#2454 - Robert Malone, MD

[MUSIC] [MUSIC] >> Yeah, a lot of water into the bridge. [LAUGH] >> Your appearance on the show boy that created a lot of problems. [LAUGH] >> Yeah, I didn't expect you ever having me on again. I thought maybe Spotify was just going to say hello. >> No, you were right. Like this is a victory dance. Like it turned out that all your warnings and all the things that you were saying about the problems turned out to be true. >> Well, thanks. And I know you've said that on a few shows. Every time you do, somebody sends me a clip and sees, hey, Rogan said you're right there. >> What was it like for you? >> First of all, they were trying to label you a quack and a cook. >> Try. >> And try. >> I didn't know what they're talking about. I don't think it worked with everybody. I mean, it worked with people that weren't paying attention. But anybody that really paid attention to your background said, no, this guy's very credible. I mean, don't you have like nine patents on mRNA vaccine technology? >> Yeah, on the mRNA, yeah, in total about 15 I think. >> Yeah. >> And you also took the vaccine and had a horrible adverse event? >> A series of them, yeah. >> Yeah. >> That at the time, it was so early. That was when the National Guard was still doing it and that was Moderna. And I was embarrassed to have these experiences. And I was embarrassed when I got coded in early 2020. Looking back, there was so much fear, so much anger and anxiety and everything wrapped around all of this. And in retrospect, it was promoted, but it was also very organic. It was looking back, being honest about it. It was a frightening time, what was happening. And yeah, I had those experiences. My doc who was a cardiologist was like, why were you so stupid to take this? >> Your doctor said that too. >> In 2021? >> Yeah. >> She was 20 or 21? >> It was 2021, 2021. >> Yeah. I was going to kind of a cardiologist that had left traditional medical practice at UVA and the associated hospitals. And I was going to her for hormone replacement therapy and bioidentical hormone replacement therapy. And she was monitoring a lot of things and yeah, that was her response. Why did you do this? Of course, I've had that question a thousand times since, why were you so stupid? You're the one that should have known. And so I have to answer that still. It kind of gets a little tiresome. >> What was your perspective on the vaccine before you took it? >> To be honest, I was amazed. I was amazed that the claims that the problems that I encountered when I had been working on it had been solved. I didn't see how that could be the case, but I knew that a huge amount of money had been thrown at it, so it was possible. >> What were the problems? >> In my hands, it was inflammation primarily. It was also, it was absolutely not localizable. It was in the monkey models that we tested. It was incredibly inflammatory. It didn't give long, long prolonged levels of expression. It was hard to make. It's kind of back then it was almost a little bit of witchcraft. You drop, I mean for me as a graduate student when I was doing that, it was incredibly scary because it was a couple thousand dollars worth of reagents and a little tiny tube. And back in the late 80s, that was real money. It didn't always work, the reaction. It was a little bit of a wing in a prayer. But then as I started working with animal models and with the different formulations, I could come up with a variety of different compounds and formulations that worked pretty well in cell culture, but not so well in animals. And I spent a lot of time trying to do that, optimize that, and what I ended up with is just seeing that it really caused, sorry to use medical jargon, that's kind of where I'm from. So that's the language. >> Not as probably better from you. >> It caused a lot of inflammation. White cell infiltrates, really aggressive white cell infiltrates. In my hands, in both mice and monkeys. And I'd abandoned it as something that just was useful in research, particularly in cell culture, but I just didn't see it maturing as an efficient delivery strategy with low risk, acceptable risk in animals. And that also became the experience at this company that I had first joined where a lot of the original patents were filed, Vikell. They abandoned the RNA because they couldn't make it. And they turned largely to this strange discovery that we had, that was a negative control, that the RNA alone or DNA alone was actually more effective in animal models, mice, for instance. And it was to use the positively charged fats. Now people call them lipid nanoplexes, lots of fancy words around it. It was just positively charged fats of various types that were mixed, that bind the DNA or the RNA and kind of spontaneously assemble. And a lot of work went into trying to improve that. We did what we could in the '90s when I was at Davis to try to advance that technology and develop new lipids. And we had a number of them get patented and they were marketed by Promeg and others. But could never solve the delivery in vivo. But this group up in University of British Columbia that had been banging away at this kind of related liposome tech for years and years, even before I had known anything about it. For the ones that kind of came up with the magic sauce that is used essentially by both the Moderna and Pfizer products. And that's the stuff that we've all been exposed to, those that have taken it. So when you were first experimenting, you said it couldn't be localized. So meaning that in the injection site, it was supposed to be there and then your body was supposed to produce antibodies because of the injection. Yeah, and it goes all over. But it went all over the body. Yeah, it does. But the assertion, what they were telling you when you got the shot initially was that it was not going to leave the injection site. Yeah, and I called my colleagues at University of British Columbia that I had known back in the day as I was grappling with whether or not to take the product because I had to travel. As you call back, then forget international travel if you weren't jabbed. Even national travel. Yeah, you couldn't get on an airplane. But in Canada, it was even worse. You couldn't get on a train. Yeah, so I called Peter and had a chat with him and he said that they had solved the problems of the distribution that now when you injected it, it would stay local. It would go to the trading lymph nodes. It was much more effective and that they didn't have those safety issues anymore. So that was one of the reasons why I decided to go ahead. Did you ask how they solved that problem? Yeah, yeah. I asked in detail because I knew some of the nature of the formulations. Again, I don't want to get too technical. But what was claimed was that the incorporation of polyethylene glycol, so you would know that as antifreeze. But it's in the liposome world, it's long been known as a waif to create what are known as stealth liposomes that circulate in your body for a long period of time and make it so that these particles don't get inactivated by extracellular proteins and deliverance to like that. And so he was using the gentleman in particular named Peter Kullis. By the way, he's the one that should have got the Nobel Prize for these products as far as I'm concerned and got slided in the pick. But Peter Kullis said that he had experimented with a lot of different structures of the fat particles, chemical structures. So they came up with some that had these properties of staying localized and then built the formulations in ways that were similar to what I'd done with cholesterol and other things. then all of you. also added these shorter polyethylene glycol molecules attached with a really short organic, you could call it fat or gasoline like molecule, that put the peg into the liposome particle, but in a way that once it got into the body, it would fall off. And so this is, you know, some people have the sensation as I did with my second jab of, you know, you get it and then suddenly you feel tingling in the end of your fingers or things like that, that may be the peg. But it was those advances in the components because these are self-assembling particles that were used that Peter and his group, Peter McColle, no, Peter Coles, P-I-E-T-E-R, and UBC in his group built these products with in this technology. And that was, they had it available, their choice because they created companies for this. I mean, a ton of money must have been made because they licensed it non-exclusively to bio-intech and Moderna. And that's still kind of the core tech that makes this particular category products work. And so this was enough to convince you that they had solved that problem. Yeah, I took his word. I mean, he's an extremely experienced knowledgeable liposome formulation expert, quite senior. He's older than me by another decade at least. And been doing this forever. And he asserted that he had solved the problems. And I believed him. I needed to travel internationally. And also, there was this buzz going around at the time that if you had long COVID, which at the time, if you think back to