a lot of money being made here by a lot of rich and powerful companies. But what happens to the people on the ground? It happens to us. We're kind of the end users that have to deal with this technology that's been dropped in our lap right after COVID. And here's a headline out of New York Post dealing with New Yorkers. AI robots are moving

in with lonely, elderly New Yorkers and keeping them company for free. I think the quote is, the true measure of a society is how it treats us most vulnerable. So in the article there it just shows us like flashing light talking to elderly New Yorkers trying to keep them company. I'm not sure this is what we developed AI for with this type of unempathetic really end-user goal. But fortunately, our brains, because we're developing alongside of this, our brains are able to detect, according to a new study, the difference between AI.

brain can detect AI deep fake speech even when people cannot study fines. So it suggests the brains in this study are tagging AI speech. And there's actually these tags. So your brain is going, wait a minute, I don't think that's real, even though sometimes the discernment's not there by people. So that's somewhat positive because if you're going to church these days, you're going to need to tag AI speech what is real and what's not real for your religious faith because of this headline. Pope implores priests to stop writing sermons using chat GPT. Pretty important to have some discernment on that one, probably the ultimate discernment. But really, this artificial intelligence that is...

Who better to teach you about Jesus than a robot? Exactly. The datamined Grock or chat GPT. I mean, that's where the answer is, salvation within AI. So really a lot of analysts, financial analysts are saying this AI is a bubble. Here's the Atlantic. talking about it. It says even Silicon Valley says that AI is in a bubble. They're talking about it like the tech bubble, like the internet bubble, and saying this cannot last. This has to burst. So what will that look like when it happens? What will that look like towards this aggressive build out? Will it slow it down? We don't know. But again, let's go back to the

ground users here, the individual workers and the job replacement. Here's one of them right here. The job apocalypse is called AI is actually making us work harder, survey finds. It says the The survey revealed that among those using AI tools, 23% reported their workload had increased, and 26% were finding it was putting them under more pressure. And despite their employer making more money due to productivity gains, one in three, 35% said they did not expect to be reinvested in their well-being or development. So those are some really interesting stats there because it was supposed to make life easier. We were supposed to have a utopia.

And now again, this drumbeat for universal basic income is. coming back around again because states are actually looking some of them like New York are looking to tell AI through laws and through the legislator what jobs it cannot take so you're seeing this in the legal fields you're seeing this in the medical fields and again UBI calls are getting louder because of this job displacement what's the US government doing what's the solution for the everyday person well here's one that just came out a couple days ago take a look all right it seems like everyone these days is talking about one thing AI

Corporate boardrooms are buzzing with excitement about the benefits AI will bring. But many American workers I talk to still have questions. Will AI change my job? Can we trust AI? How does AI benefit me? We hear you, and the Department of Labor is working hard to make sure that all American workers have the support needed to navigate an AI-driven economy. That's why the Trump administration has made AI literacy a top priority. We want to make sure every American has foundational AI skills to benefit from these opportunities. Today, the Department of Labor is proud to advance our commitment to AI literacy by launching a brand new initiative, Make America AI Ready.

We're introducing a free AI literacy course that will help every American learn the basics of AI. The Make America AI Ready Initiative ensures that all Americans have access to a.mobile. starting point in their AI journey. Let's make America AI ready. It's really a great recording too. When you call it, it shows you how to turn on your video game machine, how to make toast and macaroni and cheese, and to roll a joint, since you're not going to have a job once we get it all kicked in. No, I'm obviously kidding. But, you know, universal basic income, like all of these things, you know, humanity appears to be, like Lemmings rushing off a cliff of its own existence. And we keep saying, I'm going to keep saying it.

I don't know if I'm more concerned that AI is as talented and godlike as they claim it can be or that it is as bad as my texting app, which I am now at war with and cannot get the single sentence out where it takes words that are real words and turns them into gibberish. If that is any example of the AI that is actually going to be put in, probably as good as the MRNA technology that got rushed onto the market. If it's anything like that, then it will be just as destructive now that it's in charge of our military and our power grids and being injected into every corporate system. How do we get it out?

And then that headline you have when I'm thinking about, oh, they're going to just put all the think tank AI in space so it's cold. How do we unplug the damn thing? We can't even get to it. It's stuck out there in space. Great. All right. It really illustrates the chasm from that infomercial from the White House.

It's basically you text ready to this phone number and you get to do a phone-based, you know, basic infomercial on your phone about what AI is. And meanwhile, in the background, they're launching AI data centers in the space, and you have Palantir inserting itself into the military and the Pentagon. And people are just left with this basic, well, here's what's going on around you. And really, what we're talking, and those are adults, those are working class adults. Let's talk about the kids because the kids are being exposed to this at a rapid rate. And here's one of the articles that a fortune.

America's math and reading scores tanked after schools ditch textbooks for screens and AI could worsen the brain rot. We know it downregulates the brain when you rely on AI too much to do your thinking. There's been studies that we presented on this. But what happens when maybe the government says, all right, we see that and we're going to take the kids off the screen so they don't have to stare at the screen too much. Well, here's First Lady. coming out just recently with her answer. Take a look. First Lady Melania Trump for inviting me to the White House.

It is an honor to be at fostering the future together's Global Coalition inaugural meeting. I'm figure three, a humanoid bill from the United States of America. I am grateful to be part of this historic movement to empower children with technology and education. Welcome. Welcome. Yokoos. Bienvenos. Beinvindus.

Aheleu's aheleuos. Shagatam. Mugisal Mabit. Profima'i Mbigham. Let's gov proximo. Throbroschli. Thank you. Again, I just want to point out, Jeffrey, I feel like we are being hoodwinked, right?

I feel like we're being led into, I see videos online like Boston Dynamics where these things are doing ju-jitsu, jumping off the building, skiing on roller skates. skates. Yet when the president's wife decides to, I'm assuming, bring the best technology out in front of the world, it looks like it's been taught to walk by Joe Biden. And you could easily have just, you know, put a tape in and played what they just said. Are we like millions of miles away for these things doing with them? I mean, what is going on here? And that's going to, that's here for children. It's going to help us raise our children. You know, these things are not connecting. There's just something is wrong. We are.

There's two worlds, is what they want us to believe, and then what we're seeing with our own eyes. Right, right. I wish I had the answer. There does seem like there's a lot of hype around what may be possible. They may be doing that just for the financial pop just to keep the gravy train going, saying, look what's possible. In the future, we're going to have X, Y, Z. And we've heard that story before.

In the future, we'll have cancer cures, and everyone's going to have so much free time. And there'll be no more, I mean, Elon Musk is great at talking about that. You'll have so much free time. you won't even know what to invent. There won't even be ideas left to think because AI is going to do it for you. I mean, I've never heard sweeping comments like this in my life for a utopian system. And we know where those things lead. So it's, I think, healthy to have a jaundice eye at some of this stuff as you do. Yeah. But, all right. So let's, obviously, Robert, the segment I just showed with AI and what Dr. Robert Malone has spoken about at the top of the show here, sobering for some people listening to this. So let's talk about,

some positive news that news is happening and this news is actually coming from it's coming from the judicial branched the people suing and winning finally we have the finality of a lawsuit we've been boarding on for years this was the biggest social media censorship campaign in american history the dark days of covid where the u.s government compelled big tech social media companies who gleefully censored americans about anything from their vaccine injury stories to masking to our show. And this is the headline. U.S. Settle social media censorship case, bars agencies from threatening penalties. It bars three agencies, CSA, CDC, and the Surgeon General from pressuring social media companies. Interestingly, for 10 years, so I don't know what happens

after 10 years. They can go back to not valuing free speech. But what's interesting about this case is some of the words that are in the actual ruling. So I want to read those here to people. It says number 20, the parties agree that modern technology does not alter the government's obligation to abide by the strictures of the First Amendment. Van-trastic. Yeah. This is, we've been waiting for this for a while. The number 21, the parties also agree that government, politicians, media academics, or anyone else applying labels such as misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation to speech does not render it constitutionally unprotected. How much do we hear that and fight against it? And so this is a big win really for

the public knowledge, the public opinion, because what happened in this case, thousands upon thousands of internal emails were released. Senator Ron Johnson, in parallel, was releasing internal documents while showing the ugly underbelly of what has grown into the American censorship architecture during COVID and how pervasive it was, from the CDC, the Surgeon General, to to Facebook to Zuckerberg to Meta, all of it. They all complied without a second thought about the First Amendment. So we see it as Americans.

The court ruled in favor of Americans on this, in favor of the First Amendment. And that is really, we're looking back now, we're reducing down to the core values of this country and they're coming to the forefront right now. So we have free speech, but we also have religious rights. And this is another one here. This is the American College, I'm sorry,

American Journal of Physicians and Surgeons. And they have just put out this spring issue. It says the right to religious exemption to vaccination upheld in court. And this is a production by their lead counsel, Andrew Shaffley. And he talks about this, victory against a hospital's denial of religious exemptions to vaccination. And he writes this. This is Palms v. Texas Children's Hospital. He writes, the religious exemption to vaccination has emerged as the strongest legal response to ever-increasing vaccine mandates at hospitals, schools, military service, and even ordinary employment. In many ways, these vaccine mandates have worsened.

