The Highwire with Del Bigtree - Episode 475: FAUCI’S LAST STAND, MAHA SHIFTS & THE GLOBAL HEALTH MACHINE

Episode Date: May 14, 2026

The tidal wave sparked by ‘The People vs. Poison’ rally is reshaping the conversation in Washington and beyond, as Del unpacks shifting alliances around food policy, chronic disease, and public trust.As pressure mounts on Anthony Fauci, we examine the growing legal questions surrounding his role in the COVID response, and why many believe he should be indicted.Plus, Dr. Tess Lawrie joins Del in studio with her investigation on whether the World Health Organization may still be influencing U.S. universities and public health systems—even after U.S. funding was halted.Guests: Dr. Tess LawrieAirdate: May 7, 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?

Yeah. Action. Good morning. Good afternoon. Good evening. Wherever you are out there in the world, it's time for us all to step out into the high wire. Well, there's a lot of conversations right now, especially around, you know, U.S. politics, and Maha and Trump and Republicans and Democrats. Democrats. We're going to get into a lot of that today. But one of the big conversations really

is, is there now a rift somehow between Robert Kennedy Jr. and Donald Trump? Is there, are they throwing away any attempt to do something about the vaccine program, which is a big concern amongst many of you that watch this show? And I saw a headline in an article that really, you know, made me think it's time to address this. Listen, this is the headline that I saw. It's raw story. Trump can't fire this deeply unpopular official, and it's driving him mad, says a biographer close to Donald Trump. Trump wants to fire health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Because of his anti-vaccine policies, which Wolf said are deeply unpopular everywhere. It goes on to say they don't want to fire him because the Maha constituency is significant. they feel to the Trump base, Wolf said. So they want him to go away, but not go away mad. Very interesting article there. And I want to approach this, and I don't have any inside scoop. I'm not talking to Bobby a lot, even though we've worked together to get him into that place. But I just want to give you my perspective as really a journalist.

And I think you know me. I study people. I study what motivates them. I try to strategize around that on the issues that we deal with here on the high wire. But I want to push back on this idea. First of all, I want to explain something. We talk all the time about the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is the one funding all of the media. Farmer marketers, here he goes, a perfect example, spent more than $10 billion on prescription drug ads just last year.

About half of the total spending can be attributed to television advertising per iSpot's 24, of $5.15 billion in prescription drug TV spending. So I've talked about this all the time. 50 to 70% of all advertising is funded by the pharmaceutical industry. You can test this yourself. You don't take my word for it. Just count the ads at every commercial break, especially on the news programs you're watching

and recognize that those news anchors are employed by those ads. That is how we see television. That is what media actually is. Who's ever paying for it is who you're actually working for. Forget whatever it's CNN or Fox or, you know, whatever branding there is. So when Farma wants to push an agenda, it makes us all believe across multiple platforms that this is the world that we live in and it's being reported on. One of the problems we have, I think, right now in Washington, D.C. is your average politician probably goes home and says, well, what's on CNN?

Okay, I'm going to get the other perspective. I'm going to go over to Fox. And in both those spaces, It looks like they're not really interested in the vaccine issue. They're turning on it. Well, but both of those are still funded and, you know, taken care of by the same industries. The problem with our politics is not talking to you. It's not talking to me. Even the polls are designed so that the media can make us believe

to propagandize us into believing a world that we live in when it's not actually a litmus test of who we are, what we are. It's trying to program us to believe. that's who we are. And I'm going to use this article as an example. Can we go back to the quotes in this article, essentially, where they're saying Trump wants to fire his health secretary, Robert Kennedy Jr., because of Trump. He's saying Bobby's anti-vaccine policies, meaning Trump essentially just got more than he bargained

for. He didn't want to get into all this. Really? That's all, Bobby? Let's go back to a 20, let's just go ahead and pull up a 2014 tweet by Donald Trump before he was ever president of the United States. He said this, healthy young child goes to doctor, gets pumped with massive shot of many vaccines, doesn't feel good, and changes.

Autism, all caps, many such cases. He didn't have to do that. That wasn't a quote by Del Batry or Robert Kennedy Jr. That was Donald Trump himself. In fact, he so believed. in that and had a perspective on that that it came up when he did really get into the middle of really running for president the first time almost every single debate they would try to attack him on this position he was holding and he didn't back down remember this moment a backlash

against vaccines was blamed for a measles outbreak here in california donald trump has publicly and repeatedly linked childhood vaccines to autism which as do you know the medical community adamantly disputes. Autism has become an epidemic. 25 years ago, 35 years ago, you look at the statistics not even close. People that work from you just the other day, two years old, two and a half years old, a child, a beautiful child, went to have the vaccine and came back and a week later got a tremendous fever,

got very, very sick, now is autistic. Jake Tapper describes that moment as he has said repeatedly, on the campaign trail that vaccines cause autism. Again, wasn't running with Robert Kennedy Jr. Robert Kennedy Jr. had nothing to do with that campaign that was, soon to be, President Donald Trump, all on his own.

Now I wanted, well, did he change his mind? Has he changed his perspective now that he's been in office all this time? I want to point to the moment where we finally were getting some action from Robert Kennedy Jr. as HHS Secretary. He was finally going to be. going to discuss one of the causes of autism. We were all hanging on the edges of our seat. And when he came forward and, you know, was there with Donald Trump and wanted to talk about this new discovery, it ended up being Tylenol. Now, perhaps that was a safe place to start.

And it looks like Bobby didn't want to go near vaccines, at least not in that conversation, but somebody did. Watch this. Today, we are announcing two important findings from our autism work that are vital for parents to know as they make these decisions. First, HHS will act on acetametaphim. The FDA is responding to clinical and laboratory studies that suggests a potential association between acetamapin used during pregnancy and adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes, including later diagnosis for ADHD and autism. Today, the FDA will issue a physician's notice about the risk of acetametaphon during pregnancy and begin the process to initiate a safety label change.

I just recommend strongly that you don't use Tylenol unless it's absolutely necessary. I understand it's maybe 10% of the women that are pregnant would perhaps be forced to use it. So don't take Tylenol. Other things that we recommend, or certainly I do anyway, is, and it's so important to me to take, see the doctor four times or five times for a vaccine. Don't let them pump your baby up with the largest pile of stuff you've ever seen in your life

going into the delicate little body of a baby, even if it's two years, three years, four years, you just break it up into, I would say five, but let's say four, four visits to the doctor instead of one. But they say that there's no problem if you do each shot separately, not put together. I mean, look, Robert Kennedy Jr., you know, the man for the vaccine issue, the one that was, you know, going to be looking at the vaccines and did, you know, reduce the vaccine program down to the Denmark schedule from 54 vaccines to about 26 or 17 diseases down to about 11. but in that clearly, I don't know, I mean, we're being told that Bobby's being silenced, that he's not supposed to talk about this. Maybe that's true.

I don't know who's telling him that, but he's being quiet in that moment. And Donald Trump, actually, if you watch the whole thing, seemed annoyed. Was annoyed. Like, when are we going to get to the issue that I really care about with just vaccines in autism? Bobby, we're working on that, right? We're working on that. And so now the media, and especially biographers, close to Donald Trump, want us to believe that Donald Trump is frustrated with Bobby Kennedy's vaccine, you know,

position. Really? I think that that flies in the face of the actual facts. And I think one of the things that really determines that. And look, I do think there's politics. I do think coming into the midterms, there are those will say, hey, let's stick to the real bread and butter issues like the food supply that nobody can argue with, you know, getting, you know, ultra-processed foods out of our children.

and school lunches, huge winner, Democrats and Republicans. So who doesn't want broad appeals? So maybe they're, you know, softening up a little bit. But this idea that Trump is turned on Bobby, it could be true. I'm not psychic, but what I'm telling you is what I know to be true about human beings. And let's be honest, there was concern that the DOJ under President Trump was not going to appeal the American Academy of Pediatrics decision, which obviously erased that vaccine shift and erased Robert Kennedy Jr.'s A-SIP committee.

But then just last week, we found out that, lo and behold, they are going to appeal that decision. DOJ appeals vaccine policy injunction in American Academy of Pediatrics v. Kennedy, escalating landmark ASIP fight. So for guys that didn't want a vaccine conversation out there in the public during the midterms, it's going to be really hard to not talk about one of the most important. judicial fights we've ever seen. And so all of this to say, they want us to feel weakened. They want us to feel broken. There's even some on our side that are a little bit worried that Maha is falling apart. I think today we'll talk about some of those issues. But if Maha doesn't

just now end up, you know, moving the Republican Party, but also the Democratic Party, doesn't that mean it's growing, not necessarily collapsing? I think what we've got to look at are what are motivations. And if I know Donald Trump, which I don't think anyone can say that we do, but it does seem that a person that for year upon year upon years states publicly, they have a serious opinion on an issue. Something clearly struck close to home for President Trump that has made him stand on this issue every single election without ever backing away. I can only assume he's gotten even deeper into this conversation in private dinners with friends and family on golf courses, you know, for all those years. Do you really believe someone that has laid that much stake has actually risked his own presidential campaigns to talk about an issue is just going to look the other way, walk away because it just doesn't seem popular?