then, there was a whole cloud over even using the words long COVID, that the idea that you would have these long lasting effects from getting the infection was controversial and not really accepted. But partially promoted. And there was a narrative that was, you know, in retrospect, actively promoted. That if you took the vaccines and you, and if you had this symptom of this chronic malaise in loss of stamina, I mean, you're a guy that's, it's important to you to be physically fit. For me, it's been important to be physically fit on my life because I've always been a farmer and a carpenter and worked with my hands and my body. And I have farm chores. I still have farm chores every day. And I couldn't do them. I couldn't walk up hills. I just had lost my stamina. I'd lost my pulmonary function. And it wasn't getting better. And nobody knew anything about this, what was causing it, whether it was even real, but I was experiencing it. There's a whole cluster of people who say there's no virus. And there's certainly not any long COVID, but I experienced it. And so it was promoted that if you took the jab and you had this symptom, then it would kick your immune system up. You'd get more of a response to the spike antigen. And that would allow you to clear these symptoms of long COVID. That turns out now we have data in just fairly recently. That in fact, the opposite is true. So this idea of long COVID, so you got long COVID from the actual infection of COVID-19 before the jab? Yeah, I got infected in late very end of February 2020. I was in Boston at a conference on drug discovery, computational drug discovery, high throughput stuff, very high tech MIT, and staying in a little firehouse that had been converted to a hotel right across the street from the biotech company where the initial Boston outbreak was associated with. And I came home sick as a dog. I thought that I had influenza B, because the narrative was that was circulating at the time. I remember laying in bed just feeling sick as hell, hard breath. And my wife came in, it's just been on the TV. COVID is circulating right there in Boston, where you were. So that was pretty early on, and it hit me pretty hard. So that would have been the Wuhan one variant. And then there was a couple of genetic changes that occurred apparently in Boston around that time. So how long did this affect you, this long COVID? No, I was second till I took the jab, just not having stamina, just feeling. How many months was that? I had never really thought about it many months. And did you try anything else to mitigate those symptoms? Yeah, I did. So my whole story, the whole bunch of what I did back then that never gets discussed, and that's okay. But the kickoff was that I got this call from Wuhan, I think it was for Wuhan, from this guy that used to be CIA, named Michael Kelleyan, who I'd worked with in the past. And he told me, he told me with the call that there was this virus in Wuhan, this coronavirus that looked like it was going to be serious. And I ought to pay attention to it, and I ought to get a team wound up to try to address this. So what I'd done, because this is coming off of what I did in Zika. And I'm the vaccinologist, at core, but developing a vaccine in the face of an outbreak historically has taken a decade. And it just isn't a practical way to address an emergent, infectious disease crisis. And I had become convinced that the best way to do that was through repurposed drugs. So after I get this call, I put the team together building on the technology that I'd been working with at UCIRA during Zika for rapid identification of repurposed drugs to address new crisis. And this time we'd really taken a computational approach. So I used some tech out of UC San Francisco to recreate one of the key proteins in SARS-CoV-2 based on the sequence that got published from Wuhan in January 11th, I think, and of 2020. And we started doing what's called computational docking of very, very large virtual libraries using Amazon AWS and high throughput parallel processing. And came up with a list of compounds and then kind of screened those against problems adverse events, that kind of stuff, more coffee good. I would. Thank you. So I had this list of compounds and then I was sick as a dog. And what you get trained in, if you do clinical research is docs don't experiment themselves. It's like breaking the rules. But I'm lying there so sick that I'm just like, what the hell? What do I got to lose? I'm probably going to die. You know, I'd already at that point, I'd spend a lot of time already looking into the virus and what it was causing and what people were saying it was causing. And how old were you at the time? Let's see, I'm 66 now. So that's what's the long? So you were in high risk group. Yeah, for sure. And I was obese. I don't know if you noticed, but I've dropped about 40 to 50 pounds since we last met. So I started taking some of those compounds and one of them was this drug that is normally taken for stomach acid called femodidine. And I got an immediate response with that. And so I also tried isocursitin. That didn't seem to make so much of an impact on me. But I experimented on myself. And the femodidine at higher doses now has been verified to be helpful. And it was one of the first things out of the box that people started taking even prophylactically before we knew about hypermectin and other things. And then that went on. I mean, there's a whole thread here we could go on for an hour about what was done with the repurposed drugs. I was working closely with the Fentzer Reduction Agency. And I managed to capture a few hundred million dollars and direct that towards drug repurposing, adaptive clinical trials, etc. And the thing that I zoomed in on through a collaboration with a doc up in Minnesota. was the combination of femodidine, another anti-inflammatory called celicoxib, and then the thing that really kicked it in high gear was the forbidden horse medicine, Ivermectin. And we got, I managed to working with DOD, got over $100 million set up a contract, I got managed by SAIC, and we were going to go after that using a very cutting edge clinical trial design. And remember this is the DOD. We submitted initial drug applications for using this combination of license drugs, well known license drugs, and the FDA just dug in. Again and again rejected the application. So long what they said was we were going to have to do cell culture tests to demonstrate the antiviral activity of Ivermectin before they would allow us to proceed. And so in the end the DOD caved and they dropped the Ivermectin component and proceeded with the femodidine and celicoxib, which showed some effect. Why would they so hesitant or who was the resistance? Your guess is as good as mine. I really, people think that I have visibility into the FDA, and yeah I've met with them and I have a background in regulatory affairs, but the policy decisions that were made during COVID in still to this day are perplexing. But particularly Ivermectin. Oh it was like a high sin. They deployed what do we want to call it, propaganda, psychological warfare, nudge, everything, just like they did after you and I had our little discussion. It was stunning. I mean like after we had our chat, I don't know if you remember, you asked me about what is this about mass formation psychosis. Yeah. And I mean the term broke the internet is overused, it broke the internet. The search results on Google went nuts. Well because it perfectly described what was happening. Oh and it couldn't possibly describe what was happening even though every single person that heard it knew damn well it did. But it was forbidden. I mean this was forbidden because people didn't hear our first discussion. Please explain mass formation psychosis. So since then I've had a shit storm come at me for using the term psychosis coupled with mass formation. You can't you know the grief you think you got a lot of grief from Spotify and from. Spotify was actually great. Yeah. No grief from them. It was from like Neil Young and Joni Mitchell and. So you probably don't know the whole backstory. That's fun to dive into because it relates to the psychological warfare domain that now I've become a pseudo expert on. Just in trying to understand what the hell I experience and what's going on. So Matthias Desmond who's a friend at University of Gent in Belgium, who by the way has been pretty well railroaded in his university now. Not allowed to teach his own book on the psychological basis of totalitarianism which is where that book had not come out yet. But it was the mass formation hypothesis is what was the kind of core of that book that's now published and widely regarded. So Matthias came. Matthias is somebody who as a PhD full professor had long taught 20th century psychology work relating to totalitarianism and thought that goes back to Freud and beyond really all the way back to Plato and the allegory of the cave. And in particular there was a number of philosophers in the 20th century associated with trying to make sense of Nazi Germany and what had happened to the German people and really all over