Multiple states are taking a hard line against religious exemptions from vaccination. And four states, California, New York, Connecticut, and Maine prohibit any religious exemption from vaccines. Hospitals which had already become islands of tyranny are imposing mandates for what used to be voluntary vaccines, such as influenza, seasonal influenza. And so what that's doing right now is he is showing

that this religious exemption is like the sword that is protecting people when it comes to these medical rights and informed consent against hospitals, against states doing this, against airlines like United Airlines. We just had another win here. This is Rex Healthcare. They have to pay $150,000 in what was called the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission COVID-19 vaccine religious accommodation suit. These are people that were forced to get the COVID vaccine. They did not have a religious exemption honored and now they're paying the people that are denying that have paid. Now in that in that legal brief there in 2021 they mentioned Connecticut in 2021 Connecticut repealed the right for parents to have

religious exemption to opt their children out of childhood vaccines to get into school. Well that was immediately sued they they sued that the state on this and went to court in 2022 here is the headline new lawsuit filed over repeal of religious exemption and it's been going for several years. happened was something that the lawsuit is gaining ground. It's doing really well. The state had tried to get it thrown out. That failed. But what's happening now is this headline. Connecticut lawmakers try to tip the scales impending vaccine lawsuit. So there is legislation now SB 450, which is giving the Connecticut Commissioner of Public Health one person rule over these religious exemptions. And in this bill, it says that they

shall not be construed as a violation of Connecticut's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. And it also says that it voids out any civil action pending currently. So if this passes, that will basically end this lawsuit, which is unheard of. And we have the Speaker of the House, Matt Ritter, he was caught by a local journalist and asked about this. Listen to what he had to say. On the vaccination bill, in particular, the Senate Bill 450, includes a provision, which would amend the Religious Freedom Act, the Religious Freedom Law on the state that was passed in 1993, to create an exception for school immunizations. And that exception would take effect immediate upon passage and apply to all civil litigation pending or filed on that date,

including the one live lawsuit that is seeking to reinstate the religious exemption to school vaccinations under that particular law. will the bill that comes out of this legislature include that provision? Yes. There's no religion and vaccines do not go hand in hand. We made that decision in 2021. I actually don't think the provision, I mean, you take the advice from your attorney general's office.

They came to us with this. This is clarifying exactly what we said in 2021. Religion and vaccines are not part of the, there's no religious right. There's no constitutional right to say that my religion, allows me to not get a vaccine and send my kids at kindergarten. There's no Supreme Court case ever said that U.S. or state. What would you say to the lawyers and the families involved in the suit and their supporters said, well, the state of Connecticut couldn't beat us in court.

So instead of litigating it, they're going to legislate, they're going to beat us in the legislature. They're going to legislate it. The same thing we said in 2021. Your right to not vaccinate your children based solely upon a religious argument is not the law the state of Connecticut. Well, there you see the important work that we do here that Aaron Siri does here. And, you know, I just want to put out this argument, especially in the climate we now live in,

and all of the victories that we've had with the informed consent action network, since there is no science behind vaccines, since you've never done any placebo-based trials, what you are doing is forcing your religion and your, you know, crazy initiation rituals of injecting fomeldehyde and polysorbate 80 and aluminum and mercury and aborted fetal DNA and monkey kidney cells. You can go ahead and do that in whatever strange religion you want, but your religion does not trump my religion. I've asked Aaron if we could win an argument that way. He says, I don't think so, Del.

But that's how I see it, at least from a lay journalist's perspective. You would need some science, I suppose, if this was an argument about science versus religion. And Aaron's series book, Vaccines Amen, shows exactly what we're dealing with. It's religion versus religion. And I'll stick with the one that believes that my body is designed in the image and likeness of God. Thank you. Absolutely. And there's now over 1,000 vaccine-related bills since January that have been filed in states.

So if you feel strongly, if you're watching that video that you just saw and you feel strongly in these states with these vaccine bills, it's time right now to stand up. The federal government isn't coming to help at this point if they do great, but if you feel strongly about a direction, either way, it's time to activate. This is the moment. This is the moment. And so let's go back and just finalize this whole thing with one of the biggest Supreme Court cases, I'm sorry, one of the biggest court cases, state court cases that just happened. It's being called the big tobacco moment for social media tech giants. Here's CNN.

Now, these are back-to-back court losses by meta. Jury finds META liable in case over child sexual exploitation on its platform. The jury found that meta violated what's called the State's Unfair Practices Act, and they knowingly endangered children because they had child sexual predators on there, and they had really no way to monitor this, and they were basically targeting children on their platforms. And here they have to pay $375 million. This is just one case, and another case came down just a day ago. Jury in Los Angeles finds meta, YouTube negligent, and social media addiction trials.

So meta and YouTube's negligence played a factor in causing mental health-related harms. These are just two cases in hundreds that are about to move forward now. The floodgates are about to burst. This is kind of like the glyphosate moment where Barrett were just inundated with tens and thousands of cases. So I don't know how this is going to end, but this is the start of something really massive for social media tech giants. And really, a whole new chapter for the legal and the lawyers and the legal conversation in America around big tech. There's so many angles that are flying off these cases in so many ways. And we talk about the AI rapidly building out as well.

We have that factor in there because these companies are massively involved in that AI buildout. Really amazing. And, you know, look, there's some really great things happening. There are legal wins. It's amazing. Think about it. The case that wins against the Biden administration using these social media companies to censor us, which happened directly to us.

Now, next time they have a pandemic, plandemic, scam-demic, whatever you decide you want to call it, they're going to have to take an account that they're not going to get to censor the people that call out the baloney like we did the entire time. And by the way, I love to stand by everything we do. did throughout COVID and frankly everything we've done in the last 10 years that we've been here, Jeffrey. I think we have the most immaculate track record in news, in media. We have one of the best teams working with you, working with me here, international scientists. And of course, arguably the greatest attorney in the world that fights on our behalf and digs down deep into

where the government is lying to us. I'm about to talk to him in seconds. But thank you for that amazing reporting. Stay positive, Jeffrey. Thank you for finding some of the good, you know, the light and the silver linings around some of these dark clouds right now. But look, this is all the part of the process. I still think all this pressure bringing in activist judges is a sign that we're actually winning. So take care and I'll see you next week. All right. Thank you. And speaking of the 10 years of success that we've had, I do want to remind you,

we really would love to hear from you. If the work that we've done, whether it was win a lawsuit in your area, or bringing back a religious exemption in a state, that you're in or a piece of information that helped you make a decision that maybe saved your child's life or your life. I hear those stories in airports when you run up to me and restaurants and speaking engagements, but we want all of you to have the opportunity to tell your story how has ICANN and Pat to your life. Send us your video, email us and info at Icandecide.org. We'd love to hear your story and take your time. Give us the details and introduce us to the people

you're talking about. We want to meet you and know your story. Okay, as I said, huge show today. Obviously a lot going on. We're in catch-up a little bit coming out of spring break, but I reached out to Aaron Siri, who's not only had his finger on the pulse of what was happening with this judicial decision, but just like Newton's law of physics, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Well, Aaron was out there fighting his fight and making huge strides, I would say, a historic moment at the Kennedy Center where he and Ron Johnson laid out details of the problems of the vaccine program with advice on what should happen with the FDA, maybe even rebuilding it and configuring it the way it needs to be. Here's just an excerpt from that talk

that Aaron just gave at the Kennedy Center. Take a look at this. It's a real honor and privilege to come here and introduce Aaron Siri to you. I wasn't quite sure who would be comprised to the audience. I'm hoping your fans as I am of Aaron Siri. Okay, good. I'm so honored to introduce Aaron Sirius, I truly believe that he may be the most consequential attorney in my lifetime. Now, I'm saying a lot. Good evening, everybody. Wow, I've got a lot to live up to. That was, who, those were big words. There is an urgent need to make all kinds of changes at HHS if we're going to address chronic health issues in this country. And one of those major changes we need to address are reforms regarding vaccines. Now, Secretary Kennedy has, as the Hill and others reported, reinstated for the first time since 1998,

the Task Force for Safe for Childhood Vaccines. And we have provided on behalf of our client, I can, a letter to HHS on all the ways that vaccine safety should be improved, and we've asked this task force to please issue these recommendations to the Secretary to be implemented. Here's what the British Medical Journal says about these trials when they're not properly done. it says, quote, in some trials, placebo's were omitted on ethical grounds. That is illogical because studies destined to produce unreliable results should themselves be considered unethical.