He knew it wasn't popular. There was no one else on the 20 politicians on that stage that would jump up. up with him and say they thought vaccines cause autism. He knows what he's up against. He knows what he's dealing with. And sure, maybe Susie Wilde's right next to him. If Dr. Robert Malone is right, doesn't like Robert Kennedy Jr., probably never did. And maybe the other people in his cabinet, maybe there's a lot, probably are, that don't like Robert Kennedy Jr. But the only person I think that it actually matters when the midterms are over, if these guys manage to not be impeached but actually get a little wind under their wings and at their backs,

the only guy I think matters is Donald Trump. And the only relationship we should really be thinking about is how do these two guys get along together? And I've been watching Robert Kennedy Jr. do a really good job of protecting Donald Trump, even on moments that were difficult. So before you lose sleep, before you start really screaming bloody murder, let's just look at the history of what brings us here and recognize maybe the media,

is not telling us what's actually going on, but what they want us to believe is going on. We're going to talk more about this. One of the great things that Donald Trump did was to withdraw us from the WHO, formally withdraws from World Health Organization. We pulled our funding. Awesome.

Does that mean it's the end of like any world health organization, pandemic, taking over America? Well, I have Tess Laurie joining me. one of the founders of the World Council for Health. And she has been involved in a deep investigation to the WHO. And as it turns out, we may not be as disentangled as you thought. I'm looking forward to that conversation. But first is time for the Jackson Report.

All right, Jeffrey. It's wild coming off of a week like last week. I feel like I went to battle like a gladiator. We just, you know, we took hides, we took land, we took castles. And then, you know, the next week you're like, all right, you just watch the repercussions and I'm still strapped for battle, Jeffrey. I won in. Yeah. But it was a good week.

They strapped in because we have a full deck today for the Jackson Report. You know, I'm sitting here about to talk to you about what's going on in the world. And I'm having some COVID vibes from 2020 when I look at the news like this. Take a look. What began as a cruise of a lifetime has instead turned into a major medical mystery and an international crisis. Health investigators covered in protected. gear boarded a cruise ship Monday working to curb an outbreak of the deadly haunta virus, a severe respiratory illness believed to be linked to three deaths and four other passengers and crew members

who are ill. The luxury cruise line are now a ghost town with its nearly 150 passengers quarantine. There's a lot of uncertainty and that's the hardest part. As a precaution, passengers have been asked to remain in their cabins while disinfection and other public health measures are carried out. The Dutch ship carrying close to 150 people, including 17 Americans, initially took off from a port in Argentina in early April. Now, world health investigators say it's possible the ill passengers became infected during their time off the ship. This was an expedition boat, and many of the people on board were doing birdwatching. They were doing, you know, a lot of things with wildlife. Research shows that it can be, it has a high mortality rate of 40%, up to 40% of those

infected have died. This is a highly fatal disease. You know, Jeffrey, they have been fishing for some, you know, fear hook, you know, whether it's monkey pox flopped and, and, you know, and then this bird flu and we just murdered ostriches in such a big deal. Nobody seemed to care. But this one, I think they should go whole hog with this one. This one's got people's attention. I have so many texts coming here, people going, oh, we all get to die of hunter virus? I mean, it's amazing. and a half billion people right now are terrified because three people have died. Right. And it seems like a lot of what we do here is unpack the spin and tease out reality from the corporate media hype that's going on. Yeah. Hype like this, I mean, you just saw that, but here's this headline here out of the Washington Post.

Authorities scramble to limit honta virus outbreak, trace contacts around the globe. Oh my god, this thing's spreading around the globe. Well, let's talk about this hunt of virus because many people are hearing this for the first time. It's all over the news. It was first discovered. in the late 70s after the Korean War, a lot of the American soldiers were getting sick. And its main route of transmission is aerosolized basically feces and urine and droppings and saliva from rats. So what happens is this gets aerosolized when it gets kicked up in a small space, perhaps cleaning, maybe a small space like a cruise ship. If there's some sitting there and people are cleaning that gets kicked up and people breathe

this in through their lungs, you can't get this through contact. but it's extremely hard to get this from person to person transmitting. Now, the cruise ship, the cruise ship departed from Argentina. It was sailing through the South Atlantic. Three people have died, eight are believed to have the virus. Going to get into that in a second. But let's go to the CDC, because what does this mean for Americans?

Well, the CDC reported cases of Honta virus. Listen to this. As of the end of 2023, 890 cases of Honta virus disease were reported in the United States since surveillance began in 1993. All right, so let's do some quick math here. That's 30 years of surveillance, 890 cases. It's about 30 cases a year on average. If you do that, the CDC says 35% of those have a mortality rate of 35%.

So you do that math. It's about 10 people per year on average. Like 20 to 30 people a year get struck by lightning in the United States. So that's giving you the odds ratio there. And interestingly enough, about 94% according to the CDC says, west of the Mississippi River are of the cases. So if you're on the East Coast, you're statistically immunized from this essentially when it comes to the odds. But let's look at Newsweek here, because it goes into further. This is actually a decent report. It says the morbid reason why

Hunter Virus is unlikely to be the next pandemic. And it says Andy's virus, the only human transmissible strain among roughly 50 species of Honta virus does so poorly that even on a ship with hundreds of people in close quarters, a worst-case scenario for disease spread, transmission remained rare and limited to people with closest contact. That goes on to quote an expert here, a public health expert. Huntingivirus would need to make a major evolutionary leap to become a pandemic threat. Weiss told Newsweek that would likely require multiple coordinated changes affecting how the virus enters human cells, replicates in human tissues and evades early immune defenses. Hunter virus does not currently spread well enough between people for that to be an easy and

plausible evolutionary path. I feel like it's just to say, but we're working on it. You know, we got it in a gain of friction. We will figure out a way to make this thing spread better. Trust us. Now, that's not his point, but you know someone is. Yeah. Yes.

And there's other, you know, data points that we look for when we see these stories pop up. Here's one of them, 24 news release, press release. Korean University Vaccine Innovation Center collaborates with Moderna on MRI-based hunt a virus vaccine development. It's a very rare disease. Even in Argentina, even where they're having a higher than normal outbreak this year, there's only a little over 100 cases. So that's interesting that that seems to be a market. Jeffrey, right there, that headline is something I've really been trying to get across to people. They will make a vaccine for anything, and they'll be able to make you personalize an insanely rare risk. This will be one of the

most rare issues we've dealt with just short of Japanese and encephalitis, which we did a whole show on years ago, which was absolutely hysterical. But can you imagine spending R&D millions of dollars on R&D for an issue that kills maybe 10 people of the 340 million Americans every single year? But it's valuable because all they have to do is 100% effective. Do you really want to take the risk? What would you do if your child died of the hunter virus? How would you forgive yourself?

Should we call Child Protective Services if you don't? get it for them. And then all of a sudden, 340 million shots will be sold or close to it, 90, 80 percent of them to be like, oh, you're right. I mean, better safe than sorry. And that's what they know. And so they will make a vaccine for an almost non-existent problem because it will still sell like hotcakes. Exactly. Average of 30 cases year. Meanwhile, millions of Americans are dying from a preventable chronic disease epidemic. And thank God we're hearing more about that since Kennedy jumped in there. Otherwise, we'd be just focusing on these limited little issues. Not, you know, people are still dying. Don't want to make too much light of that. But here's the

issue, though, because they're saying now, now the big story is where are these contacts? They're around the globe. We have to search them. So the virus is really only transmissible when the person is symptomatic. And even then, it's very difficult. You have to have a close contact. It's not something like the flu. It's not something like COVID where this thing is, if you're in a cubicle next to someone you could possibly grab this. So that's and the problem is the incubation period's up to eight weeks. So the issue is the PCR test now that they're using. Here's a headline here. Hunter virus PCR test sequences repeatedly match human DNA raises false positive concerns. So we have that issue now too going into this whole mix just like COVID. We have to question this. We have

this wisdom coming out of COVID of the false positive. So we have to bring this forward now, whether there's bird flu, whether there's monkeypox, whether it's hunter virus, those are all issues that we have to face on this. And this appears to be a limited outbreak, but you never can tell. I don't want to say never. You're right, absolutely. And COVID started out kind of like this with Tony Fauci saying it's never going to be a problem in America. But then they realized actually it would be great if it was a problem in America. So much to be gained there. Yeah, all right, well, we're watching it. I want to piggyback off your opener talking about Maha. And, you know, just last week, it was last Monday, or I guess two Mondays ago now, we had the march in D.C.