the world. But particularly relating to the Germans. And Matthias had been teaching this on a regular basis. And the way he tells the story he had an epiphany one day that, oh my god, the thing that I've been teaching, I'm living. We're experiencing this process of the formation of masses. And you could call it crowd psychology. So mass formation, it's kind of awkward or mass formation psychosis which is what the term was that was used in the initial podcast that he gave out. So that's why I use that term. But it's not in the attack was that it's not in the diagnostics and statistical manual for the American psychiatric association. So therefore it doesn't exist. But you know all the attacks, but the core of it is that when people to make it simple become disassociated from society and from each other, they become extremely vulnerable to manipulation of a variety of different types. And a leader can come into that environment and offer, let's to simplify it, offer a solution to their pain because being isolated, socially isolated is associated with pain. We as human beings have a need to connect with others. It's a fundamental aspect of being human. So what you do, I mean you connect. That's that's the essence of the Joe Rogan experience, I think. So we need to connect with others and in certain situations where people are threatened and in particular in the modern era where we have all of these things that drive us into isolation most notably our electronic tools. We become disassociated from our community and when that happens we have a strong need to become associated with community and a leader can come into that environment and basically say, I have the solution to your pain, your psychological pain. And what will happen is a strange phenomenon where people will rather than building social networks, let's say horizontal to those around them. They'll attach to this strong leader and they'll get that they'll get fulfillment for that need to belong by this attachment to that leader and following the edicts of that leader. And this leads to this phenomena that gives rise, you know, enables to tellitarianism but gives rise to this whole cluster of things that mistiest described that, you know, he uses the term mass formation in a way that's kind of an odd artifact of translation, I guess, from the Dutch. It's an easier way to think of it as a crowd formation. And in his examination of the history of what happened in Nazi Germany where things people really went crazy. Mothers were turning their children in, you know, children being executed on, you know, consequent to mother's testimony which is really strange when you think about it just, you know, in a fundamental way. You know, we had all of this dear leader kind of stuff, the linkage of the self and the soul to this central figure in deriving a sense of identity and belonging from that that went on. And, you know, there's still people from that generation in Germany that are still caught up in a lot of that. That's why the German laws. So that's the short version when we spoke before I gave a much more technical precise definition of Matthias' core thesis. But once this happens, then people become very, very easily manipulated through propaganda and a variety of techniques that now I have a better comprehension of. I mean, then I was still just trying to make sense just like all of us of what the heck was going on. What's with this crazy. But now it's kind of coalesced into an understanding of the fact that a modern psychology has been weaponized. It's been intentionally weaponized in the context of military activities in the domain that, you know, one way to express it. The term is used kind of term of art in military jargon is fifth generation warfare or you call it psychological warfare. And what distinguishes the present from say, SunZoo and, you know, ancient propaganda has always been part of warfare in humans. But we haven't had the digital world. We haven't had modern psychology. We haven't had nudge technology. We haven't had all these tools that allow the control of information, thought, perception, feelings, emotions that have become commonplace. And that, you know, is, is, in, has, you know, this suite of technology and capabilities that we saw deployed in all of us, were built in a kind of a structured way, largely by UK and US leadership in the intelligence community, as a weapon of war to counter these successful insurgencies that we keep losing wars over. You know, being a notable example all the way through Afghanistan. And, so that's why it was built. But then that tech got deployed by governments against their own citizens. And this was really launched in large part in the United States by a presidential directive from Barack Obama. I'm not making this up. You can look it up. And by the way, the presidential directive is still in place that established the nudge technology units in the United States. They were already operating in the UK. And in the UK, it's quite advanced. When you look at the UK politics right now and what's going on there with all the censorship and everything, you know, this is no joke. We're barreling right to that endpoint. Same as Canada has. You know, we're just a little bit behind. And there they, you know, we have the benefit of the First Amendment in a constitution. And, you know, often on courts. But there they don't have those obstacles. And the government believes in the UK that once they have won an election, it's perfectly acceptable to deploy this modern psychology and information control technology on their own population. And I argue that once that Rubicon has crossed, the idea of democracy because the tech is so powerful, becomes completely perverted. And we got a good hard taste of that during COVID. What you and I experienced, what you experienced with hypermectin, what you experienced with, you know, just talking about your own experiences. And the blowback that happened after we did that little hit is a super powerful clear case study. In understanding this intersection of modern psychology, warfare technology, and the digital world. And algorithmic control of information, the creation of digital avatars for all of us. The application now in present of artificial intelligence to custom craft, messaging that gets fed into our digital domains on a regular basis in order to, you know, sell us whatever. But also to shape how we think. And to control what information we get access to all the time, just to give an example, my wife, who does a lot of our research for our sub-stack, was talking me the other day. She just gave me a couple examples where stories that were in corporate media in the United States that weren't listing certain key names or whatever. She said, I just go to the Hindustu Times. Hindustu Times is a great source for all the stuff that we're not allowed to see here in the United States. You're now in an environment, an information environment where you cannot rely on, but we all know that. You can't rely on corporate media, but the rules, the boundaries that are being set up about information are profound, and they're completely distorting our ability to process what's happening around us. Can I give you the example of what actually happened? You said, in our example, with the blowback in Spotify, this is documented by a report out from the house about COVID and what happened. And that report only carries just through to the early part of the vaccines and then it stops. For some reason, they didn't really want to go down the road to the vaccines. They did talk a lot about the events around the, let's say, "lably hypothesis," which is allowed. You're allowed in DC now to talk about that. Finally. Yeah, you're still -- It was about four years later, you were allowed to talk about that. Yeah, yeah. So what was documented was that the trail of events was that we had our discussion. That triggered -- and this is going to sound bizarre, but this is what's documented -- that triggered Coca-Cola corporation to complain to the global alliance for responsible media, which is created by the World Economic Forum. It's one of these global aggregators that controls advertising. The global alliance for responsible media, which, by the way, had a dust up with Elon Musk and lost, and they closed it down as a nonprofit. It still exists in other ways, but as a structure that could be sued by X, it disappeared when he stood up against it. But global alliance for responsible media had a socket with Google EdSense, by the way. So they control the advertising ecosystem, which kind of matters to Spotify. So Coca-Cola complains to Garm, saying, "This guy Rogan, you got to shut him down, okay. You got to put pressure on Spotify." So Spotify gets the message from Garm that we're threatening to pull your advertising. Okay. Now, what happens between that and your experience? I don't know. It's not transparent to me what you experienced. Yeah, we all remember the Laurel Canyon crowd saying they were going to pull their catalogs, which they didn't actually own. That was another thing. And then they went after you with this mashup of inward historic