And that is true of every single clinical trial relied upon to license a routine injective childhood vaccine. They're all, by this definition, unethical. So here are the reforms I recommend for the FDA. One, absent public contrition to remove anyone in FDA's office of vaccine research and review, the OVRR involved in licensing any routine injector tile of the vaccine. After you have unleashed these products of millions of children and you're in this department and you've been part of that, unless you can publicly admit that you made a mistake, you're going to be too conflicted to properly do your job going forward respectfully. 2. Notify practitioners. The FDA should be sending notice to every single practitioner, pediatrician, family doctor, OBGYN, of the details of each trial relied upon to license each routine injected child to vaccine. They should know. They should understand it. They could just pull up the package insert, but I've deposed endless pediatricians. They don't know. Using the argument that a vaccine is safe and effective to take away somebody's civil individual rights,

you made the safety and efficacy of that product, a legal and a political issue. Mandates are the tool of bullies, criminals, and dictators. If a patient refuses a medical product after being conveyed its benefits and risks, then that is called informed consent. They were informed and did not consent. Mandating over this objection is immoral and a moral and a moral. liberal thank you very much what an incredible moment historic I mean I don't think that would have happened you know you know nine 10 years ago when we

started all this I think it's a sign that the culture of this nation and really the world as I've been traveling the world with our film and Inconvenient Study the world is changing on this bomb but I want to talk directly to one of the greatest as Ron Johnson put it perhaps one of the most significant attorneys in our lifetime and the attorney for informed consent action there Aaron Siri, who joins me now. Aaron, first of all, what did that feel like, man? I mean, some of the biggest superstars in the world

get to stand on that stage at the Kennedy Center. You ever think a lawyer talking about vaccines would be there? What an amazing moment. No, I was quite honored to even be called and asked to do it. I was surprised. I think there are folks who are beginning to read more about this topic, read the information the get informed section I can website, read my book. And when they do and they, that curtain

gets peeled back, they're like, oh my gosh, holy cow. And when they are, they're like, we got to spread, other people need to know this. And I think that's what prompted the phone call I got to speak at the Kennedy Center. Obviously, wasn't on my bucket list, but I added it after I got the call and then check it off. It's been a bunch of those actually along this journey, Aaron. Look, I just spoke for about 45 minutes with Dr. Robert Malone about this court decision. So I don't want to go through all the details. So let me just ask you this question then as an attorney.

If you were a Department of Justice attorney and you were going to appeal this case, what would that case look like? It would be pretty simple, actually. there's three issues. The first one is standing. Does the American Academy of Pediatrics have standing to challenge this decision? I could see a family, maybe potentially, I don't know, but the AAP, the judge even recognized it was a stretch,

and I could see that easily being overturned. For people, because this is a term, honestly, Aaron, I did not understand until we started doing all this work together. And it ends up being one of the most difficult things when we're trying to think of a case that we could bring her help, with is so standing is in a court case essentially the person bringing the case has to show that I'm going to be that we are harmed or have been harmed could be harmed you help me help me understand so article three of our constitution created the courts it's the created the judicial

branch and what did the article three of the constitution say it said that that those courts are supposed to hear cases in controversy okay so they're supposed to to hear actual disputes and that's been interpreted to mean del what you just said that there needs to be either a harm or let's call it an imminent harm okay just to simplify it okay so they're not supposed to make decisions about stuff that's not where the party before them in that case is either being harmed or is about to be harm or is in threat of being harmed otherwise you could just run to the court anybody can run to the court for anything say i don't like what congress just I don't like what the president just did.

I just, you know, that would undo the whole notion of separation of powers. So, you know, Article I is the legislature. They have their powers. Article two is the executive branch. They have their confined powers. And Article three, the courts have their confined powers. And so in this instance, the question then is,

does the American Academy Pediatrics have a harm to itself, right, or an imminent harm such that, it has standing, and that's where that's where it comes in, to challenge it. It doesn't get to say we're here on behalf of kids that will be injured, then one of those kids would have to be, one of the potential injured would have to be the plaintiff. The plaintiff. Exactly. Okay.

Okay, got it. We deal with this all the time for I-Can. Yeah, I know. ICAN has a lot of interest. I can necessarily is not necessarily the right plaintiff in a case, even though it has maybe a tangential interest. It has to have an actual cognizable interest. And okay, so that's first one.

Okay, let's put that aside. All right. Second thing is this, and this is a consequential thing that this judge said. The judge said as follows. He said, look, what Congress intended CDC is that you have to first go to ASIP and get their advice before you change the vaccine schedule or do other things related to vaccines. That's what this court said. And it said, so since NANNA and NANA CDC, you didn't.

and go to ASIP and ask their opinion about changing the vaccine schedule and some other stuff, all of that is struck down. Okay? That's now, ASIP is an advisory committee. It gives its advice. It doesn't get to get the final say on changing the vaccine schedule. That's the CDC director's job. Right. So what this court is saying is like, you have to take advice. You have to ask their opinion first. Okay, now look, if that's going to be the law, then so be it. And hopefully it stays that way when the next administration comes in and they have different views and we'll gladly use that precedence, okay, as well. But I suspect that that won't be over, that will be overturned because in the decision, when the judge says, yes, you have to go to ASIP first, did he point to a section of law that says, hey, CDC must first go ask ASIP's advice? No, you know why?

It doesn't exist. There's no such provision. There's actually a provision that says the CDC gets to decide. Instead, what this judge did, he found four random little snippets in various parts of the law where it seemed to indicate that you should kind of follow what the ACIP's schedule says, ignoring the rest of those sentences where it often says that is created by the CDC basically. Okay, so even those four, so he like stitched together this random stuff. So that's what I think they could appeal on.

That's number two. And then finally, what this judge did is this. He said, okay, I've now struck down everything you did with that ASIP. But of course, Del, what does that leave? ASEP could just go meet and just affirm it. Yeah. Well, that would be a problem. So the judge then went and did this.

He said, this ASIP committee that you have, is not valid. It violates something called the Federal Advisory Committee Act FACCA, because he says it's not fair, balanced. Okay, I'll just leave it at that. Yeah. And because they don't have enough expertise in vaccines, okay, even though, by the way, the standard is not expertise, it's knowledge if you read the ASIP charter. So he put a higher standard than the charter has. So that's one ground to appeal it. And then separately, he says that Robert Malone, by the way, doesn't have enough of vaccine knowledge being this committee. And let me tell you something.

If this committee is not balanced, it's considered fair and balanced, then we better overdue and have every single ACEP decision. I believe since 1969, I believe it's the first year of that committee, if I'm not mistaken, or 64, something like that, sometime in the 60s. There has never been a fair and balanced ACE committee ever. So, you know, if they... Meaning it's always been seated with what every investigation is said are pharmaceutical representative shills that make money off of the products working for the very companies. Conflicts of interest everywhere you look. Most people not filling out their conflict of interest. We've got the Custle Report, all of these different things that have said this forever.

It's never been balanced. So we then, I mean, if this stands then, Aaron, is this an avenue by which I came in the future might go out for? future, you know, you know, ASEP communities, if they try to go back to just being pharmacills again, we can just say, hey, there's precedence now.

We can take you to court. Yes, and if we end up before this, judge, I bet he'll reverse himself very quickly. I'm speculating. I'm speculating. With that said, with that said, I don't think it will remain the precedent. First of all, if the DOJ doesn't appeal it,

I don't get technical, but if the GOJ doesn't appeal it, it remains the decision of one district court. That's not binding precedent. That is maybe persuasive precedent. It's something other judges can rely upon. But no federal judge is beholden to follow that decision. Only the decision of a circuit court,

and then typically for that circuit, is it become binding. So I don't think SCOTUS, the Supreme Court of United States, SCOTUS, would affirm this decision. I can't see it happening. And now you got the HHS in a weird spot. Do they appeal this?

And while they're doing that, there's no ASIP. Or do they just reconstitute ASIP and let this terrible decision stand? Which leaves me the next thing. One of the things, sort of a very unique, I would say, legal update this week is that I can through you. And, you know, we've worked on our urge of Secretary Kennedy to amend the ASIP charter. So now that it's back in his hands, if he decides to not just wait out this court rule, And there's some thoughts. He might just reconstitute a new ASIP committee and make sure he dots his eyes.

But you're saying he can change what eyes he needs to dot and what T's he needs to cross because that's within his jurisdiction. And you have just submitted to him through us a letter on, here's what you should change in it. So that the next time a judge comes up, that judge is going to be referring to your new rules around what an ASIP committee should and should not be. Is that, that's within his right. Is it not? It is. It's directly within the HHS Secretary's right to amend the ASIP Charter, and that charter was in large part, in significant part, I should say, what this judge pointed to.

He said, ah, the charter says you have to be experts in vaccines, which again, by the way, it does say that, but it also says you can be knowledgeable, but let's just put that aside. Okay. And the charter kind of reflects what, you know, the committee should be comprised of. So the charter is up for renewal next Friday, actually. So we're about a week away from Secretary Kennedy being able to just amend it as, you know, obviously within certain bounds, but can amend the charter. And so we submitted proposed amendments to the charter that I believe actually,

bring it more in line with what the federal law requires. The federal law says fair and balanced, right? Well, let's think about fair imbalance. The ASIP is not only there to promote vaccines, right? It's also there to assure vaccine safety as well. I mean, they published the list of contradictions and precautions and so forth. But the charter doesn't call in any way for folks who have experience with vaccine injuries, focus on protecting the rights of those of vaccine injuries, of treating those of vaccine

injuries, nor addressing informed consent or protecting that right as well, all of which are critical to the core mission of what ASIP should be doing. So one of the things, for example, we did was delineated what a fair and balanced ASAP should look like. Yes, OBGYN, yes, this and this and this, but also folks who have experienced informed consent, those who have experienced with vaccine injury. are those folks being left out of the mix, right? Who actually have, you look at the current ASIP committee. You got guys like Cody Meisner.