People versus Poison. This was the Supreme Court case where Bear was asking the Supreme Court to appeal its cancer-causing glyphosate, cases that are burying this company and almost bankrupting it. And I want to see if people can notice something that happened at the rally. Take a look at some of this footage. This is an important moment in the constitutional history of the United States of America. Today's fight in the Supreme Court is one battle to take back our food system for the people. This should not be a partisan issue, and I've been so proud to work with so many of the speakers and the advocates and the leaders here today. What we're dealing with today with the liability shield is absolutely unacceptable.

We believe no corporation should be able to poison people and then run for protection to the Supreme Court. of the Supreme Court and Congress. Don't let the false narrative of the tribal politics distract you from the truth. This is not a left or right issue. This is a right or wrong issue. It's unacceptable that this administration uses the power of the Defense Production Act to increase glyphosate production, appoints chemical lobbyists to run the EPA

and completely gut our help. We got our help. This fight is the crossroads of where our country stands. And the politicians in Washington are going to have to make a choice. Who do they stand with? Any farm bill that protects chemical companies over American families is not pro-farmor. It's not pro-health. It's not pro-America.

It is a giveaway to make chemical. As a 20-year Democrat, I like what Biden Kennedy's doing. I think it's really important. Let's unite people. Let's bring our nation together. Let's put more indivisible in this one nation under God. Maha is a major power block, political power block. And what you saw right there were Democrats stepping into this Maha void, I guess you want to call it, at the Supreme Court case.

And what you're seeing is the people that comprise Maha, everyday Americans, have no allegiance to Republicans or Democrats. And this is what the headline at the Hill is really pointing out in people's face. Democrat sees on Mahas growing frustration with GOP. It says many Democrats are also critical of the chemical industry, and they're leaning into what could be a natural alliance with the MAHA voters. And then it goes on to, quote, representative Shelley Pingtree from Maine. She's a Democrat. She says, quote, I have told many of my colleagues over the years,

you're crazy if you don't talk to people about food and toxins, and basically trying to engage with MAHA voters. she's talking about. So what we're seeing is this bipartisan maha shift right now in real time. And this was spoken to just last night by Thomas Massey when he was speaking to Tucker Carlson. Let's say what he had to say. Okay. The president is the president and we're in the majority because there was a coalition formed. I do believe that he and his advisors were genius in setting up this coalition.

And I was part of it when I endorsed the president to try to bring on libertarians and independents, but we also brought on Maha, which is... I was one of the people who helped put that together. Yeah, because I believed to that. Well, then you're the genius. I'm not a genius. It's just like that seemed like an obvious issue. It's obviously they told us banning smoking was going to make us healthy and life expectancy went down.

I just noticed that. And I'm like, this country's super unhealthy. And why wouldn't you make it easier for people to be healthier if they want to? So, and by the way, I have a standalone bill, too, to, to, this is no immunity for glyphosate act. And I have Republican and Democrat co-sponsors on that. But that's what Maha is. And here's the problem. If you keep, if your DOJ and your USDA and your EPA are all going to be captured by a German company and argue that Americans don't deserve their day in court if they're harmed by a chemical that's being sold and mislabeled according to their state, then you're going to alienate that.

part of the maha part of the coalition yeah and that's another thing that could lead to a bloodbath in the november elections you know Thomas Massey's been incredible on um all the maha issues from the very beginning years actually you know before we were even to trump i would run into thomas massey he's been very vocal about covid about the vaccines he believes in personal freedoms all of it a super interesting interview everyone can go check that out at Tucker Carlson, very, very interesting. But what they're saying is true. I mean, I just want to weigh in here.

It's not necessarily, I think, that the way the media, when they're asking questions at that rally is, is, you know, is Maha moving over to the Democrat Party or, you know, are they, or, you know, Democrats. But what I said is, maha had a huge constituency that is, was Democrats. And, you know, they said, well, I thought Maha was Republican. As if Maha was Republican, it would have had no effect on the election. It clearly had an effect. It clearly brought the Maha Mons, which the numbers in women that voted for Donald Trump, which they thought would be higher with Kamala than it was with Joe Biden. Actually, Trump beat the Joe Biden numbers by, I think, three points.

We don't know how many men and, you know, biodynamic farmers and all of that were involved. but Maha only shifted the election because they weren't already just conservatives. It's great that, you know, Republicans and Trump and, you know, a lot of that body took on these issues. But this is really, this has been a bipartisan group that just followed Robert Kennedy Jr. Who, let's remember, started his election, you know, running as a Democrat. So, you know, that is, I think that's what they're missing in this is this issue is bipartisan. The issue of medical freedom is bipartisan. The issue of clean food is bipartisan.

And maybe now the media is just waking up to it, which, you know, when someone says, Mahas falling apart to me, you know, an organization that is now, or an idea or a movement that's now being embraced by all sides of the political spectrum, that's a movement that's growing. Absolutely. Absolutely. And let's move past on this specific issue, on glyphosate, on the farm. bill on Bear Supreme Court challenge. Let's move past the politics just for a moment and look at the science. So everyone should remember by now the Great Barrington Declaration, which really set the tone for the pandemic of the do's and don'ts, which shouldn't happen. I mean, is an evergreen document at this point. Something just came out that mirrors that for

glyphosate. It's the Seattle statement on glyphosate and public health. These are experts, over 50 public health experts, scientists, researchers, they got together and they put this out. I'm going to read some of the quotes from this. This is kind of the document now. And it talks about glyphosate and the glyphosate-based herbicides. Remember, there's a lot of other accelerants in there that aren't really tested, but are chemicals as well. And it says this. The comprehensive evidence supports this conclusion with the strongest epidemiological evidence

linking exposure to increased risk of non-Hodgkins lymphoma, a cancer of the lymphatic system. So we know that. That's not just something that greedy lawyers made up. That's what the science suggests, and the strongest evidence suggests that. But then it goes on to say this. There's additional evidence from human and or animal studies that glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides increase the risk of multiple adverse health effects in addition to cancer, including diseases of the kidney, liver,

and impacts to the reproductive endocrine neurological and the metabolic systems. Of course, children, infants, and fetuses are the most susceptible. And then it goes on to say something we should all know by now, that the pesticide glyphosate has been inadequately, inadequately evaluated and regulated. The approval process globally for all existing and new pesticides are weak and fail to protect human health, especially for health of infants. It talks about the system needs to be fundamentally revised, but then it talks about how this should happen. And this actually is a one-to-one for vaccines, too. It says the cost of obtaining such data must be borne by the pesticide

industry, but the testing must be conducted by laboratories and organizations independent of the pesticide industry and free from financial conflicts of interest. So that's really, that's really the blueprint how we can move forward here. Make these companies, these chemical companies, these pharmaceutical companies, make them flip the bill for the research and make the research independent, truly independent. They don't have a hand in this anymore. They can't tell us, we did the studies that are on our own products, and guess what, they're safe. The FDA can't rubber stamp them. This is a way forward. And you can see all the list of people that sign this document right here. This is really the science. This is what the EPA should be looking at. This is what all the other researchers and the Supreme Court,

with all due respect, should be looking at as well. This is a settled conversation at this point with glyphosate and the glyphosate-based herbicides. And I don't know how any politician can vote against this at this point. I agree. I think it's, you know, the writing literally is on the walls. We know all the things that give liability protection, something that's all over our food supply right at a moment where you're trying to clean up the food supply. It's a misstep. And that's all I can say. I think that what it does show you, though, with President Trump is I think that, you know, people that like President Trump think he's a rogue player, that he acts on his own. It's also the same things that people that don't like him like, he's got an ego, he doesn't listen to anybody.

But I think when you watch someone like that go in and then sort of buckle under pressure, which is, I mean, it was a huge pressure. And I try to genuinely put myself in the shoes of things I see on the news. If Bear Monsanto came to me and said, we were going to pull our product off of every farm in America. And whether you believe in organic farming or not, they don't know how to do it. They will be devastated in year one. And by year two, they will all be bankrupt and you will have no food. You will have no farms. We will destroy American farming. Or you're going to have to do something to take care of us. You know, it's a really very complicated situation. I keep saying it's another too big to fail moment just like the banking.