events. There was clearly a concerted effort to take out Joe Rogan. Much more than to take out Robert Malone. And so then the question comes, "Why the heck would Coca-Cola be the socket with the global alliance for responsible media?" One of the biggest advertisers in the world, right? Why would Coca-Cola give a hooy about what Joe Rogan said to Robert Malone on New Year's Eve? Coca-Cola is really tight with the CDC. Coca-Cola has funded buildings at the CDC. Coca-Cola funds the CDC Foundation for the CDC. As does Bill and Linda Gates has done all the major vaccine manufacturers, etc., etc. The appearance is, I can't verify this, that CDC acted through its ally Coca-Cola. Why are they allies? What's Coca-Cola got to do with CDC? The angle there is that Coca-Cola wanted the CDC to get a WHO to not implement restrictions in messaging about sugar use. They didn't want those messages. Remember, this is at the heart of the inverted food triangle now. The old food triangle was the product of sugar lobby. I mean, the sugar lobby is incredibly powerful because this stuff is addictive. I mean, it's like having the cocaine lobby here, right? Well, and that's an interesting analogy because, of course, the history of Coca-Cola. But, so sugar is addictive. The CDC, Coca-Cola didn't want the CDC to influence public health policy, to avoid global positions on the risks associated with sugar intake, because it would potentially hurt their market share. It wouldn't be a major globalized company. So that little ecosystem that I just described illustrates what we're dealing with here. And the many ways that all of this kind of influence in messaging and signaling happens in this kind of integrated horizontally and vertically ecosystem that we live in right now. And one of the things that came out of that, you'll recall, was that you were asked, as I was saying, recall, you gave this, you know, I've had a hostage video, I think that was a close to a hostage video from you back in the day when you were saying, this is what I'm going to do. It was like out on your porch or something. I remember, I was sitting around a campfire in Maui quite literally when somebody said, "Oh, did you just see this from Rogan?" And a matter of fact, I was sitting around Gavin DeBeckers campfire at that time, somebody that you know. And so, the compromise was that there would be a little trailer put at the bottom of that episode. And by the way, you probably know that episode for a long time became very hard to find. It was basically blacklisted from the search engines, et cetera, et cetera. But it carries on, I think it still does, that little banner that says, you know, you should go to the CDC if you want the true, true about COVID. And you can still find those kinds of banners popping up all the time on YouTube. If you talk about vaccines or COVID vaccines, that will get, if you pass the filters, if YouTube will allow that to still be up, because you didn't say something, whatever it is, then you'll get the little banner. Okay, that banner is pushed out by the Nudge units at the CDC. Okay, that is Nudge Technology. It is all around us, all the time. And it's basically still public policy consequent to the old Obama presidential directive that still hasn't ever send it. You know, I love President Trump. I think he's doing amazing things. I think he's amazingly brave. I just mentioned our friend Gavin DeBecker referred to Trump the other day when I saw Gavin in Mally as a once in 500 year leader. And that's not nothing coming from Gavin. And so I'm a big supporter, but the president has still left in place this mechanism that exists, that directs the federal government to use Nudge Technology and related what I assert is psychological warfare technology on the American populace. Right, this is from back in, what was it, 2015 or something like that? It's quite early. And then you had his, you had Obama's subsequent like the notorious speech at Hoover, at Stanford, where he talks about an order to preserve democracy. We're going to have basically says we're going to have to have censorship in order to preserve democracy or whatever democracy is. For people that don't know where we're talking about, we're relating to the Smith month act. The Smith month, everybody focuses on Smith month. But as I examined Smith month and we did an essay on this in the substack, you know, like three years ago, because that was the kind of the narrative that was coming out in, let's say, our site of alternative media. And in my examination, Smith month's impact is a lot more limited. It has to do with voice of America and some of those things. The broad impact wasn't quite in my opinion what was believed to be of enabling propaganda domestically. More specifically, there is a presidential directive that established a Nudge office, that Nudge technology shall be used. What they call it, they don't call it a Nudge office, right? I don't know, it's got, they've gone through various iterations and I'm sorry I don't have the latest version. And it's kind of become decentralized. It was called the social and behavioral science team. Wikipedia says that that was stopped in 2017, but continued under the Trump administration under, sorry, the general services administration's office of evaluation assignment. There we go. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's been, like I said, it's been pushed out into a lot of the agencies. They don't use that lexicon because that is easy to find them. Right. They use, there's other euphemisms they use to describe those kinds of activities, but it's become normalized. The weaponization of propaganda has become normalized. There's the worrying from overall behavioral interventions or nudges like the ones implemented by OES have been found to be effective in recent psychological science article. Researchers identified several policy areas of interest, example healthcare. Here we go, 2015. Yeah. It's when it was implemented. So 2015. Exactly. But President Obama signs that executive order requiring federal agencies to incorporate behavioral insights into their evaluation efforts. That's a nice way of saying the use of propaganda on the American people. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And so this is kind of become, thank you so much for pulling that up. That's super helpful. So this is, like I said, if I can illustrate, I was on a Great Britain News broadcast about four years ago. At the time when they would, you know, there was a window time where they would have me on, but it was sketchy. And GB News was the only one that would do it. But the rules were then that if you were going to have somebody that was speaking against the government narrative, then you had to have somebody representing the government's interests in the same broadcast. So that's implemented by basically the UK has an active censorship organization that controls news media. And so I'm on with this guy, Great Britain News, pinstribe, bow tie, you know, it just reeks. And I'm talking about psychological warfare and the 77th brigade, which is part of the British Army, which is their psychological warfare unit. It's very open that that's the case as is the existence of a civilian branch that they set up and paid people to do social media in opposition of counter narratives that the government didn't approve of. I mean, now they just understarm or they just censor you and send you to jail. They just cut out the middle man. But back then they were still kind of buying civilians. And so I'm talking about this. And that's that the guy says, yeah, but here in the UK, our belief is that if the government wins the election, they have the right to govern. And that right to govern includes our ability to use this type of technology. And we believe that it's justified to do so. And that when that conversation happened, frankly, I hadn't we hadn't launched the book yet, Cywo, which is our most recent publication. And it just kind of all coalesced in my mind that, oh my God, what all these things, Matthias is teaching about mass formation, what I saw, what I experienced with you, what I experienced with the concerted attacks of the media. And then subsequently it's been validated by this congressional report that talks about, for instance, the juror ticket system, juror tickets are what, it's a system that all the software companies use to track glitches and complaints and stuff like that. Well, the government had their own juror ticket system set up to log information about activities of persons that they wanted to have censored and suppressed. And they would build these juror tickets with information. And so one of the things that's out on the congressional report was that I actually had a juror ticket. I was surprised that this is the case, or I mean, not surprised in retrospect. And in my personal sins were that I was listed as an anti-vaxer and a conservative. Even though you're a vaccinologist and a conservative, that's interesting. And a conservative. Yeah, exactly right. I mean, the stuff that's coming out. That's wild. It's fascinating to query things like GROC, even GROC. You can vote