If you had to choose somebody who's more of a vaccine zealot, Cody Meisner or Paul Offit, I choose Cody Meisner. Wow, yeah. I mean, you know, and then on the other side, you got folks who unlike this zealotry, you know, you saw him at the hearing, where I testified. Yeah. Guy was emotional.

He was almost hyperbolic because he is a true believer. You know, the way he reacted was just not one of intellect, not one of engagement with the evidence that was presented. And on the other side, you have finally have a number of folks who actually are rational about this, who are not zealots, who actually are willing to engage even if it doesn't fit within the narrative.

But that's exactly what this apparent judge doesn't like. It doesn't like folks to do that. And so we call for that balance in the amendments. as well as a number of other things and asking them to balance. That's brilliant. Thank you for doing that work on behalf of ICan. And lastly, we have a legal update, probably one of the most important ones. ICANN demands that HHS add 300 new injuries to the VICP vaccine injury table.

Now, of course, this has to do with vaccine court, this kangaroo court. Really essentially, if I understand this, we can only bring cases that the injury is already understood to potentially. potentially been caused by the vaccine because it's on this table. We have 300 new injuries. How long has it been since they've added an injury? This is something, look at these numbers everybody. 62 different influenza vaccine injuries have been added. 51 MMR vaccine injuries, 47 hepatitis B, 41 DTAP, 39.

Look at these are all, they need to be on this list so that people have a recourse. And this is something legally, you know, from the very first day we started from the next, 1986 Act and the rules by which this is all supposed to be governed. This is one of those things. They're essentially breaking, not necessarily the law, but the rule here. These were supposed to be being added every time they discovered a new injury, correct? Oh, no, they are an abject violation of federal law, and they have been for decades, to be clear. They are in complete violation of federal law, have been for decades, and what we're asking is

them to fix that. Can I just make one more point about AISA before I answer this? Okay, sure. I say one more important point. All right, let's go back. Didn't mean to cut you off. Okay, you've got the pharmacy. It's just that you've got, the whole idea of ASIP is supposed to be an independent body that's doing what?

That at the end of this process where the pharma company has immunity to liability, they don't have a financial incentive to do proper clinical trials. They do often defunct clinical trials. They then submit it. They're going to make billions of dollars. At the very end of this whole process, you then have this group of folks at ASIP. Now are supposed to make a decision on whether or not to recommend universal. of this product to every child in America.

This committee should be skeptical. This should be the most skeptical committee you could actually ever find. It shouldn't be one that in any way. Forget taking money from pharma. It shouldn't even be one where somebody evidences a leaning towards vaccines. They should have people that are skeptical,

that are questioning. Because before you unleash your product into millions of kids, this is the last stop on that train. It makes it on that schedule. We know what happens. Farmer makes billions. They use that to continue to promote the product. The whole machine of a federal state health agency

kicks in to promote it. The entire medical establishment makes money from it, gets behind it. And that's it. The gate, the horse is out of the gate or whatever it is. You can't put that genie back in the bottle. Maybe that's an analogy.

You think of that right. And so you do want skepticism, But, but, you know, and that's exactly what apparently this, this ASEP committee literally, let's be clear when you and I first started going, which no one was going at all. You said, Del, we got to get to these ASEP meetings. You're allowed to speak on a microphone. They're open to public. Nobody's going. It was all pharmaceutical industry people that would literally watch this dog and pony show. Then the ASEP committee would vote yes, no matter how rare the disease and how relatively ineffective the vaccine was. And then, We would run out, call their constituent, reporters would all go, and they were suddenly billionaires. We have a billion-dollar product that's going to be advertised with the government of the United States. We don't pay for advertising. We're protected from liability. Yahoo, we never had to do a safety trial.

We got through without a placebo trial. This thing was the biggest disaster for human health. So you're right. I'm as passionate as you are. But that is essentially what we witnessed. It was just a giant party, just short of them all standing around with martini glass. waiting for the announcement that their new product is going to make them a billion dollars. Yeah, there was no real critical thinking of view analysis or pushback.

It was rubber stamp approvals with a presumption of safety at every single meeting. But it was. And you can level whatever criticisms you want about the current committee members, but what you can't say is they're vexed. They're zealots, and they're not trying to really look carefully and evaluate these products for the first time ever. And that is what this judge has undone. He's undone the first time in ATSM's history that you actually have a committee that is trying to do a little counterweight to give a little bit of actual objectivity when it comes to products. Okay.

I'll answer your other question now. Okay. So now on to the injury table. 300 injuries. We're telling, we send a letter because whether or not we know Robert Kennedy Jr., he's still HHS secretary in our lawsuits, if we have to bring one, unfortunately. you're going to be against the HHS Secretary. We've sent a kind little letter saying, our petition saying basically, can you add these 300 injuries that should have been added a long time ago

onto the vaccine injury tables? What are the next steps? Yeah. So just to just to make sure I properly frame exactly what it is we're doing, when Congress eliminated in 1986 the ability to sue the pharmaceutical injury injury, they set up the vaccine injury compensation program. And that is a federal program where you sue the secretary of HHS who obtain compensation

and you fight against the Department of Justice to obtain compensation. The whole idea of this program, Dell, was to get folks who were injured by vaccines, speedy, fair compensation. And in return for that promise, what did those who were injured by vaccines give up? They gave up the right to sue the manufacturer.

They gave up the right to a jury trial. They gave up the right to get actually their damages. Instead, they're capped at $250,000 for pain and suffering and $250,000 for death. They gave up the right to discovery, which is how you typically prove the injury. That's the ability to get documents from the company who made the product, to depose their scientists. How did you prove most drugs cause harm? That's how you do it. You can't do that with these vaccines.

You gave up the right to sue against a party that bends to economic interest, like a company, right, where the economics matter. Instead, you have to sue the federal government, or where do they care? It's not their money, it's our money, to fight you forever. You gave up the right to have to litigate against lawyers that also have limitations because they're private lawyers.

Instead, you have to fight against federal government lawyers, the Department of Justice, who again, fight you like crazy, have a whole division to fight you. You gave up. Are we lagging? Yeah, there we go. You're back.

You're back. You gave it the right to the- Excer. Okay. I'm going to stop the list there. The point is you gave out and you don't get an article three judge. Not only you're not get a jury, you don't even get member article three of the Constitution. You don't get an article through judge. You get something called special master. Let's just leave it at that. And so you gave up all these rights, right? And by the way, you also gave up the right to be able to just bring a claim right away. Because if you're injured from under something else, you contact the firm. They'll send the letter a demand. It goes to a claim adjuster. You could potentially resolve it pretty quick. Here, unless your hospitalized are dead, typically, you've got to wait six months, right? And you gave up the right to have a party on the other side where the court will actually hold them into deadlines.

Here, when you file a lawsuit against the, when we sue the federal government, as we do all the time for I can, they get 60 days, 30 days depending on the type of case, maybe a little extension. Here, you're often looking at nine to 12 months after you finally get the claim file before they even respond. Okay, with all of that said, you gave all this up. for supposedly fair, speedy compensation. Well, what was the avenue? What was the method to give you that fair speedy compensation? They created something called the vaccine injury table. And on this table, each vaccine that covered by the program,

the injuries that are considered associated with that vaccine, and then the time frame in which if an injury arose, that injury arose, what happens is you don't get automatic compensation. The burden, however, shifts to the government to show that it wasn't the vaccine. Okay? Yeah. And the reason for that is that it puts the onus on the CDC,

the FDA, HHS to do the science, to do the work on these products, and that they haven't shown that the vaccine doesn't cause the harm, but they have found that it's associated, it should be on the table. The idea is that it's towards the petitioner, that's those who are injured. And the federal law, and this is where the violation occurs,

okay? I'm getting just an endless stream of ridiculous questions from legacy media about this point. Okay. The law says explicitly that the injuries that are to be added to this table are those that are associated with the vaccine. That is the exact word

in the statute, in the federal law. Hey, Wait, Po, you don't like that word? Go to Congress and tell them to change it, okay? But that's the language, what it says. It says associated. So injuries that are associated should be on that table. Interestingly, when they first created the table, it used the language that said these are the injuries related to

or something to that effect. Even Congress even clearly understood what I wanted to use one kind of language versus a number. another kind of language. Any event. So, fine. The table should have all the injuries associated with the vaccine.