I wish he would have maybe just stopped that let's stockpile someone so we can't be threatened like this in the future as we're weaning ourselves off. But it's putting the Department of Justice in, as Thomas Massey so clearly laid out, to go and defend, you know, sit on the side of a German company against the Citizens America. It was just a step too far. I hope all of this attention is waking Donald Trump up to the fact that he does have a powerful coalition that was put together to get him there. We'd like to see the work, you know,

that, you know, we were voting for to be conducted and finished. Yeah. And there's a lot of eyes on the Department of Justice right now. I want to move on to this next story here. We have the statute of limitations for Anthony Fauci's indictment is up on May 11th. This is this coming Monday. And we have Ram Paul, Kentucky Senator Ram Paul. And he's been really leading the charge with this, Massey as well. But here's the headline. Paul pushes for indictment before statute of limitations expires. And that is, what are we talking about here? Well, there's really three that rise to the top, lying to Congress, destroying federal records

and conspiring to destroy federal records. All of those, either Fauci did deliberately lying to Congress, or you have in the emails, you have evidence of him, what appears to be conspiring and destroying evidence using private servers, g-mails handing documents to them publicly in person at their own houses. That's Dr. David Morins, who's already indicted. And we talked to our legal team about this. The problem with this indictment is there's two hurdles. The biggest one being that former President Biden pardoned Fauci on his way out of the presidency.

So you have a presidential pardon. So unless Trump reverses that pardon, eliminates that, the DOJ is going to have a hard time acting. So even if that is eliminated, will the DOJ act? So there's two hurdles there. But if Fauci wasn't alone, there's also a lot of other people who could be targeted for indictment, One of those, as the Brownstone Institute writes right here, is the next indictment should be against Greg Falkers. Who is this guy? Falkers was critical.

It says to the censorship operation at the heart of the COVID response. It's chief of staff of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease and IAID. Falkers oversaw operations for the agency's $6 billion budget and later sought to evade FOIA request by conspiring with Dr. Morins, indicted, and intentionally misspelling key phrases such as gain a function. We can go further here. Here's John Leak of Peter McCullough's publication focal points and he says this. This was from 2024, but the evidence is still there. Why aren't Dazick and Barrick arrested?

That's Peter Dazick of EcoHealth Alliance, Ralph Barrick, of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. And then we have Paul Thacker, journalist article on Ralph Barrick, talking about hiding star researcher, Ralph Barrick's ties of the global pandemic. It says the University of North Carolina researchers work on coronaviruses and his connection to the Wuhan lab are now receiving renewed attention. after real clear investigations learned that the federal government has quietly removed Barrick from all his NIH grants. RCI has also learned that UNC placed Barrick on leave. UNC has also refused to cooperate with NIH officials as they have attempted to gather more facts and emails about Barrick's coronavirus research. So Barrick now is completely sidelined. Grants canceled.

He's been put on lead by the university. What do they know? What do they know? And why isn't this guy, I mean, if you hauling this guy up every week in front of Congress to do, get in why isn't the university giving emails up at this point this is this is massive information and then finally speaking of the nih h we have this exclusive report again by paul thacker nih h virologist vincent munster caught smuggling deadly pathogens into the u.s. FBI investigating what did they get caught well he got caught with monkeypox on a plane coming back from africa to his lab in

Montana so this is an ongoing investigation here just just smuggling it on a plane Or did he like, you know, checked a bag? Protected case. Yes, yes, with no license to do this. Wow. What could possibly go wrong? Yeah. Exactly.

Exactly. So keeping an eye on that one. And I want to finish on really the vaccine conversation. Della, you and I have talked about this before. We meet so many people that say, I don't have kids or I don't know I have kids that are young anymore. I don't care about the vaccine conversation because it's about the childhood schedule, right? Well, if you live through COVID, you should know that. that that's wrong. But if you didn't, you should look at this headline and realize it's not just

about kids. Wooping cough surge exposes gaps in adult vaccination. And you go into this article and listen to this. It says, this is the heading. The case for life course vaccination. Remember that term. The failure of health systems to take a life course approach to immunization becomes more serious as population's age and immunity wanes over time. Comes from this document titled from 100-day cough to the 100-year life pertussis, prevention in the future life course immunization. And you can see in here it goes on to talk about that. They want to prioritize solutions. They want to improve detection and reduce infection rates. But they say they want to couple with strong life-course immunization programs. These measures should be treated as a health security

priority. When you see the word health security priority, think terrorism. Remember during COVID, that was a health security priority. That was used to send a health security priority. That was used to everybody that was used to shut down conversation that was used to paint anti-vaxers as terrorists by Homeland Security. So here we are again. And that's in the UK. But in the United States, in 24, the FDA's Verback Committee produced this document from their meeting in 2024. That's the vaccines and related biological products, the Independent Committee. And let's look at this document talking about pertussis. They said, despite high vaccination coverage with acetylular pertussis-containing vaccines, the U.S. has experienced a resurgence in reported pertussis cases.

This rise may be due to a combination of factors, genetic adaption of circulating strains to escape vaccine pressure, rapid waning of accellular pertussis vaccine-induced immunity, and the failure of the accellular pertussis-containing vaccines to prevent B-protustis, colonization, carriage, and transmission. So everything in that paragraph points to a failed vaccine. And that document goes on even further to say this. A cellular protesis containing vaccines induce helper T cells, TH2 memory, and neutralizing antibody responses that effectively prevent symptomatic disease but fail to prevent colonization and carriage. So it does not stop transmission.

So it does not give mucosal immunity. So people are walking around. They don't have symptoms, but they have it in their nasal pharynx, they have it in their throat, and they can cough, they can transmit these things in public. It's kind of the opposite of the haunt of virus where people, when they show symptoms, they're down and out. They're on their back. They're not walking around, going to school, going to work. These people are with whooping cough.

And it didn't need the FDA to tell you this. In 2019, researchers came to that same conclusion when looking at the pertussis vaccine. They said this, accellular pertussis vaccines do not prevent colonization. Consequently, they do not reduce the circulation of B pertussis and do not exert any herd immunity. And strong word any. By the way, measles. Yeah. No, it's strong to say it doesn't, you know, any herd immunity.

So all this argument, I had gotten this argument with a journalist recently and sent him all the data some earlier than that on this issue. We've discussed it on the show. If you're new to this show, most people watch and say, yeah, you've covered this before. It doesn't stop transmission, which is even worse. If it's not stopping transmission, only hiding your symptoms, it's turning you into an, and, unknowing, asymptomatic super spreader. You're walking around sick, but don't know it because you don't feel the symptoms and instead are spreading it everywhere. Whereas if you were sick, you'd probably stay home. If you had a cop, you would stay home. So, you know, super interesting problem and

more and more science still pouring out, which begs the question, why are they still using this vaccine? It's causing more problems than it's helping. Exactly. And an inferior vaccine and their answer life course immunization just boosters just more boosters for older people right that's their answer and they're going to market it to you like this this remember this adglaxo smith k krc big bad whooping cough vaccination campaign bears its teeth remember this one this was the big bad wolf and it was scaring the elderly and saying if you want to see your grandkids you have to get this shot otherwise you could be like this big bad wolf and you could infect them and give them whooping cough and endanger their lives and spread disease so if you want to see your kids and your family

you got to get this. Well, that didn't work so well for GSK because they got hit with a class action lawsuit. Here it is right here. Glaxosmith Klein Boostricks, that's the name of their vaccine, class action settlement. According to the class action lawsuit, the big bad cough campaign misled consumers about Boosterick's ability to prevent whooping cough from spreading to others. Whoops. And if you're in New York and you saw that ad and that ad compelled you to get that shot, you can be part of this class action lawsuit. Here it is right here. Here's the link through June 8th. So you have less than a month to sign up for this. If you live in New York or vaccinated by Boosterix, you live in New York State.

This is you. If you fell for this campaign, which was based on what they call misinformation, you could be part of a class accident lawsuit. I just want to say to everyone watching, probably a few people on, you know, watching our show got that. I would imagine some because it was such a threat. Some people just wanted to say, I just want to see your grandbaby and my kids wouldn't let me until I got the stupid vaccine. So I got it just so I could see them. So for all of you, if you're in New York, now you can sue. But also, you know you have friends.

I mean, I have talked to so many grandparents that went through this because it was such a powerful pitch by every pediatrician, every OB across the country was essentially just shilling or marketing for this product. Claxel Smith-Kline, so almost every grandparent you know in New York could be a part of this lawsuit. Let them know that there might be some money to be made there. Great reporting, Jeffrey. It's all so incredibly interesting. And there's many ways to look at this. The media will push it one direction. But thank you for bringing balance to all sides of these conversations.

Very, very important. You bet. Thank you. All right. I'll see you next week. Well, on that... We have a new legal update. If you are signed up to our newsletter, you're receiving that update.