certain subjects and you will find where they have algorithmically built firewalls. And you can approach them and detect them because it will act dumb. It'll lock up seemingly. It won't give you that answer. Or it'll talk around the issue, et cetera, et cetera. You can identify these things that have been built in algorithmically. And of course, then we had all of the disclosures, the Zuckerberg. Oh, I'm so sorry, apology tour that happened to remember when basically you got out of my Congress. And the rest of the tech bros, and of course, the thing that catalyzed all of that was that Elon decided to pony up a good chunk of change and buy Twitter. Which I think is one of the most impactful decisions that any American citizen has ever made. Amazing. If he didn't do that, I think we would be really screwed. There's how can you debate that? How can you debate it when you look at the Twitter files and you find out how much the government was involved in censoring accurate information from legitimate professors, esteemed researchers, anybody who didn't go along with the official narrative. That's all coming out now in spades. And we're dealing now the lovely thing about all of this. I mean, let's try to, it is mourning in America, in my opinion. I mean, a lot of people get very dark. there's a darkness to the times, but there's not to push the metaphor too far, but there is new light coming in. And the fact that we can now see this and we recognize that you and I are a similar generation. I mean, one of my earliest memories with the assassination of the president. And all of the propaganda around that, the propaganda around Vietnam more, ever since we've just been swimming in information control that's gotten increasingly sophisticated and fortunately as Americans, we also kind of have become more and more immune to marketing and propaganda over time because we've been living with it, trying to discern what is real and what is, you know, false again. This is if it's a core part of what you do for a living, I think, is just try to, you know, have conversations to be able to get to the bottom of the bullshit. But that we've been swimming in it and now we can see it. We can see the structures that, you know, the power of artificial intelligence and influence mapping and all the things that are going on the internet right now that are the cutting edge technology. They're scary because they can be weaponized against us. But they're also super cool because we can now see those relationships. If you want to example of that, look at the threads that are coming out on X, illuminating the networks of affiliation associated with this latest Epstein fellow release. Just mind blowing. Mind blowing. And it's just like, you know, we can, we can sit here and bitch and whine saying, oh, they didn't release that. I'm like, oh, this is, this is redacted. All that's true. But still the impact of that information, we're still getting to the bottom of it. It's completely changed. Most people's narrative of what happened. Like, we have this sort of vague understanding, you know, but when you see in the email, like clear evidence that they're talking about children in pretty obscene way horrifying ways. So that was the thing that like even when I talked to Mike Benz about that, he was sort of incredulous about that. I don't think they would use children. It just doesn't make any sense. It's a big car, but it just seems like if Mike Benz was incredulous, that's pretty big. Well, I just don't think we really knew until we saw those files come out. And then you go, oh, there's no denying it now. My position on his completely shifts. But I thought there's probably some really sick people that have an appetite for that, but I hadn't seen the real evidence for it until these files. And now I'm like, oh, this is demonic. This is clearly demonic. Okay. So thank you for saying that. I'm somebody who was raised to Christian and went to Bible school and that kind of stuff as a kid and youth groups and then growing up in central coast California, let's say, veered in different ways. But the experiences that we've encountered over the last half a dozen years, it's hard to come up with the language to express what we're observing in the world other than the language of theology. Well, demonic by action. So whether or not demons exist, if they did exist, that is how they would behave. They would pray on children and torture children. And there was the one where there was a suggestion with a child was praying to Jesus that like there was a joke that someone should dress up like Jesus. I'm I do you see that one? No, I'm not watching. I don't even want to. People sent it to me and I go, okay, because I'm for the most part off social media. But every now and then someone will send me something that I have to look at. I'm like, oh my god. Yeah. And these are these are emails back and forth. There's one of them where Epstein says I enjoyed the torture video. There's these references to pizza. A lot of references to pizza that are 100% some kind of a code. Yeah. And then it brings you back to pizza gate. Yeah. And which was widely dismissed. Yeah. Everybody's like, oh, this is a bunch of cooks. Here it is. She said she felt God's presence next to her when she was in bed. She knows that Jesus watches over her and he helps her save. He helped save her life. And then he writes whoops. And then in response, Jeffrey Epstein says, you should dress up as him when you see her. It is it is dark. You should dress up like Jesus when you see her. What the fuck? And well, look at the line. Look at the line above it. How am I supposed to interpret? I'm coming trick. The OH Jesus. I'm coming trick. It's just the whole thing. But so so we see this darkness. It involves leaders in academia, in science, in industry, in politics. Yeah. And it it just, you know, I remember point in this arc of the last six years where a film crew came on to my farm and learned to shoot some segments. And they were talking this and frankly, I thought it was crazy talk. I kind of smiled and you know, tried to be civil and nice, not contradict them about the new world order. And then along comes, you know, then my wife one day says, hey, look at this book from Klaus Schwab. It's called the new world order. What? I mean, he was just saying and out loud. Yeah. I mean, the world economic forum had those ads where they were saying you will own nothing and you'll be happy. Yeah. And it goes back to the current King of England was the guy that kind of launched that. He was the first one to be really talking about that you can if you you can use your use your favorite AI and track it down yourself. I prefer not to use Google these days to try to find stuff. But it it we see vertical after vertical after vertical after vertical where information has been crafted and manipulated. And the same tools of of de legitimization of a promotion of these messages that you are a conspiracy theorist or that you are controlled opposition is another favorite one. A lot of this was pioneered in the 60s by the FBI against the various protest movements and you can go back and track that. Okay. The narrative of being a a collaborator surreptitiously is called bad jacketing. And and it has its own its own language and and protocols for how to do this to people to divide movements. We're we're we're in this I mean in a way it's kind of a glorious moment where you we're having a huge amount of social pressures coming together in this moment in time that you and I happen to live in. How fantastic is that to be at a point in time where there is so much change there's so much social interaction and pressure and competition between these different philosophies and and we're swimming in it. I for somebody writes on a daily basis these essays on sub-stack because that's how I make my living now because I can't do what I used to do. It's it's your kid in a candy shop. There there's so much corruption. There's so much falsehood being promoted. There's so much of this manipulation of of reality. And so if you're in the business of trying to help people to make sense out of that which is kind of what I do now for a living. It's you know I wake up every morning people I get the feedback. How do you come up with all these ideas? I'm like how do you not? All you got to do is keep your eyes open. Yeah it's not hard to search in and out. So so you talked about Iver Mecton. I mean the Iver Mecton story is is still ongoing. There was an announcement the other day from HHS that they are launching new initiatives to investigate the use of Iver Mecton in cancer. And there was immediate blowback along the lines of oncologists are outraged you know the narrative is Bobby, you know, not saying this explicitly, but basically Bobby Kennedy is at it once again promoting falsehoods and conspiracy theories and it's going to you know we're all going to die because Because scientists are going to investigate the use of Ivermectin and other drugs. Why I'm I'm so this is the this is the core question and this is one of the things that puzzled me to know end I understood That they were upset that