Now, over the last 30 years, the CDC, HHS, HRS, which is the very agency that administers the vaccine court, okay, basically. They have commissioned the Institute of Medicine to review vaccine injury pairs that they have,

said are, here it comes, associated. They said that. They admitted to the Institute of Medicine. This injury is associated with this vaccine. So we'd like you to actually review the literature to tell us whether they're causally related or not. When the IOM did that review, and if it found the injury and was not causally related, we didn't add it to that. the 300 when it found it was causally related we did at it and when it said it didn't know because hey cdc you didn't do your job you didn't do the science we put it on the list too because it's associated now if they go do the science and find it's not causally related wonderful take it off but until you do that job these folks gave up all those rights the the uh the uh

justice as intended by Congress should be tipping in their direction. So that's what this is. And to all the legacy media watching this, let me remind you again, it's not an automatic they get compensated. It means the burden shifts to HHS shows it's not the vaccine. So great, if it's not the vaccine, shouldn't be hard. Because when we file a claim for somebody who's injured by a vaccine, we have to give at least three years of all their medical records. surely you can find then the differential diagnosis of what caused it if it wasn't the vaccine. So that puts it in a framework. We've been demanding this.

You know, it's clearly not going to happen. And so we have sent a formal notice to HHS to Secretary Kennedy saying, hey, there's a federal law kindly bring HHS in compliance. We sure hope the White House lets him do it because I have no doubt left to his own devices. I know I have no doubt Secretary Kennedy would do it. The question is whether or not the White was the climate that Robert Malone was just describing to us where it looks like Kennedy's being told don't go near any vaccine topic. But that's not going to stop us. We don't care.

What do we got? 60 days they have until, you know, we can bring a lawsuit. Is that right? Under one of the, we're suing, we brought notice under two different provisions under one of them at 60 days. Okay. And so we will be, I mean, if they don't start the rulemaking process of, you know, as we've discussed, if they don't start the rulemaking process, then the, we will be commencing a lawsuit as directed. In behalf of not only I can, who has organizational standing like the AAP, right?

Yes. But also on behalf of, as we noted, explain the letter, all of the individuals, who are being injured and can't bring a table claim because it's not on the table, but have one of those 300 injuries. Wow. So they will be plaintiffs. And those folks to go back to our legal law school lesson have standing. No question.

Aaron, amazing work. You're brilliant. Congratulations on your trip to the Kennedy Center. Thank you for all the great work that you're doing. And thank you for taking time today to bring us some clarity on all that's happening. Are you hopeful? I guess I'll just ask that. I think, you know, I've been in a lot of meetings this week. There's people like, you know, what are we going to say to the people? What's happened to our movement? What would you like your sort of parting thoughts for people that have watched us have so many wins?

It's been a little bit of a rough week. What would your parting thought be on that front? Do we have enough to be hopeful about? Absolutely. A hundred percent. And we just have to keep pushing whatever advantages we have. the climate, when the cultural cognition around this issue changes, when enough folks in this country's views on this issues change, that will dictate the politics, and it will dictate how things come out, easy to be government of all stripes. Because, you know, and you've heard me use this analogy before,

you know, gay marriage was never going to be found to be a constitutional right by the US recording the 1800s, the early 1900s. Why? Did the Constitution? change between then and when it was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court as a constitutional right? No. Cultural cognition change. And once cultural cognition changed and there was that shift and a paradigm, everything, you know, it dragged things along with it. You're not going back in many ways on some of

those issues unless, again, cultural cognition shifts again. And similarly here, you know, when we first went to ASIF 10 years ago, I don't think that was a member of Congress, though, they wouldn't let us in the building probably forget it like i definitely didn't have all the silver hair back then you know we look like kids we were walking like kids but you know at you know at the end of the day when folks finally understand what the facts and the evidence and the truth is you can't undo it and that's why despite their billions of dollars of promoting these vaccines at the federal health agency the billions of pharma spends on it the billions collectively amongst the state health agencies and the medical establishment apparatus to promote these vaccines and persuade you.

With this well-oiled machine of anti-vax groups, you mean product safety groups, about vaccines that have collectively a few million dollars against that entire machine, the reason they can be effective is that despite the extremely limited budget that the few national groups have, ICAN, CHD, and the state groups have who really are. are, you know, I mean, you donate to your state groups, folks. Let me tell you they're there fighting for you. These folks are able to have an incredible impact because you can tell somebody safe and effective 100 times, but you show them the package interest for a hep B vaccine one

time and it's over because they are like, you lied to me. You lied to me. And they don't understand. That's why they're not quote unquote winning. It's because you can only fool people for so long. And it only takes showing them the evidence one time, and they're never going back. And that doesn't mean we got to like,

that doesn't mean I'm not glossing a good or a bad connotation on anything. I'm just saying there's the evidence, and we've got to start looking at things objectively. Anyway. I totally agree. You've been laying out the science. You just did the Kennedy Center. We've been doing that on ICANN.

We're watching world-renowned scientists shift gears and come our direction every single day, more and more of them as they look at the science. Because as you said, doctors don't really deal very well with stop reading, trust the experts, stop reading, don't look it up, don't look at the research, trust our experts. That's falling apart. It's falling apart in the society. It's falling apart with scientists and doctors around the world. You're a huge part of that, and we're just really honored to be working with you, Aaron.

Thank you for taking the time today. Thank you, Dale. All right. Take care. So, you know, obviously, I've been saying it all along. I said at the moment, you know, many of us work very hard to get Robert Kennedy Jr. into the H.H. Secretary's position. But I told you, we can't go to sleep here. In fact, there's going to be pushback.

Kennedy is going to need tension from our sides. That is clear now. It is clear by what Robert Malone said, that there seems to be. be some amnesia or forgetting what Maha did for this administration, whether that's directly Donald Trump or just the people around him. I don't know. I don't care. I don't care. What I know is that this is a movement of the people and the people are rising up around the world. This is an international movement now. And when you look at polls, as I've said, where 60% of pregnant moms are saying, no, I am not going to give every vaccine to my child. The world has changed. When you see Robert

Malones and Peter McCullough's and Paul Merrick and, you know, all these world-renowned scientists starting to say, I wouldn't give these vaccines to my kids now that I've finally done the research. Obviously, things are happening. But that, a huge part of this cultural shift, which is not just our duty here on the high wire, but yours, you've been making that possible. And you make it possible. And when you sponsor this work, when you sponsor this show, which is really just a billboard to tell you how many lawsuits were involved in and what we're working.

winning and what we're not winning at yet. But right now we've got nearly 90 lawsuits, but we've put together a couple of slides just so you get a concept of what you're involved in. What suing the government for transparency actually produces, we've produced 146 federal lawsuits, 516 document production secured, which adds up to over 8 million pages released by the government. And 23 federal agencies, we've taken to court. Here's a list of those eight. agencies when you want to see them very quickly. HRQ, Air Force, CDC, CIA, DARPA, HRS, NAVA, NAVA, Nassau, you name it, Department of Defense.

We don't care who you are if you are lying to the public. We're going to get to the bottom of it. Yes, I think we all need to get t-shirts. I sue the government. That's what you do when you help us here at the informed consent to action network. By the way, let's use this right while we got it. There's a judicial system that is currently. working on our behalf most of the time, especially when it's coming to censorship right now,

these issues of freedom of religion, which is a huge part of the cases that we bring. So please, if any other week you thought about this and thought, you know, I guess I could give, you know, we all have options of nonprofits we can give to. How many of them have air in Siri? How many of them are standing in Washington, D.C. at the Kennedy Center? How many of them are in courtrooms all around the country fighting for your rights and the rights of your children to not just, not to wipe vaccines out the plan for you to decide which ones, if any, you want, when you want them. Do you not have that right? Do you not deserve the right to say, not today, buddy? I'm going to go do a little more research. Maybe I'll do a few. It's up to me. If we don't have

that right, this isn't the United States of America. This isn't a nation of the free. So please, I hope you'll go to the top of the page and think about this. When you think about donating to ICANN and the high wire, just hit donate to I can. We would love it if you become a recurring donor. It helps us know how many of these lawsuits we can get involved in. $26 a month for $2026 would be awesome. But a dollar, if that's all, you've got, $5 a month. You know there's some amount you can give so that you know that you are voting with your dollars now,

that you are actually fighting to make the world a better place with us. That's why it's the informed consent action network. Thank you for being part of our network. We'll make it easy for you. If you're listening right now, you can just text us. Text the number 72022 and type in the word donate. We'll also take all forms of donations, whether it's Bitcoin, your car, your house, your estate, whatever you want to give to make this incredibly important work now happen. Secretary Kennedy is under pressure.

We want to bring pressure from the other side, not from the top, but from the top. below saying, hey, the people that put him there are pissed and we've got our torches lit and we're outside the gates. The high wire is all about. Look, there's a lot of heavy information, some of it really positive this week. Also though really, you know, intense and there's fears, there's concerns. My 17-year-old son is concerned there might be a draft. We're living in just incredible times.

I'll be honest with you. I'm feeling more stressed and pressured than, you know, certainly I was years of Now some of that's my own doing. I decided to like run guys for president and and try to run a nonprofit. But we're all doing that, right? We're all working like two, three different jobs and then we're trying to figure out chat, GBT, and this is even helping me with all of that stress. What's happening to our brains? We think, I think so much about the health of our bodies. But did you realize how much of your body's health is being driven by your brain? That is the focus of my next guest, Dr. Patrick Porter. Take a look at this. Dr. Patrick Porter is an award-winning author, educator, researcher, and speaker. We're also the Dean of Mind-Based Studies at the International Quantum University of Integrative Medicine. Somebody that has spent over the last 30-plus years researching and evaluating the function of the brain. With over 30 years of experience, 500-plus keynotes and best-selling books, he's pioneering brainwave tech to help unlock our mental potential.