If you're signed up to our newsletter, you're also receiving all the data. In fact, if you're like, oh, I missed what that class action lawsuit was, well, it'll be in your inbox with everything else from this show every single week. All you have to do is just sign up, just go down the page to where it says Brave Bold News and just enter your email there. We don't share it with anybody. but you will now have all the evidence and not just the little pieces we show you, links to the entire Tucker Carlson interview with Thomas Massey, links to the entire study on pertussis. It's just part of what we, you know, it's we call it the high wire protocol.

We're asking every other news agency to do the same thing. Show us your work. Where's your evidence? You know, if there's been a double-blind placebo-based trial, like print it out, let us see it. Oh, you don't have it. Interesting. But today's legal release is very important. FOIA documents reveal New York bioethicist strategy to restrict vaccine exemptions. This has been since 2019.

He acknowledged that facts alone are not enough to increase vaccine rates. And facts sometimes look weaker than they should, especially when they are weak facts, which taxing it actually admits. He's unable to persuade people with his crappy science. Guilt, hesitators, and then resistors. So guilt them is a much better approach. Call them selfish, bad neighbors, indifferent to the vulnerable. All things that we have heard and see when people go see the pediatricians.

This is why I know we're going to win, by the way. I mean, I'm going to use this as sort of like, look what we're up against, but look what we're up against. This is literally the definition of insanity. They're going to keep doing the same thing. They're just going to just going to keep bullying you and your friends and family members. And they're going to, when you ask a really important question like, have there been ever safety trials of saline placebos? I'm not going to get in the weeds in science.

You would never understand it anyway. Just trust me, it's safe and effective if we've been using it for years. Trust me, or I'm going to kick you out of the office. That's all they got. And so when he says, don't get into the weeds, don't try and talk science. It won't work. Well, it's worked for us. you know it's worked. The high wire has made it work. We've done nothing except talk about science

with you. We took a different approach. We said, you know what? Your average person does understand the science. It's also what my producers learned because most of us came over from the CBS talks to the doctors where we were turning science and medicine into entertainment. So they're dead wrong. People do get the science when you talk about it, but we're really up against it. It goes, there's more to this. There's a real pushback. They're going to try and the vaccine education plan approved by the New York City Council. So now an education plan. It'll be bludgeoning with no facts because that's what they're going to do.

The New York City Council on Thursday passed a package of bills, not just one, seeking to do more to educate parents about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines as immunization rates show signs of starting to dip. You're darn right they are. Listen to this. James Allwine, a virologist, professor emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania, and visiting professor at the University of Arizona is a member of Defend Public Health,

a nationwide network of public health leaders that are all looking to gaslight you. He applauded the legislation and offered this advice for the Health Department on vaccine messaging. Keep it simple and straightforward while highlighting the harm that these preventable diseases can inflict on children.

Stay out of the real side. Here we are again. Out of the real signs of data. That just doesn't work, Alwynne told HealthBeat, You can't fight against what they're saying by trying to tell people, well, here's the science, here's the data, here's the study again. That's what the highwire does. And that's what Robert Kennedy Jr.'s been doing.

And that is what seems to be changing this conversation across the country. So how far do you think they're going to get? If they're going to keep showing up with a knife to a gunfight, I think this is all over. And of course, I'm talking about the power of truth, the power of words. But New York is under serious threat. Connecticut, serious threat. Maine, when we talk about freeing the five, it's not easy. It's super duper difficult. And look what we're up against.

You have a nationwide team of scientists. The entire pharmaceutical industry is funding every medical university. All your doctors, they're the only ones not admitting the COVID vaccine's a disaster. They're so brainwashed. And some of them, like Senator Richard Pan, are going to try and get back into politics. Meanwhile, we have this little window with Robert Kennedy Jr., Donald Trump, whatever their relationship, you decide what it is. There is certainly a pause button on censorship. There's a moment where we have momentum and we can get a lot done right now. So ask yourself,

who is getting it done? Feel pretty good about America's public health watchdog I can and the work that we've done. There's only one nonprofit that has Aaron Siri in 90 different cases. There's only one nonprofit that won back a religious exemption for an entire state in Mississippi, won it in West Virginia, but now, obviously, we're in the appellate court because it's being appealed, which means that could drive it all the way up to the Supreme Court, which I think would be fantastic. Let's go ahead and let the entire country experience religious and medical freedom. But that is only going to happen if we really get help from you right now. In this critical moment, we should not be relaxed, obviously, even if we are seeing that there's some tumultuous things going on inside of

the White House. We want to get as much done as we can, and we have a couple sponsors that have really taken it up a notch to make that happen. Right now, up until June 30th, we have a $1.5 million match that may sound like a lot of money, and it is. But we need all. we can get. These are lawsuits that are sitting in courtrooms year upon year upon year. You can't imagine what that cost. But if you donate right now, your money, every dollar you give is doubled. If you're thinking, boy, I suppose I could stretch and give $100, then do it. Or I could really, you know, get to be a recurring donor. Whatever you want to do, this is the time to do it. Whatever we want to achieve, this is the time to achieve it.

If not now, then when? And if it's not you, then who is it going to be? Look at our track record. That's what we stand by. 146 federal lawsuits have been filed. 516 document productions have been secured. 8 million pages have been released by the government of information, including the Pfizer data, the Moderna data, the V-safe data.

And nobody else did that for you. Federal agencies, 23 of them, have been taken to court. And here, you know, we are going to be really starting to push the fact that we sue the government, man, and you are making that happen. Look at all those government agencies that we have put on blast. And we're making a difference. The world is changing around us. So please, if you want to donate right now, just go to the top of the page.

You can hit donate. You can hit the QR code. We just showed you that will also be in the newsletter if you want to take a look at it. Love it if you become a recurring donor so that we know exactly how much we can expect $26 a month for 202026. It would be awesome. But a dollar would be great if that's all you've got or 100 or if you're doing really well and you want to maybe have a special assignment. I want to fund a lawsuit or some piece of science that you're involved with.

Reach out to us at info at I can decide.org. And we'll get back to you and talk to you privately. If you're listening right now in a podcast, you're going to make it super easy. Here's the number, 72022. Pull out your cell phone right now, type in 72022, and write in the word donate. And I will respond immediately in a text back and make it super easy to become a part of the informed consent action network. This is a community building experience. Every time we win a lawsuit, every time we change the world, I want you to be able to

say, I actually had something to do with that. And every one of you that has been sponsoring and donating to us, thank you because you are changing the world. Well, you know, when you think about changing the world, one of the big things is obviously who you elect, who's president, and, you know, maybe breaking free of a global agency that ran a pandemic would be a good idea. This is what it looked like when Donald Trump withdrew us from the WHO. United States officially completing its withdrawal from the World Health Organization. The United States has officially left the World Health Organization. What is this one?

Withdrawing from the World Health Organization. Oh, that's a big one. This is from the White House this morning. This fulfills President Trump's commitment under an executive order signed one year ago, following the WHO's mishandling of COVID-19 and its ongoing lack of reform, accountability, and transparency. He withdrawn means, among other things, all U.S. government funding to the organization has been terminated. Its existence starting in 1948, Democrats and Republican presidents alike, all of them, realized that American national interest and security depended upon the World Health Organization.

The World Health Organization is responsible for coordinating disease surveillance. It sets vaccine standards. It's responsible for sharing transparent data among countries throughout the entire world. This withdrawal for the U.S. is unprecedented, and I think it really is something new and concerning for all of us. Well, I know I celebrated the moment we withdrew from the WHO. I don't like this organization. It's, I think, does much more harm than good. the pandemic, the way it just sort of seemed to galvanize the world against the citizens of the world

was a horrific moment. But there may be a different perspective. Maybe we aren't as disentangled as we thought and no better person to talk to than someone that used to work with the WHO, did studies and investigations for the WHO, I think was once considered a friend of the WHO. I'm talking, of course, about Tess, Lorry, one of the founders of World Council for Health. She joins me now, Tess. Welcome. Hello, D. The WHA should have held you closer, I think. They should have kept you on the Dull, but of course, the pandemic was a huge shifting moment.

We've talked a lot about it, but... Well, they would have kept me on the dole, as you say, but I was always an independent consultant, so I never worked. I was never on their payroll, so to speak. So they would, they would brought you in for special projects, take a look at a study, see if we've done it right, or if we're about to do it. ethics issues, things like that. I would help to prepare clinical practice guidelines. Okay. So tell me about this investigation that's been going on for the last couple of years than WHO. Yeah, I actually feel a huge burden of responsibility to share this today because we've got such a short period of time and it's a massive investigation.