I had gotten better without the use of the vaccine that I was a popular person that I was a famous person and I made a video about a canceled show Dave Sheep Allen and I were supposed to do a show and I made that video to let everyone know that I couldn't do the show because I got covered I had no idea it was going to be even controversial but I listed a bunch of things that I took and the shit at the fan I talked about IV vitamins. Yeah, I talked about monoclonal antibodies. I talked about which were allowed prednisone Yeah, all these things that I talked about Z-Pack. I talked about all these different things that I took There was no mention of any of those things. There was only Ivermectin and that's what really puzzled me I was like this is fascinating because I listed a bunch of different things but there's no demonization of monoclonal antibodies But they did make them much harder to get and eventually pull them so I Have a friend and his friend was in the hospital and they wouldn't administer monoclonal antibodies once he got into the hospital They wouldn't allow him to have what way down in the hospital is the whole another thing but that's crazy so So the why the why the only medication the only two Threads that I can pull on at all Is that Ivermectin is a miracle drug? I mean no bill price right? Right? We don't understand completely how it works in this case It doesn't seem to be working as an antiviral it seems to be working as an immunosimulate pro inflammatory or or pro immune response in some way that subtle Because it has this broad spectrum of activity against things that have an immune response component and controlling But it's off patent right they don't understand it. It's off patent and it it The response is as if it represents a significant threat To some business interests. It's hard to discern that and you mentioned Z pack So that's another Fascinating one and to say that it was only Ivermectin Ivermectin was the most prominent but they were actually effective in shutting down the Z pack um the use of hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine has a fascinating story when you mentioned Z pack you're talking about Zebs Alenko and Zev was the one that wrote the letter to the president Saying hey, here's this data and this information about this drug that is off patent We have a huge portfolio of Experience in using it Millions and millions of doses it's safe in pregnancy What's not to like here and in the story of that is is a fascinating microcosm because it goes back to Ralph Barrick Ralph Barrick had published that Back years ago when you know, he's he's kind of the guru of coronaviruses and a good case can be made that he had his fingers all over the engineering of this particular virus so he had published that this drug was effective against coronaviruses and Zev Zalenko who's passed away now um God engaged in trying to find some way to help his patients in New York with recovering from COVID and treating COVID and he went back did a deep dive into into Barrick's work Pulled out this drug a drug see cleric that had been recommended Road to the president about it start he got clinical experience with it um and you know caveat Mickey Willis is doing a bio On Zev now and I'm involved in that so conflict of interest but He was the one that pulled it out sent the letter to the president With his clinical experience President tasked Peter Navarro With sourcing the drug for the and and Peter Economist went to town. I remember the company I was working with all chem at the time getting a call from Peter Can you come up with some way to make more of this drug here domestically? We want to source it so we have enough doses for everybody And then I think it was lancet published this paper That had totally made up data That trash the drug Said that it's toxic doesn't work blah blah blah blah blah it was all fake Okay, they pulled the paper when it became revealed that it was based on non-existent data That it was more propaganda published in one of the top medical journals in the United States But by that time it was completely crushed so they didn't have to go after Z-stack they'd already killed Z-stack Iver mechden though that was a new threat And one of the reasons why it was a threat was there was a meta-analysis that had been done at the Cochran So the Cochran Institute in the UK is like you know The holy grail for analysis of drugs in biologics and This process of meta-analysis they kind of they kind of wrote the rules for how to do it And they had done an analysis that showed that Iver mechden was quite effective and then something happened and There was some influence exerted And suddenly that meta-analysis got quenched it got squashed um There were two investigators that were involved in building that One kind of went underground and and got a big grant and carried on as an academic The other one got so pissed off that she created this organization called the World Council for Health that's teslori And she really objected to what happened but Iver mechden You know there was a signal there. There was a clear signal there There was data supporting that signal and then something happened To cause that meta-analysis to be restructured and certain studies that were showing how effective it was to be thrown out And then the suppression of the data coming out of India you remember that? Uh-huh uh-bird dash and and bird dash and and uh And I guess it had kind of it's like the cat was out of the bag And they had a trouble putting it back in so they just My sense is they turned up the amplitude on the on the uh propaganda and the censorship In order to try to overcome this and in a pretty sure Remember who was it that held the original patent Merck Now I was involved as an observer on behalf of of Ditra To the active trials that were going on under the foundation for NIH which is sponsored in sign language by Merck And which is now headed up by the former head of Merck vaccines julie herbiting Uh Bobby can't get her out. It's the rules Uh and they were running these clinical trials including the clinical trial that essentially by tweaking the dosing etc Made it so that they came up with a result suggesting that iver mechden is not effective There there was a whole lot of manipulation in the why part Still the best explanation i've heard is that it had a lot to do with uh The risk that if there was an effective countermeasure Then the utilization of the prep act and the emergency countermeasures uh um Process to enable fast tracking of these vaccines Using this new technology Uh would no longer be valid Because those are the rules is if there's an existing countermeasure then you can't uh implement Those clauses so it was all about emerge use author's it it's the i don't know that that's the case It's it is it's it's only the make sense when you see how much profit they made Which which was enormous enormous so it was effective and yeah all that propaganda Regardless of how much expose them and expose their methods they made Hundreds of billions of dollars. Uh it Well and and that that the ugly part of all of this I mean people the big big picture when i talk to people That are still kind of on the fence trying to make sense out of it you know still a lot of those folks out there The the thing that kind of gets Into their brain is the greatest upward transfer of wealth in modern history occurred during covid yeah It wasn't just the vaccines it was the whole enterprise And lock downs lock downs What was done to small businesses? What was done to the economy, the stimulus packages, they're still digging out of all of that fraud? It, you know, in retrospect, for average folks that are just trying to put food on the table and pay their rent. To look at, in retrospect, what was, you know, quite a lot of the you know, quite literally done to them. The middle class was hollowed out in like on hyperspeed. This, so yeah, I'm still pissed off about this. You should be. The thing is not enough people are, and so many people let it go. And part of the reason why not enough people are pissed off about it is because they took the vaccine and they want to justify their decision. And you will talk to a lot of people that make this blanket claim the vaccine saved millions of lives. And they'll just say that. Yeah, because that's the propaganda along with fault with safe and effective. That was a promoted narrative. And that was, by the way, the rationale given by the Nobel Prize Committee to award to Carrikel and Weissmann was that these products, which they had, the thesis is they had been playing the central role. I disagree. I think Peter Colis is the one that should have got it. If you're going to give it for these vaccines, it was Peter Colis and his team at UBC that really wasn't the enabling tech. But be that as it made, the decisions made. And the committee said basically millions of lives have been saved. And by giving this Nobel at this time, we hope that it will promote more people to accept this product. That was explicitly the logic given at the time. And that reflects what was really a thrust vector. Joe, I've, you