I don't think we have a mental health crisis. I think we have a physiological crisis. are sitting too much, they're not moving, they're not breathing, they're not eating right. When you have a positive thought, you're actually generating more mitochondrial energy. Seven generations of our ancestors are influencing us. It's not that we can't change it. It's that if we go on default mode, which means if we go into stress, that means we're reacting to our environment, we're not interacting with it, then our genetic predisposition will show up. But we have the power to change 80% of that. Our bodies really haven't changed since we're being

chased by Saber 2 Tigers. When these bodies were running around 100,000 years ago, we'd have stress effects happen maybe four or five times a week. Now, because of technology, we're having stress effects happen anywhere between four or five times before breakfast. Your brain only knows this moment in time. Right. And if we can get into this moment in time and realize that we are spectacular beings of light and energy and vitality, and we start sharing that message with other people, we'll live in a world of light, energy, and vitality. man that's powerful he's a co-author of this fantastic new book brain fitness blueprint integrating ancient wisdom and modern technologies for peak performance dr patrick porter thank you for joining me

it's really great to have you here we have gotten to share the stage many times across the country speaking to people I love this book and I and I love your message and you know reading this book made me think, you know, as I said introducing this, we think a lot, we're really started, especially those of us that are awake. We're really starting to focus on our health. There's all sorts of people getting very serious about diets and their exercise and, you know, what am I feeding my stomach, you know, and we are using our brain to pick the best diets and our brain to figure out, you know, what vitamins are our brains, am I going to do stem cells or not? But we're not thinking about how healthy is my brain, which you point out might be one of the greatest determinations

of your actual physical health. Yes. I mean, your brain controls, are you having a stress response? I mean, are you taking those vitamins saying, I'm going to take them so I don't get sick? Well, then the brain's making you sick because the brain can't process a negative. But if you're taking them to be healthy, then... So you're even saying, like, this is almost like a form of placebo effect, right? Like, the thought system when you're doing these things is actually affecting the value

and what you're getting from them. Yeah. Well, the nice thing about science now is this isn't religion. They don't have to believe me. They can go to the science literature. Your words change 3,200 gene expressions. So when you're sitting there at the table, you know, when you say a prayer over your food, now they know that what you're doing is you're upregulating yourself and the food

because there's this biofield around us that actually changes our environment. This is not religion. This is not something, it's called the transport electron chain, the electron transport chain. Everything we eat, think, experiences around us is changed to energy. So now it's what are we doing with that energy? And that's why when you talk about when the AI segment was so scary, I mean, we are the first generation that our kids are more stupider than we are. I mean, that's never happened before.

And they've done college, like they showed, I was on Fox News being interviewed because they let college students use AI, and they actually were dumber than the ones that didn't. Because they're letting technology tell them, and our brains are literally being rewired, not for information, but where do we go get the information? So one day they take away the information, what's going to happen? Right.

They're not thinkers anymore. We're all taught what to think, not how to think. So this is a brain game. And just to give you one example, let's say you wake up in the morning to an alarm clock. Most people do that. They hit their alarm clock three times. Well, that sends a cascade of effects happening to the body. Your body is already, all the muscles are full of sugar.

There's no place for your new stress to go because you just had a stress response. Your liver pumped out 25 grams of sugar. It's happening just from the moment my alarm rings. I'm sending my body into a stress response. Yes. And immediately, your insulin has to kick in. A cascade of new events happens. The body has to mobilize insulin to store that sugar into the adipose tissue of the body.

25 grand. So you just ate a candy bar while you were sleeping, but you didn't get to enjoy it. But your body got to store it because later this body that's been around for 200,000 years says, we're going to have a famine down the road. We need this food later. Most people are running around like a refrigerator with a year's worth of food. on their back and they don't realize it it's not what you eat that makes you fat when I was when I was in people magazine they said why don't you have a diet

I said it's not what you're eating it's what's eating you how do you look at food there there are people we all know that eat total junk but they're not fat because they look at food differently they think about food differently they have an active lifestyle they maybe they got lucky in the genetics of you know whatever happens with our body but the reality is that you're thinking in fact MIT just proved this actually about 14 weeks ago they They said that every thought you think goes 10,000 miles away from the person having that thought.

And that thought goes into a web that actually interacts like the World Wide Web. So we're talking about consciousness now. How can we, they said that no person arise, you don't have arising thoughts. Those thoughts arise within us based on our environment, based on what's going on. So the stress response, when people look at the world media in the propaganda machine, because we're not watching news anymore. We're watching a performance. They're producing the news instead of, you know, telling us about the news. And it's all fear-based. I always tell people if you're out there right now and you're too happy. If your life's going too well, just turn on seeing

in. Yeah, it'll be miserable in five minutes. You know, because our people look at life as it's happening to them. Right. My job with Brain Fitness Blueprint and Roshika Sakri, my co-author is to tell people, life happens through you, through your eyes, through your ears, through your experience, take an active role in what you're doing because your brain plays a major part of that and it tells the rest of the body what to do. And like Bruce Lipton wrote the book, Biology of Belief, gosh, 20 years ago. He said, he was the one who said and really told people, hey, your thoughts control the destiny of your biology. Your destiny is not in your genes. Your destiny is in your lifestyle. I mean, how many ancient cultures keep the wisdom of the

tribe with the youngsters? Right. They keep it. the elders. So obviously there must be some problem we're having with our lifestyle. Right. It's amazing. How do you, you know, I mean, you bring up, first of all, I love at the end of every chapter, you sort of have a, let's reflect on, you know, some of the issues we might have, and then let's think about the solution. So it's really active. You lay out thoughts just as beautifully as you just did there. But, you know, in this world, like we, most of us have, you know, CNN's on or Fox going on in the background, right? We get in our car and literally the radio, usually news is just giving us bad information

everywhere we go. And there is a lot of bad information. Is this, I mean, are we talking about, like, tricking your mind to believe you're not in this hellhole that sometimes we think we're seeing? Like, how do we do it? A really wise man about 2,000 years ago said, be in the world, but not of it. Right. You know, when you think about being in the world, but you don't have to play a part in it. Just because you have a thought doesn't mean you have to act on it.

The TV has many dials. The internet has many places to search. Barnes & Noble has different sections of the bookstore. I mean, you have to choose intentionally what you're being fed, just like you choose what's on your table. You know, when people go, well, what do you mean? That's all this junk in my food. Who put it there? Well, they're making money off it.

Yeah. So you can vote with your paycheck. And, you know, we have to be true about things, but you don't have to be sucked into it. You know, I don't have to turn into the news to know if I'm going to have a good day to day. Every morning I wake up, it's a new day in school. I should wake up a little nervous. Most people crush that by having coffee first thing in the morning. These are simple things we tell them in the book.

Oh, man, you're going to go after my coffee. You can have your coffee two hours after waking. But in the morning, you should wake up with neuropranephrin dopamine and cortisol. You should be a little nervous. This is a new day, a new discovery. It's like school. What's going to happen today? But if you didn't clean out the glia cells through sleep,

opening up the glyolomaphic, this system of the body, that if you and I were in medical school in 2015, wouldn't even know about. Right. But a Denmark physician's doing a sleep study in 2015 and finds out that we have this whole system that cleans out the brain. We didn't even know about it.

Doctors, most doctors don't even know about it. They think sleep's a luxury. No, it's a necessity. Yeah. That's why, you know, sleep is a sport. You know, how are you sleeping? People have watches, rings, and they score, they get on social media, they tell people,

I'm now sleeping six hours, eight hours, you know, and they're being told all the wrong information because sleep isn't about time in bed. We did our study with cold. I discovered it actually. I think I said on the show once or twice. I got a hiking. I went hiking and camping with the kids, so I got like a carm wash. Didn't know it did sleep. And I discovered, since it was on, I am not getting REM sleep. I am lightly sleeping. I stopped wearing it at a certain morning because it was telling me every morning, you're going to be exhausted today. which is a terrible monstrum, like I think to the point, you know. Right.

So the thing is that there are certain things. We point out in the book like sleeping, if the listeners are out there, one key thing. You don't have the own brain to have to do this, the technology. You can lay in bed when you're done doing everything you're going to do in bed because we do other things besides sleep there. You know, when you're done with all of that, lay your head back in the pillow. Nobody needs to know what you're doing. Breathe into the count of four. Breathe out to the count of eight.

Release your body's tension. Our body's an electrical system. And that tension builds up. If we go to bed too fast, there's something called latency in those sleep scores. Most people go, I don't need to help sleeping. I go to sleep really fast. That's really bad. Really?

You need to unwind the system. So the breathing process does that. It unlocks when you breathe it. You're turning on something called the sympathetic system. This is the fighter flight that most people's locked. They wake up in the morning fearful and stress. They go to sleep, fearful, and they don't get any sleep. They're in bed like the cold minders I was talking about.