It is the work of Lucinda van Buren, who is a nurse from Australia, who more than two years ago, realized when she was to be forced vaccinated or mandated to be vaccinated in an Australian hospital. And she refused. She realized that the nursing system in Australia was a WHO collaborating center, as was ARPA the regulatory body of Australia. And she wondered what are WHO collaborating centers. So she started this long investigation, honestly, day and night for the last two years completely voluntary. So I do, you know, she deserves an award. And what she's exposed is

really, it's really very sensitive. It has huge implications for all of us. And I think it's probably going to be too mind-boggling for many people to grasp right now. But it will unfold. And thank you for the opportunity to at least present the first. Well, thank you for sharing it and thank you for your continued work and the send that sounds amazing so she realizes it's like what's going on here she looks in her own hospital and finds that we're a WHA what's it called collaborating center a WHA collaborating center okay yeah so it's really interesting just even watching those clips that you showed before I came on how you know there's this emphasis on the WHA the WHA is coordinating this and doing

this and doing that and creating vaccines and things and that's not the case at all. This is what the investigation shows is the WHO is just a messaging and implementation tool of what's been called a global health security agenda. Okay. And they simply are the mouthpiece. What informs them are a network or web of these collaborating centers, there's more than 800 around the world and in 80 countries. Every country has various collaborating centers. And they range from a variety of subjects, but there is a preponderance on pandemics and vaccines

and pathogens and health security policy and healthcare system and regulatory strengthening and all of that sort of thing. Right. But there's a, there's a, there's a, there's a, there's a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, in the, in the, in the U.S. So Lucinda's investigation. So still, even though we parted from W.H.O. We'd have these 70 collaborating W.H.O. Yes. Well, in actual fact, it really is relatively meaningless to say that the USA has exited the W.H.O. All they really have done is perhaps withdrawn that relatively small amount of money given, you know, because the, what the WHO Collaborating Centre agreements do is they facilitate what they call funding

opportunities for, from private partners. So collaborating centres get this funding opportunity and we do have a little segment I can read for you from the guide, the WHO guide for collaborating centers. Okay. So hopefully that can come up. There we go. So it says WHO collaborating centers are institutions that have been solid WHO allies for years, helping WHO to implement its mandated work and achieve its current goals.

WHOCCs cooperate with WHR on a diverse range of activities, such as collecting data for a report, organizing a meeting or developing a guideline. I mean, that is such an understatement because it's developing vaccines, developing antigens, and so on. But it does go on to say that there are benefits from this collaboration. It's a win-win situation because the collaboration can bring in this funding opportunity with our partners, organizations, partner corporations. Okay, so it's really corporate partnership.

This is like, I'm assuming, Pfizer and Sinofi and Well, in actual fact, a lot of organizations that call themselves philanthropists as well. So there's Gates, there's the Gates Foundation, there's, it's actually numerous. There's just, you know, any corporation you can name is backing somewhere. And a lot of the funding is not obvious. You have to dig down. So, you know, what we've presented in an overview report, which was published in January, this is the World Council for Health Overview Report of USA Collaborating Centers,

shows that there are 70 active collaborating centers, and this is when we downloaded the data, these contracts, from the WHO. We were unable to access that website subsequently after I presented the evidence at a meeting in October. Really? The website was taken down. But the 70 active ones then, there were 330 discontinued ones. But then there were 97 missing numbers, because these are consecutively numbered.

So altogether for the USA at the moment, there's something like 503, but there's 97 contracts that are missing. And we would very much like to know what those are. Our FOIA requests where we have sent to collaborating centers generally come back ignored. We'll get the initial reaction and then they just ignore. So they do seem to be above the law in many ways.

But just to say that the USA has the most number of collaborating centres, and then there's China, which has 59 or so, these are active ones in India, the UK, Australia and so on, Switzerland, Italy and European countries. But they are all over, and the point of it is that the WHO is not making the policy. So we've seen, you know, they're negotiating the pandemic. treaty. Well, they've actually adopted the pandemic treaty pending the agreement of the pathogen access and benefit sharing system or scheme. And this is a scheme where if a pandemic gets declared, called it hantavirus. Yeah. Hantavirus pandemic, for example. They then, there's then a mechanism whereby the vaccine reference material, the virus and vaccine reference

material is shared and disseminated. So and then there's a sort of just divving up who gets to make what. So it's it's sort of divving up the spoils of a pandemic. Opportunity, really. This is opportunistic moments and they have a network that can come and feed off of that moment and provide whatever their specialty is and pull money or systems or like whether, oh, yes, like vaccine tracking systems. And oh, we can make a vaccine. And all of that sort of ramps up from all of these different threads. But what's really interesting is that whilst all eyes are focused on stopping this WHO

pathogen access and benefit sharing system going ahead, what Lucinda's investigation shows us that it's been going on for a very long time. And the coronavirus pandemic was a huge success. This is why they want to formalise the arrangement with, you know, you get this and you get that percent and everybody. And it's in the pandemic treaty, you know, article, I can't remember what the article, maybe 21. It says, you know, equitable sharing of monetary and non-monetary benefits. So this is a financial arrangement and this is what's taking so long for them to agree. But what's really important is for people to realize it doesn't matter much, really, whether they agree that or not,

because this is a system that's been entrenched for a long time, these pathogens are being made in the institutions like the CDC in Atlanta and other. So there's collaborations with CDC in this that you can track? I would love to be able to show you a couple of the agreements that we've downloaded. There's so many and I had to just choose a few. Just to show you, you know, hopefully people will be able to see the implications. And we could start with the one from the Office of the Lead for Global Health Security. So this is really interesting.

I pull this up because people will know that the international health regulations and the amendments to the international health regulations were passed last year and they had been in negotiation for some time. Well, in actual fact, you know, the U.S.A. so deeply involved, they actually have the lead, the office of the lead for the global health security agenda and the international health regulations. And, you know, so... You haven't really pulled yourself out of a collaboration if it's being led out of the United States of America. No, no. And there's a university, John Hopkins as well, which is very much involved in the

global health security agenda. So this is their role, it seems, and the designation you can see was 2019. And these are four-year contracts, and then they get renewed. Some of them have been running for a very long time. Good time to get a contract in health, 2019, to four years. Exactly, about global pandemics. That's a really good four years. You will remember as well that the term health security came in around then as well. Right. The UK's health security agency used to be called Public Health England, you know, and then suddenly we've got this term health security and global health security. Well, it's coming from these institutions,

not the WHO. The WHO is just messaging. So like the media, it's the press box out in front of the whole thing. Yes, and telling everybody, we're telling everybody telling the countries what to do. And it was really obvious, you know, recently, with the Indian court case or petition for the Indian.

government and officials to show whether a virus existed or not and to prove that they had a virus a coronavirus that said or caused a pandemic and they've been unable to manifest this so governments around the world with respect to COVID never received or did or isolated a coronavirus they received reference material from the CDC in Atlanta and the the the countermeasure, the vaccines that were disseminated through the infrastructure that had been set up for influenza decades ago. So, you know, this is on the CDC website that they were instrumental in disseminating the coronavirus reference material and vaccines because they had this infrastructure already set up for a very long time. This is interesting. Yeah. I'd like to actually speak a bit about the

CDC's influenza division because it came about, the CDC was actually set up in 1946, which is the same year that the WHO was set up. Really? Yes. That's convenient. And their first big recommendation was DDT. Who set it up and was there people? Well it was, it does seem to have been set up by the US

government but Coca-Cola had donated some land and has continued to fund the center for disease control yes Coca-Cola funds the center for disease control not directly but through a CDC foundation which is how they've got around the regulations about being publicly but privately funded so they set up a CDC Foundation where Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation and all these other private entities are able to what goes on at the Center for Disease Control, which is now called the Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

But originally, it came out of the war. And the... So, 1946. Yeah. In actual fact, during the war, Rockefeller Foundation invested in the naval military research units, or units, whose aim was to find pathogens of military importance.

And malaria was their big, the Rockefeller Foundation's big activity then. And then out of the war time malaria institution of, I'm not sure exactly what it was called, came the CDC. So the CDC then settled in Atlanta, did the DDT spraying, of course, DDT, we now know. That was this first big mission, like, you know, we're here, we're going to help you.

Let's spray DDT everywhere. Yeah. And in actual fact, that's a neurotoxin, you know, it paralyzes insects, but it also has an effect, neurodegenerative and toxic effect on the human system. And so decades later, you know, we became aware that in actual fact it causes polio-like symptoms, it causes Alzheimer's, it's, it's pointed to, very written in detail by Suzanne Humphrey's dissolving illusions that really the polio outbreak very much could have been just a DDT poisoning reaction.

And then interestingly their next gig was influenza. And influenza was a disease, a virus that was isolated firstly, again in one of these naval military research units that was isolated firstly, isolated firstly, again, in one of these naval military research units that was set up, you know, during World War II. And this one was in the Great Lakes. So you can see there I have a little slide of a document which states that in 1954, this Namru 4, this naval medical research unit, I was the first lab to ever isolate influenza virus. And then it goes on to say that they used the, it was ideal because they had a large recruit training command with members arriving from all over the US. And the troops were basically expected to experience outbreaks of respiratory illness periodically. So they were experimenting on the troops and they came up with influenza virus and vaccines to go with it. So that's...