know, it's what a bizarre world sense we met. And so I've been sucked into, to call it the center right of Europe is a little bit of a misnomer because they're all socialists as far as I'm concerned. Georgian Maloney and everybody else. But, you know, compared to the far left, they're labeled as neo-Nazis. But I've been traveling to Europe interacting with these people. You think it was bad for us? The European Union and the UK and the Canada were at order magnitude worse. That we, we, we should be so grateful that we live in this country at this time and that we still have something like a functioning constitution with a first and second amendment. Look at the poor suckers in Australia and in Zealand. Yeah. You know, it reminds yourself. It could be a heck of a lot worse here. And it has been a heck of a lot worse in, in Europe. I've got buddies in Romania in the leading alternative party, you know, calling it center right, let's say. But, you know, recently, I think it was the vice president that came out and said specifically that that last election was stolen. It was in, in Romania. George Eskieu, they tried to put in jail and the logic was that, I think it was TikTok supporting his campaign had been sponsored by the Russians. It was the same game that they played against Trump of Russian collusion. They played that same book in Romania successfully. But in the European Union environment, under the European Council, they don't, you know, they ain't got a constitution. And they can just step right in and throw you in jail, and activate your candidacy, do whatever if you represent a populist threat to the existing structure. We talk about the deep state. But it's, it doesn't, you know, yeah, it's a problem here. But, and think, Mike Benz, I defer to, as a notable expert in that state. But it's, it's a lot worse in Europe and Australia and Canada and the UK. And I think, you know, we're, we're, you know, in a perilous time here in the United States, where, you know, we have the midterm coming up. But, but people like Bobby are making progress. And these dissident physicians that have risked so many things. And I'm just one, you know, people, I hear people saying, "Oh, Robert, Robert, they've been so mean to you." And I'm like, come on guys, you think they've been mean to me. Then look at what they did to Bobby. And then, if, you know, and then look, I don't have a nick out of my ear, you know. Look at what they did to Trump. What they did to me is just, I'm, I'm nobody compared to that. And they're willing to deploy that kind of capability against me. Think about what's really going on at the higher levels where, where the big games are being played. And, you know, at least we can see it now. At least we have, for those of us that have our eyes open. We have some ability to be aware. But what, what I've spent the last two years mostly trying to convince people about, I hardly ever talk about RNA. I said, "Oh, Joe, I got to give a caveat. Forgive me. The opinions I'm expressing here are my own. And not those of the US government, the CDC or the ACIP. There I said it. Okay. But, you know, we're in a moment where we're seeing this, how the levers, the gears of how all this works. Give me an example. Tomorrow, Friday, February 13th. What could possibly go wrong? Hopefully my plane flight out of here works okay. And they don't have a drone attack or something, right? So, tomorrow there's a lawsuit, a filed on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics, that seeks to shut down the advisory committee on immunization practices and the changes that Bobby's implemented there. And force all of that to go back to the way things were when it was functionally controlled by the professional societies and particularly the American Academy of Pediatrics. We talk about this propaganda and weaponization and law fair and those things. And we talk about it as if it only happened in the last administration. It's still ongoing all the time. And it is going to go big time if the House turns, which I think it probably will. I mean, there's a good chance that they've already drawn up articles on impeachment against Secretary Kennedy. They're talking about articles on impeachment against President Trump. We're about to go into another two years of stagnation and functional, what do we call it? We can't call it civil war. War by other means is where we're heading right now. But at this moment, I'm seeing major movement. Kennedy is doing great stuff. The President is doing great stuff. We're seeing a transformation in America's global reach, totally restructuring global politics, and on the health side, to make America healthy again movement. There's some pushback against that and the heck of a lot of propaganda being deployed against it. It's this old quote that seems sort of abstract for most people most of the time, but rings kind of true. But you're finding it true more and more. Money is the root of all evil. Profound. A simple-- But it is. Yeah. I mean, this is the COVID thing with Ivermectin and alternative medications, off-label medications, why? Money. I think it also has to do with control. Which means-- A fair access to money. Yeah, it's money and power in my mind. The power-- they don't want power without money. Or they want to benefit from that power. I believe for the likes of Larry Fink and Bill Gates, I mean, they can't spend all that they have. Right. It's a marker. It's like chips. It's stacking up exactly. They're scoring in a video game. Yeah. Yeah. And-- But also captured by their past actions and constantly trying to obfuscate from all the things that they have done in the past that could be-- Like, if you just went into Bill Gates' stuff that he did in Africa, giving children polio with the polio vaccine that was from the AP news. Africa in India. Yeah. I mean, he's kind of banned from India. So I don't get it. I don't get where these people live. I'm happy. You know, as far as I'm concerned, I could walk away from all this stuff. It's just kind of a sense of obligation of what are you going to do when you're 66? I have this opportunity to impact in a positive way on the world on my way out the door. Who wouldn't take it? Well, I guess a lot of people would. wouldn't. But I don't have a need to have power. I have, thank God for my substacks, subscribers. I have all that I need. My wife is happy. My horses are fed. My farm is paid off. It's, you know, it's, and I have the luxury of doing good works. And that's enough. I don't, I don't get this, this global power thrust is hunger. Not what you do. That's not your thing. But if you were a politician or you were some megalomaniacal billionaire sort of business character that just wants to dominate and it was involved in a bunch of antitrust lawsuits in the past, that would be what you were naming in names. Not that we're naming in names that bribed off multimedia corporations to the tune of 300 plus million dollars so that they wouldn't write bad stories about them or owns, you know, functionally owns the World Health Organization. Right. And a giant chunk of American farmland was for a while trying to put that push that fake meat shit on everybody until that dropped off a cliff. Yeah. And yeah, so this, the business models aren't working out so good for the globalists. Sorry, they, I think a lot of it is because of information that's available now. Yeah. And you can't control like one of the things that did happen during COVID is these places like CNN people stopped going to for information. They don't believe them anymore. There's just too much bullshit and no one got in trouble for spreading that bullshit. There's no corrections, no red actions, no no apologies. And so people now more than ever in my lifetime mistrust mainstream media and polls show that the polls show that the trust of mainstream media is in an all time low for good reason. They did it to themselves. They prostituted themselves out to the pharmaceutical drug companies. They had to say what they had to say on television. People knew what they were saying was incorrect and now no one trusted them. So to this thread, about four years ago, I read a report from the trusted news initiative. You remember the TNI? Yeah. was launched by the BBC to counter Russian disinformation and then repurposed to counter vaccine disinformation. And they, and I read this report about I'd gone on your show. So I was a little bit of a fan. Forgive me. And so I'm reading this report and they're talking about threats to the industry. Because TNI is basically another trade organization. It's another guild. It's a global major media guild. And so they're doing this internal analysis and reporting and they're talking about the risk factors that they face. And they had a whole great big section on Joe Rogan. Joe Rogan represents that that was that was their threat. That that was the major threat to their business model is you and what you represent. You as a metaphor for this new information economy. And by God, they called it right. It's it's and when I this again, this has been part of my journey. When I realized what I was experiencing and what it meant