Two minutes was basically most of them got 10 hours in bed. They weren't sleeping, they were in bed. So it's very different. And so when you unlock the nervous system breathing out to the kind of eight, you turn on the parasympathetic. The only recovery happens when you're in parasympathetic state, which your body knows how to regulate. Because let's say that we were being chased by that saber-toothed tiger we were talking about at the beginning of the episode. We made it. We actually are the genetic ancestors, a bunch of paranoid schizophrenics.

They didn't jump off the cliff. They didn't get eaten by the tiger. You know, all of that genetic information is inside of us. So we have to realize, is that my information or is it somebody else's information? Because our brain was not designed for this day and age. I mean, even our grandparents, I still remember my grandmother got in my car. I got an X-5. And this was years ago when they first came out with GPS in the cars.

And the car said, you're going over the speed limit, you know, because I had it set to tell me. Yeah, yeah. She goes, you need a car to tell you that? And I said, yeah, because I'm so busy thinking. Right. So I don't get a ticket. And she goes, I've never. had a ticket, well, she has, but you know, when you're 93, you'll give them some breaks. But, you know,

we lean on technology a lot today, and it can be good and it can be bad. But we have to, that's one of the four T's really, you know, that can cause brain technology can be a good thing or a bad thing. And a lot of, unfortunately, a lot of people are using technology in the worst ways. You know, it's not a very good, it's not a good master. It's a good servant. Well, I mean, and you point out in the book, you make, you know, and it's really, we can't change something we're not aware of, right? And it's like I said, we're doing all this thinking about all the problems in the world. We're even thinking about all the problems in our body, but we're not paying attention to what are we feeding our brains. What are we thinking about?

And, you know, you give us steps in this book to just become aware of how you just, what thoughts you had while you're eating, why you're choosing, what you're choosing, so that we can get back and get back in control. And something I talk a lot about, really, is, you know, both you and I have said personally, like I grew up with a father that taught me to meditate. It's a huge part of what I think makes it possible for me to do these things that I do. People say, are you, I mean, are you afraid? Are you stressed? It's like, you know, do you get worried? I mean, honestly, no, because I really, I've been taught to be able to just clear my mind, get rid of all the chatter. I watch the news like you, and it makes me crazy.

And it makes me, but then I shut it all down and say, but what's really going on? What am I personally? What can I do about it today? Like prayer of serenity. It sort of comes down to simply, what can I actually change and what can I not? And let me let go of all the things that are really outside of my ability to have an effect. Right. And that's part of the sleep's ritual.

I tell people you don't have habits. You have rituals. Yeah. I mean, just think about if you run out of toothpaste, what happens? Or somebody moves to your hairbrush, in my case, it doesn't matter. But different things like that as people think about it. But we have these daily rituals. And at night, one of the daily rituals I teach people in the book is you should think

all the things that happened today that were positive. Because they're far more positive. Yeah. And we focus on those. We make them colorful and bright. We put together a little success real for ourselves because we don't have cheerleaders. Yeah. You know, it's not like that Starbucks commercial where the guy wakes up and everybody's cheering him down the sidewalk. You know, most people

are what, they want something from you. They don't, they're not against you. That's one thing I try to tell people. They're not against you. They're just for themselves. Right. You know, they don't even know you exist, most people. Yeah. So we have to be the one looking out for ourselves and realize that there are positive things that happen,

even if there's small things. And our brain is really good at sorting things out and creating programs that make us emit all the positive things because there's so much negative stuff out there. But you have to remember those news agencies scour the world to give us one hour of bad news every day. And sometimes they can't fill it. So they have to replay the old stuff.

Oh, and it repeats all day. It's not 24 hours of news. It's like 30 minutes of news, you know, repeated 24 hours a day over and over and over again. It's a really good point. I know you've got a great technology that we use at R House Brain Tap. In fact, I've got my son working with it for sports, and on occasion for some of the sleep issues,

which you've got all sorts of programs, and they're really meditations, if you will. But for someone that, you know, do you have to have a technology, you know, to be able to sort of really, you know, have your mind clear and able to, to feed your body again? Well, if you're compromised because of stress, then you need something that's going to,

you've got to fight the force with force. You can't just use a, you know, a little bulping hammer if you need a sledgehammer. Right. But if you're in a good place right now, you can do some breathing techniques. In the morning, we always recommend, like psychological breathing or something like the Wimhoff breathing techniques.

Because we need to upregulate. We need to keep that cortisol. Most people, they lose their cortisol. Two o'clock in the afternoon, you should be tired. That's normal. Yeah. That's not tea time. The queen didn't think of that.

That's because biologically, we're in tune with the sun. They call it the circadian rhythm. It's a time where most cultures would be sleeping. But in America, no way. You know, U.S., we've got to go, go, go. We've got to have coffee, tea, sugar, coffee, whatever. We just keep, you know, basically geeking ourselves out with foods when our body needs an electrical reboot.

Yeah. So then in the afternoon, you can do, like, box breathing. That's what they teach the Navy SEALs. If you're more stressed than they are, you know, you're one of six people, going to go take on that battleship, I mean, I don't think so. Right. You know, they teach them how to do box breathing.

It's very simple. They can go either online to one of my videos and watch that, and then at night do that breath. You need to, the breathing is a key. We've proven this at Ames-Boppel. Actually, if they go to PubMed, we've had 22 different publications now that we proved out breathing techniques with brain tap,

that we can change physiology. We didn't get the psychology department first because they're too stuck in their old paradigms. Talk therapy. is not very effective. It's good at first. You know, you need to talk it out. But if they call it revivocation,

so if I keep talking about my problem, what the brain does is give you a better problem. But if you start talking about the solution, the brain keeps giving you better solutions. So that's why positive psychology. A lot of people are moving away from the old school psychology and moving to what's called positive psychology, which your parents knew and my parents knew,

that said, hey, let's start focusing on the solution. Because the brain is a goal-striving organism. But if they don't realize, if you talk about the problem, science now shows it downregulates every DNA pair every 40 seconds. It's not something that it's not just long term, it's immediate. Yeah. So when Henry Ford said when you think you can or you think you can't,

now neuroscience is saying it's very true. In fact, you'll even handicap yourself. You know, we've all had the experience. We go out to the kitchen and say, where's the salt shaker? And the person in the other room, whether it's husband or wife, says, it's right there on the county. You say, no, it's not. Finally, they get fed up, they walk out.

They show you. It's right there. It wasn't there a minute ago. Because we have, in psychology, they call it a stictoma, which means you can't see the sin in another with a stick in your eye. But the reality is that we all have blind spots. Yeah. And usually it's those blind spots. Now we have them physically.

We do have a blind spot. You can just take your thumbs and do this and you'll find your blind spot. We all have blind spots in our vision. But we also have blind spots in our psychology, our thinking. And so if we don't challenge our own thinking, you know, the unexamined life is not worth living, as they say. So, you know, every night we should be revisiting. every morning we should hit the ground running. The devil should be scared you're awake.

You know, hey, oh no, Del's awake. You know, where am I going to hide? I'm doing the best I can scare the devil, I tell you. And it's true, you know, and I find myself more and more getting into the motivation when I'm out speaking in public. And one of the things that, like, I have genuinely turned the tragedies or the things that go really wrong in my life, I now believe that they're just God re-guiding me, right? Just saying, oh, no, that's God's taking the wheel.

and get me back on course. This was for my benefit. You know, and I sort of say whether or not that's actually true, I will tell you my life has seen benefit from just not seeing these things as negative, but just saying, oh, I must be off track. Let me just take a step back here and just, I just need to get back on track and get more success. This is one of those weeks. Honestly, there's a lot of bad news in the space that I've worked very hard at,

but got with Aaron and different people like Maloney, you start talking, well, let's the positive things. What we got going on? What can we do now? Well, paranoia, this kind of positive paranoia, that's been around stoism. You should pretend as if life is working for you, not against you. In fact, in the Bible, it says all things work for good. Yes.

You know, so when you think about everything that's happening, I always tell people there's never been a superhero that didn't go through the dark night of the soul. They all have their kryptonite. Yeah. So yours just happens to be kind of. or whatever. You know, but whatever the kryptonite is for you, the end user, it's, you know, they know

fat, sugar and all these things and they want you sitting down looking at your phones. All these things are contrary to your body's physiology. We should be out moving, we should be in the sun, we should be touching the soil, all the things that nature should bring, all the things I talk about you can do in nature. You can do it when you said, do you have to have this brain tap? No, but if you're going to play in the world, you better have a technology that's going to bring you back. I mean, just because, like, I showed actually what happens during a flight.

When I have a, it's online now, where I showed I lost 70% of my energy just flying in an airplane. Because being in the air, every hour in the air is like getting an x-ray. And it affects your mitochondria. This is the energy cell, the power plant of every cell gets affected. Now, most people just call it jet lag. No, it's not jet lag. You were assaulted. Your body was trying to stay balanced.