So just eight years in the CDC's development, you have a group created by the Rockefeller, you know, which we see, I mean, we can talk about how Rockefeller destroyed cryopractic and homeopathy, he wanted to move everything into petroleum-based drugs and pharmaceuticals, the heart of pharmaceutical. But what it appears you're stumbling upon is they, he used the Navy to say, go and find pathogens. And then once we find a pathogen, we're going to immediately start working this idea of a vaccine. So it's almost like what we're watching with Hunter virus. Let's make you afraid of something.

I was joking with Jeffrey that doesn't matter if 10 people are dying from it, will make a vaccine and make everybody afraid of it, which is sort of the tail wagging the dog. Like did you have a problem or did we manufacture a problem and then manufacture a product at the same time? Yeah, I think this is really interesting. So I'd like to fast forward a couple of decades now, several decades, to even hant a virus now.

And let's look at the hemorrhagic fevers collaborating center. If we could pull that up. So there's such a thing? Great. Yes. So there's a lovely place. The CDC has a group called the viral special pathogens branch, which is the division of high consequence pathogens and pathology.

Yeah, pathology. National Center for Emerging Zoonotic infectious disease. a zoo, and that's the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. And we've got two director heads there, Dr. Dole Montgomery and Dr. Christina Sviropoulou. So he seems to have a military background. He was captain, and he's worked in Namru, 6, down in Peru, where they've got a zoo, a zoonotic unit, their animal experimentation. And there's also extensive animal experimentation going on in Atlanta, CDC, where they have

a bio-hazardt lab, four. And so, and both the heads of that department, Montgomery and Aspiropaloo, they have a number of publications looking, you know, with animal research and monkeys and mice and rats and guinea pigs and so on, looking at all of these very, very rare pathogens. as they are called, Lassa fever, Congo Crimean fever, hanta virus, Marburg, monkeypox. All of these things are in their repertoire of research papers. So it does pose very important questions about the origins of disease. of disease and indeed of viruses, it certainly suggests that what we experienced as a COVID pandemic was not a pandemic,

but was a way of getting vaccines, if we call them vaccines, into people, biological... Are you suggesting that... that these viruses, I mean, are you leaning now in a direction that these viruses may not actually exist or is the way we describe viruses, the pathogen that you and I are going to spread and breathe, that, you know, I've heard people say the only way you can spread a pathogen is you're going to have to inject it into everybody. I think this certainly raises questions and it does support, you know, examining this infrastructure and seeing that you have, chain reaction you have an organization like the Center for Disease Control and Prevention,

you know, with these laboratories messing about and adding bits of genetic material and then, and they're coming from banks, you know, privately owned gene banks and stuff. They're mixing those together and they're calling it a virus and then, and they're preparing these vaccines to them. I mean, you know, I studied many years ago and I enjoyed my microbiology and virology lectures, but there was never this whole range of viruses that seemed to have popped up since, you know, and there seems to be a new virus every day. Which brings me to another point, John Hopkins University has had a, has been a collaborating center for vaccine epidemiology and evaluation.

And the terms of this agreement were to support and to support WHO's immunisation 2030 agenda. Now the WHO's immunisation 2030 agenda, actually to write it as well, is about what you showed earlier with Geoffrey Jackson that injections for adults as well. well. Well, this is injections from birth to the grave. Basically, they say vaccines are important for every phase of your life, and they have 500 vaccines scheduled. I don't know if they mean

individually for everyone to help, but they plan to have a library of 500 vaccines by 2030, and that's the immunization agenda 2030. That's again, John Hopkins. So. I mean, I have been warning people this is the future. These lunatics want to vaccinate you for, you know, every virus and bacteria on planet Earth. And who needs 500 vaccines? Who needed one? We're only at 17 so far and counting. It seems to be nothing but harm in my perspective, the work that we've done, the science we've done. But it's interesting as you talk about, I mean, I know I've got people in this audience right now that are jumping up. There it is Dell, right? You know, there it is. There is no virus. Train theory, all of that. I'm not shying away from that conversation. And I do have to say, you know, when you make me think about it,

Hunter virus, like the joke that I have with Jeffrey, it can only, whatever it does, however it's spread, let's say it resonates and they're not breathing it, they just caught each other's vibes somehow. And if that's what some of these people are saying is happening, I'm sure I'd be just as afraid of being stuck on a boat, whether I'm resonating with something or breathing something from them. But it still only kills and seems to spread to four people, maybe six or seven. It's tiny. But you have North Korea, to your point, making a vaccine, and if they get away with it, I think I keep worrying about gain of function, that Ralph Barrett is splicing together to try and make something that spreads. But what you're making me think is the fastest spreading disease there is, is the moment you can convince everybody to inject themselves with that pathogen.

Right? If I can make you afraid of the seven, but I can get seven billion to inject themselves because they make us worry about that seven, then I just created the fastest spreading. Mission accomplished if I'm trying to, you know, have diseases, you know, right? The vaccine is the pathogen. It is the pathogen. That is fascinating. And actually does collect, I mean, it does connect several dots. Yeah, and I think, you know, one must, you know, give credit to doctors like Dr. Sam Bailey and Mark Bailey in New Zealand, because they have been raising awareness of this for a long time. And certainly for myself, I've been keeping things in a balance and just, you know, trying to think, how can this be? How do we understand this? But what Lucinda's work has shown is that,

It provides the how, how they've been able to do this. And it's been longstanding in collaboration with military and these private funders, these private donors in our CDC and the FDA. And just to finish the story, actually, with the, if you think about the CDC presenting the reference material and to be sent off using its infrastructure. and not mention their patients as well linked to all of these products that are being developed by these institutions. There's the FDA Center for Biologics and Research Evaluation, I think, evaluation and research.

And I think that's WHOCC-289. Perhaps you could pull that up. They were the ones who rubber-stamped everything for the world. So the FDA did. Yeah, so, you know, because the... Look at that. Peter Mark, look at who's the director in head there. Peter Marks is a part of it. Think he wanted to find any issue with the vaccine they were trying to inject into everybody? I mean, it just...

He said in 2021, he said, I am the FDA point person for the COVID vaccines. We'll make sure they're safe and effective. Yeah, yeah. And then they went and approved, you know, conditionally approved the fire. one and they approved Komenetti with with with and they just said these are the same vaccines but but but it doesn't really but actually that you know the the the the it renders at all meaningless a point as any way to argue any of that now or what we need to do is focus on on how this was how this was implemented and and and not

just look at the heads it's very easy to look at the heads and say, because they rotate the heads, they move them, you know, once they've done their time, they've got branches everywhere. I'm sure you could cut one off, it won't matter. Yeah, what we really have to do is look, you know, it's not one person who's done all of this. There's a whole lot of people working in those labs, experimenting on those millions of animals that are slaughtered every year for vaccine production. So we need to look at every level, and we need to look at every level, and we need to.

need now to have deep and thorough investigation to, you know, the administrative staff at all levels, the lab staff, we need to understand how this has happened so that it can never happen again because clearly they have a whole lot of what they call viruses at their disposal that they're planning to keep these pandemic things going as a racket. Well, they plan on injecting us. Do you have a sense of why? Well, there certainly is an ideology associated with this, and it is a eugenics ideology. Henry Kissinger said if you can get people to accept forced mandated vaccination, you can get them to accept anything. So this is very much an anti-human agenda, and the idea of diminishing all of us.

And it's a control agenda, really. You know, it's about control, ultimate power. You're doing such amazing work. World Council for Health is brilliant. And I know when I talk to you, like I don't want to be called the head of it or something because it's really about diversifying power, decentralizing it, really.

Instead of, say, your reaction to WHO, it's not a singular thing. We need to just, you know, all start working towards this. But it takes funding to do the work. So is there a way to, if people want to donate to the work that you're doing, the investigations that you're doing? Yes, I would ask, this body of work, and I just want to highlight that Lucinda von Buren has been, has produced this work voluntarily for the world, committing all her time the last couple of years, did not get paid a cent for this. And there's a huge body of work that still needs to be done because we can go subject by subject, we can look into viral hemorrhagic fevers. There's all these countries with different collaborating centers.

They've got water, they've got all sorts. We need support. We need real proper support, you know. And we also need, we need attention. We need people like Aaron Siri and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. And we need their time. We need to brief people who are, that the system has been corrupted from inside art.

And we can help you, we can brief you. So please do call us. You can email me directly at Tess at worldcounselforhealth.org. That was crazy. Here it is, everyone. WorldCounselforhealth.org. You can donate up there at top. There's a button.

And you have this amazing conference coming up. I'm going to be helping MC. Just tell me a little bit about that. Yeah, well, there's a better way. I mean, if you've been listening to all I've said so far, you know there is a better way. And that's been our slogan since 2022, and we're sticking with it.

So this is a better way conference. Del, you've been to our better way conferences before. You've brought such wonderful energy. The famous argument between me and Gert Van Den Bosch will live in infamy happened at a Better Way conference. Argue. We don't argue. We value a different perspective.

That's part of our ethos. But we do like a good discussion and debates. A good row. Yeah. But our conferences are really uplifting. They're solutions focused. And you might have heard now that the WHO has a messaging for corporations. Well, we are messaging for grassroots advocacy groups and experts, diverse health practitioners who have been silenced for ages.

and we've got really the most amazing lineup of speakers. We've got six panels. You're on day one as the MC, and we have day two. We've got Brett Weinstein. And on day one, we've got this most amazing panel, which has Dr. Brian Ardice on it and Jan Jekyllek, both of them with very interesting perspectives.

And I have to say that one of the most interesting things that has come out of, well, another one of these interesting, interesting things has come out of this WHOCC investigation is the number of blood, snake venom, rabies and other sorts of collaborative, subject matters, I should say, which actually, if you know Brian Ardice's work, Dr. Ardice has been saying that the spike protein is very similar to snake venom. And he obviously presents it, I can't remember the name of the the two snakes. But anyway, it's very compelling and he certainly has stuck with his research

on that. Looking at the WHO collaborating centers, you can see that they have interests. These are subject matters that they have centers looking at. So again, you can see things coming together with the work. Anyway, I know we're supposed to be talking about the conference. So let me... So the panels, these conversations, you're going to probably get... get really in depth with perspectives that have been out there. Brian artist has had some amazing hypotheses and laid out some really critical information and lots of people. I know many people slapping on nicotine patches, you know, because of the work that

he's put out there. And there's a huge number of collaborating centers looking at tobacco control, which is also very interesting, nicotine control. So they don't want people taking nicotine again. Wow. You know, they've got a whole system in place to surveil and control nicotine. So it's very, very interesting. And we'll be discussing all of these new things and also discussing solutions especially. And you know our conferences are really, really, the speakers don't have a lot of time. They've got very short time and they've got to get their points across solutions and then a discussion.

And we do take some questions from the audience. So we would really encourage people to come. It's in Providence, Rhode Island. It's our first USA conference. So it's super exciting for us. Hosted by our World Council for Health New England team. So we're looking forward to introducing them to everybody. And we have a high wire discount, everybody.

If you, let's see, how does that work? Highwire 10. So I guess you write in Highwire 10, you get a 10% discount to go to that amazing conference. And look at that lineup. I mean, just look at all those people. It's really stunning. Yeah, I mean, and all of those people are offering their time to us for free.

They get 15 minutes, you know, in the limelight on their own and then they're on a panel. So I think it really is testimony to, you know, to the brand that we've created, you know, it's the World Council of Health and the Better Way. You know, this is really a movement. The Better Way brand is really, we all know there's a better way. It's a better way.

It better be. So we're going to co-create it together. It's not something we're going to say, this is it. It's like, let's co-create it. And, yeah, I think there was something else. Follow actions, just something that, you know, for our audience, you know, that's watching right now. I think some of the times it feels like out of my reach. What can I do about other than support the work that you're doing?

There's so much. A better way, you know, a better way. Just choose a thing that you think is a better way. maybe it's food, you know, whatever, organic food, whatever it is, you can contribute to a better way by doing the thing that you feel passionate about, the thing that you really love to do, you know, there's so many people who are unhappy and worried in that. If you just choose one thing you actually love to do, then you'll already be on the path to a better way

and co-creating a better world with all of us. I just do remember what I wanted to say. Okay. You don't have to be at the conference in person. We've got online, we live streaming it. Okay, great. Yeah, so we want everybody there. It's just, you know, it's two great days.

If you can't get them in person, you can watch online, and you can watch a panel at a time, invite your friends over, have a barbecue, start the conversation. You know, it's really a wonderful event. I can't encourage people strongly enough to find some way to be there, be it in person or online. And we have an amazing garlic dinner if you do get there in person because we have live music with Joseph Arthur

and Mel Gabriel. Sounds wonderful, Tess. Thank you for all the incredible work you've done over the years. You bring such light to this conversation, and it can seem dark, but I agree. If everyone just does the thing that they're guided to do, then we do take this world to a better place. So if you are interested, both watching online

or going to Providence, Rhode Island, here is what the conference is going to be like. Well, look, just, Amazing things happening, you know, it's a battle, right? It's a battle. We're in the thick of it now. We are really standing our ground for the future of our children, of our grandchildren, and, you know, as the Native Americans say, seven generations ahead.

Better Way Conference would be a great way just to connect. Amazing speakers there. This is an international show. The High Wire is watched in countries all around the world, and I actually want to come out and meet some of you, which is why I've agreed to do more traveling than usual, especially because we have this great tool with this film and inconvenience study that's now been seen by over 100 million people worldwide. But we're going to be doing some screenings.

I'm going to be in Italy. So if you're in Italy and you're watching the show where you have friends there, we're in Italy from May 20th to the 28th. Here are those dates, May 21st in Milan, May 22nd in Padua. We're in Rome, May 24th. Definitely want to check that out. And then almost immediately after it, I'm heading to Poland from June 5th to 6th. And then look how tight that is.

Then June 6th through 8th, I got a quick flight and a bunch of speaking there. I'm going to be in Japan, the 20th through the 21st. And then Aruba, July 1st and 2nd speaking. If you're interested in any of those, some of those dates we've shown you, but certainly just be following my socials. I'm going to keep you up to date as I get details on those dates as they're coming together right now. I'll be sharing that along with all the other fun stuff I talk about. So at Del Bigtree is the way to follow me on all my social media. But you know, you should be also watching at Highwire Talk at Highwire Plus at Del Bigtree.

Subscribe to our YouTube. We're back on YouTube. We'll love it. If all of you sign up, let's just see how long it lasts. Why don't we just see if we could put so much pressure there that they have to wonder whether they should cancel us again? Anyway, there's, you know, I just want to say this. Politics is politics is politics, right? And this is not a political show.

We are, we're all about, you know, expressing, showing you what's out there, showing what we're up against, making media. We do jump in and try to make a difference. We're about being activists. We're trying to inspire you to get a lot. up in the morning and just as test said, do what you feel you're guided to do because every one of us, I believe, has a special talent that is especially needed right now and in this moment. But as we look at the politics that's out there, they're going to try to divide us. They're going to try to make us feel like we're afraid.

That is what the media does. Just like it makes us afraid of an issue that's killed three people, maybe it could sell vaccine to 7.2 billion people. That's how they think and they're good at it. So every time you find yourself buying into the panic on a cruise ship or buying into the divide between Robert Kennedy Jr. and Donald Trump, take a minute, sit down, get quiet. Sure, there's always the possibility. It's true. Maybe three people did die. Maybe 11 are at risk. Maybe Robert Kennedy Jr.'s days are numbered inside of the government. But all along the way, we have just been doing the best that we can with every single moment and gaining ground. That's all you can do in life.

You know, I thought about this the other day, especially as I was leaving. I might have said this before. As I was leaving Washington, D.C. after an incredible week, people will say, well, what's the plan, Dell? How's this going to work? Or where's it going to go? They asked that Avani Hari and I and everybody was going to the, what can I expect at the rally? What's going to happen because of it. Those are all like asking a surfer, you know, can he make the waves bigger today? Is it going to be a 10-foot wave, a 3-foot wave, a 5-foot wave? You know, the only thing we can do is surfers is that damn wave as best we can no matter how big it is. Maybe it's a 60-foot wave, I'll go grab a smaller board. Or maybe it's a little wave will grab a long board. But either

way, we are going to win the day. So while we have Robert Kennedy Jr., let's take advantage of it. But anyone that tries to tell you that somehow the end of Robert Kennedy Jr. Or the strength that he has in government defines what maha is as though maha can be divined. Maha is you. Maha is your brother. It's your sister. It's your child.

Maha is about being healthy. And maybe if you want to call it something else because the name feels too close to MAGA, do that. It's medical freedom. It's freedom, period. It's body sovereignty. But no matter what happens in Washington, D.C., they're not going to take it away from us. They're not taking us apart. We're not going anywhere.

In fact, we're growing every single day. So whatever the newspapers want to report about what politicians are doing, they're just politicians. And they work for us. Whether the Democrats, Republicans, or libertarians, they're our important. employees. Don't forget that and act accordingly. I'll see you next week on the highwire.