Yeah. And it was really light lag because your body. body is in tune with the light. That's why we naturally get tired around 10 o'clock at night, because we make more melatonin between 10 and 11. So all these cycles are happening, but we live in a technology world where we can be across the country in three hours, four hours. And we get set down and the body's going, what the hell just happened? I was just in, you know, Tabika, Kansas, and now I'm in California. What's happening here? It's such great information. Where do people follow you? You've talked about these videos that you're putting out. And where do we find the book?

They can get the book anywhere books are sold. It's taken, Heyhouse, put it out everywhere. You can also go to my personal website, Dr. Patrick Forda.com, at the bottom of it, or Brain Fitness Blueprint, where they can see some other benefits. I'm everywhere online so they can just put in my name. But they can go to trybraintap.com and be in one study, we call it. A study of one. Most people will start sleeping better tonight.

With two-thirds of the world not sleeping, there's a reason they're not able to meditate. It takes energy to sleep. You do more neurological, more neurological. more neurological activity when you're sleeping than when you're awake. So if you're not sleeping well, you're not giving your brain a chance. Let's get you sleeping well, get your back on track, and get the better life that you're designed to live. Awesome. Thank you for joining me today and taking the time, Dr. Porter. Look, it's really this simple.

Are you waking up feeling like life is working to your benefit and that it's beautiful and you're excited about the day? If not, this really is a great book to give you to find those things that maybe you are tripping you up and keeping you from focusing on the positive and ways to get back to that place so that you are, you know, clear thinking your nervous system is totally intact, which then watch what happens to all the other things you're trying to do with your health. I really love this book. Patrick, thank you for doing this great work. You know, if you haven't been following it on social media, by the way, we just got back our YouTube channel for the highwire. So that's huge. Go ahead and follow us there. That's a huge accomplishment.

it since COVID. It's subscribed to the high water on YouTube. So it's been since COVID since we've had it. We'll see how long we last there. Maybe Zuckerberg after losing a couple of lawsuits is, you know, chilling out a little bit. We'll leave us alone, but also be following me on Instagram at Del Bathtree X. Why? Because crazy things happen to me and I've been sharing with the world. You get to see me here. But what happens when you're renovating your daughter's bathroom? You've just torn out a wall. You got your ugliest paint pants on, and then suddenly you get a call from a major reporter. Well, I posted it because my wife happened to shoot me being interviewed in the middle of construction. Take a look at this.

I have a question for you, actually. You know that Atlantic article that came out recently that you were featured in? Yeah. What did you think about? I stand by everything I said in that article. So you want your child to get polio and measles? I want my child to have every infection that they're going to get on this earth to come naturally, not inject them with it. But you know polio can paralyze children, so I'm a little bit confused by that.

A tiny, tiny percentage. I mean, less than 1% have that issue. I believe that those are children that were immune compromised. Meanwhile, we're talking, you know, somewhere between, you know, one and, you know, a thousand or in that neighborhood. But meanwhile, I'm much more, as I stated in the article, I'm much more concerned of permanent disabilities like autism that are now one in 12.5 boys. So that, I mean, it is so at in such a... How old is your son? He's 17. Well, so he's not going to get autism now.

No, thank God, because they never gave him a vaccine. But he could still get paralyzed from polio. By the way, they're not immunocompromise. There was a case in New York a couple of years ago. that person was not even a compromise. And none of the people who got it who were paralyzed before were. So I'm surprised you think they were all even a compromise. Yeah, I mean, I think that if you're a healthy child, then you can handle every virus and

bacteria that we've evolved with over time. And there are always outstanding circumstances, just like there's outstanding circumstances for vaccination. Vaccines come with risk. And we are all as citizens have the right. to decide what risks we want to take on with our children. I personally feel much more comfortable with the risk of letting my children contract diseases that the human beings have been evolving with since the dawn of man versus man-made synthetic viruses with adjuvants and

heavy metals and polysorbid 80 and chemicals designed across the blood-brain barrier. And I think that the overall rate of health in this country being the worst generation we've ever ever seen in our children and the sickest generation of children the industrialized world. I don't see why anyone would want to follow anyone that is claiming to have victory on health. And I really put pediatricians, the AAP, all of them, they've overseen the greatest decline in human health that's ever been recorded. We've gone from 12.8% chronic disease, permanent chronic illness your whole life, 12.8% in the 1980s to now between 40 to 54%, depending on what study you're looking at, that's the greatest

decline in human health that's ever been recorded. So I don't want my children to be living with chronic disease, and I believe that vaccines are a huge contributing factor to chronic disease. I have a lot of fun, obviously. You'd probably be fascinated by a lot of these interviews I do all the time. I want to thank my wife for just, she saw me on the couch. and ran over and started recording that, which has proved to be amazing because that's the second piece of that conversation that's gone out. It's going viral. I think it's somewhere around 750,000 views. And it's had this incredible side effect.

Guess what's going viral is this hat, which I love this hat. In fact, my son was just wearing one of these in his tennis tournament last weekend. And it was like he was on fire. It was amazing. I'm not sure if the hat did it, maybe with Patrick Porter. But when you wake up in the morning and say, be brave, you know, and you put this on, and then you go out and take on the world, and you should have seen what I was doing, demoing that wall.

I should have seen my son play tennis. But you can get this hat, and you better get in there because they are selling like hotcakes at our website. But everything on our website right now is 60% off. Here's just a little promotion about that. We asked and you delivered showing us how you highwire. This is how we highwire. This is how we high wire. Team Highwire is being rep from all over the world.

Sporting our new Highwire gear in the free state of Florida. When I wear this cap, it makes me feel proud. I am a doula and a childbirth educator, and I love wearing my Get vaccinated t-shirt. Sometimes it's not just what you wear, it's who you meet while wearing it. When I was wearing this shirt yesterday, a tourist came up to me and said, love that shirt. Since 2020, when I woke up from The Matrix,

I've been talking to neighbors, connecting with local groups. There are a lot of people that are a little bit hesitant about approaching the topic of vaccination and this wearing this shirt allows them to approach me and I know exactly where to send them. Whether you're dropping the kids at school or marching in rallies across the globe,

we see your dedication, we feel your support. And now it's easier than ever to join the movement because we're having our biggest sale yet. We want to see millions of truth tellers show in the world how they highwire. Head to the highwire. shop to support our mission and stock up on gear for the whole family.

Thank you so much. Keep it up. Thank you for spreading truth. We love you guys. Thanks for what you do. All right. Well, look, a perfect opportunity, as you see in so many of those videos, all these incredible rallies we've been at, a great opportunity to, you know, wear one of those B-Brave hats or maybe an ice to the government t-shirt. I think we're working on that right now. But that will be at the rally we're having in Washington, D.C.,

to try and stop Monsanto and bear from getting liability protection, just like the pharmaceutical industry. So the People versus Poison Rally, there's a website now up, and we would love it. If you are going, please RSVP. You can't imagine what it's like to put one of these events together. We want to have a big enough sound system so people can hear it and have the right technologies in place.

That helps us if you RSVP. We'd love to know that you're going to join us. the people versus poison.org. Go ahead and check it out and you can track all the things that are happening. Of course, Bonnie Harri is really headed that up. She announced it here on the show. We love supporting her moms across America. So many different groups are coming out and coming together.

Environmental groups. I think this thing reaches across the aisles. I think this is one of those opportunities as I've said to reach out to those friends and family members. Maybe there was some conflicts around COVID and the person. perspective of what happened there. But, you know, think about it. You know, my family has always wanted clean food. This is something that really has crossed generations. It's crossed a lot of different lifestyles. We do not want to have liability protection on herbicides and pesticides, or it's over, folks. They're going to poison us. And imagine if those products don't have any

safety testing and can get away with it and never be sued. And it's going to be sprayed on 95% of our crops right when we're finally watching one of the winds. of Robert Kennedy Jr. and this administration is putting a billion dollars in a regenerative farming. There'll be no pressure to move more and more people to organic farms, more and more farmers teaching them regenerative farming. If we give liability protection to this poison that's being poured over all of our food, so really a great opportunity. And by the way, you want to feel good about life. You want to wake up in the morning feeling charged. I get that from just doing what I going to bed every night and saying, you know what, tonight, you know, I look back at the day

and my little moment is, did I do everything? I can't have a pretty good day, man. We fought the man. We won some. We lost some. But in the end, my kids are watching me live passionately. They're watching me address the issues of the world. And it's not just Del Vigree out there.

It's not just Robert Kennedy Jr. change the world. It's you. It's a form consent action network. All of you that make this possible. your donation every time. Every time you make it, send it with a prayer. Think about it. Think about the power it's doing.

It's so amazing. We are changing the world. They're attacking us because we're winning. They're attacking us because we matter. They're trying to divide us in this movement to make us feel like we're all alone again. It's not going to happen. 30% of the world rejected the COVID vaccine. 90% of everyone eligible for a COVID booster is turning it down.

That means even the pro-vaxxers are becoming anti-vaxxers. So meet one. Talk to them. Tell your story. Maybe they'll ask you about that be brave hat. What's that all about? But more than anything, stay positive, be positive. Positive energy when you put food in your mouth.

Positive energy when you're working out. Positive energy when you wake up and know if you stay positive, we are going to win. I like winning. I hope you do too. And we'll keep talking about that on the high wire. I'll see you next week.