to come on your show and have that event occur, which by the way blew up my subscribers on sub stack. Thank you so much. I still get a wave every year about in the month following. So January, I get a big bump in revenue. Well, a lot of our subscribers on Spotify too. During the heat of it, we gained in one month, we gained two million subscribers. I had I had. Oh yeah, please. What is this? What's the Spotify subscribers? I know YouTube is over 20, 20 million. What is Spotify at? So while he's looking that up, I had this bizarre experience. You know, I'm just an old gray haired guy with a with you know, I about to have my 47th wedding anniversary. Congratulations. Thank you. I'm proud of it. I would have 20 year olds come up in the street and fist bump me. I'm like, what the hell? Yeah, well, they don't have a representative. I mean, they don't see all mail in. All males. Yes, males. Those males don't have anybody in mainstream news that represents anything that resembles them. I know I'm much older than them, but I never went down this path of decay and weirdness that a lot of adult males go into corporate business and industry and they become something unrecognizable to these young men who have freedom in life and they're being suppressed and they're being told that they're toxic. That was a singer right there. Yeah. Young men that have freedom in life. Yeah. And then they compromised. They don't want to be what their dad is. They don't want to be what their uncle is. They don't want to be these people that they work for. They're like, what is this fucking bullshit life? I don't want that. I know I'm being lied to. I know the news is full of shit and I know that there's one guy who is also a cage fighting commentator and a comedian and doesn't have to lie. I'm not being, I don't have a boss really. I mean, Spotify promotes the show, they put the show out. We're in partnership with them, but there's no one telling me what to do, which is why you're here right now because there's no one. I don't have a conversation with no one. I literally like reach out to my guy and say, hey, contact, contact Mr. Malone and let's get him back on all I know is I got a message from through X. Yeah. Well, I was saying Joe Rogan, do you want to come on? That was actually me. That message is me, which I rarely use those things, but I was trying to figure out how to contact you. So I reached out to you there and then I said it's my guy and he takes care of it. Like that's it. There's no one else. There's no one involved in all that, which you could still be you that way. As soon as you get involved in enormous groups of humans and a board, you have to sit down at a table with other executives. You have to make decisions based on the profitability of the company and shareholders and stuff. I have none of that. It's a skeleton. So as I look back, you know, the question, why were you able to do this Malone? Why were you able to, you know, oh, you were so brave, Dr. Malone. I could rather Malone that name became like a majority of it became like, oh, yeah, that Malone guy. Yeah, it's all weaponized. Yeah. But then on the other side, I tour. I do these rallies and stuff like this and, you know, my wife really makes my wife nervous. I'm middle-aged women come up to me and they want to have selfies. And I get this, oh, Dr. Malone, you were so brave, you're such a hero kind of stuff, which I frankly find a little embarrassing. I mean, it's sweet. But yeah, there's a lot of heroes. Really? Why was that? Yeah. Yeah. The guy said that, you know, the defenination. But why was able to speak? I think a big part of it was I had no debt. I wasn't holding to anybody. And like you say, I'd been about a decade being a consultant, a free living consultant. And it got under my skin. I've always been independent, you know, farmer, carpenter, kind of stuff. And that's, I guess, been part of my problem is I just don't fit in in corporate life. I can't suck up to people and it's just not in me. Well, it's a very unhealthy environment for anybody to get sucked into that bizarre group thing. It's just good word. Yeah. So, yeah. So, so, so, the this decentralized subscriber base model, the pithany was and I'm being quite sincere. You know, this one of those moments, my wife and I looked at each other and we said, what the hell are we going to do now? Our consulting business is shot. Nobody wants to talk to me. I've been delegitimized. They say, I don't know what I know. I haven't done what I've done. And this has been promoted by all the top liberal publications in the world. Yeah. And so, so I said, okay, Rogan built this thing day after day, week after week for years. He just stayed on it and doing it. And we can do that too. We can bring that kind of work ethic into our world. Steve Kerr should told me how to get on Spotify. And we went, we took it on seriously. We published thousands of essays now, almost every day. It's, you know, you mean, you're a substock. You're a substock. You're a substock. Yeah. I apologize. And, and so we just work at it again and again and again trying to put out content. And we're, we're shadow band and small roomed on X in a serious way. You know, we got 1.3 million subscribers of which, you know, all the time I get feedback. I never see your stuff. It will tell it to arithmetic, whatever it is. You know, when you can ask Grock about Robert Malone and, you know, you get back, you know, I'm a controversial figure. But, you know, not whining. In And so we have, we have a lot of subscribers, but we just have this core paid subscribers. And they send in their five bucks a month. And it's all we need. And it totally sets us free. We can talk about whatever we want. And yeah, now that I'm pseudo government employee, I'm a special government employee without pay. Boy, that's like the worst of both worlds. Because there's, I have, the truth is, I have guardrails that constrain me in a way that I didn't used to be constrained for talking about some things. You know, I have to live in this world. I interface with the secretary and with the deputy chief of staff and other people. And now I'm working with the State Department more. And so, you know, I have to, I have to be more mindful. What is your function? Like what do you do over there? That's data. Yeah, both. When you work with the government, like how do they use your services? So the special government employee category is a designation from the executive branch. It's the one that Elon had. I like to say I'm in the same category as Elon was only with that all the money. So, he was an SGE without pay. I'm an SGE without pay. And because I serve on the advisory committee on immunization practices of the CDC, which is this, they call it, it's a FACCA committee, Federal Advisory Committee Act, that advises the director of the CDC. That's its only job on vaccine policy. Okay? So, I'm the vice chair, which is largely honorary. What that means is that if the chair isn't there, I draw the short straw and I have to chair those bloody meetings. Like the last one for hepatitis B, birthed those, which was just a slug fast, ugly, the worst meeting I've ever had to adjudicate my entire life. But for the most part, I sit on these subcommittees. I sit on the COVID Working Group subcommittee. I'm not supposed to talk about the next meeting. I was told two days ago. So that's one of my cart rails. But stay tuned for what is going to come down if the AAP lawsuit doesn't prevail and we're allowed to actually have the meeting. But so that's that. I'm also the chair of the Influence of Working Group. Stay tuned for that. And now I am, so from time to time, the secretary asked me to help him sort out some issue. I'll get a phone call. I once got a phone call on the big island. I did this recent series of rallies to try to recap the whole reason why that we did that first hit was to try to publicize the stop the mandates rally in DC. That was the subtext for that. As you recall, and I forgot to even mention it. We had to go back in to do another shoot for that. Remember, I'm still fighting that same battle of trying to stop these mandated vaccines. So I'm sitting there and going to another one of these rallies, I got a call out of the blue from one of Bobby's people. And they want some advice about a topic having to do with the decision he has to make about spending money on another bio-defense initiative. So I get that kind of stuff. He called me, soon after he was confirmed to get my opinion about what was going on in the chicken industry and all the slaughter that was happening for bird flu. And I told him this doesn't make sense. It's not good policy. There's no way you can get rid of bird flu doing this. It's in the wild bird populations. And this is just nonsensical what they're doing. Why do you think they did that? Okay, so that's interesting that now we drive into a kind of public health and vaccinology. You're asking the why. And it's been a long-standing policy. They killed millions of chickens, right? They do it every time. Every time there's a bird flu. Yeah, it's in any other outbreak. So right now in Spain, I just wrote an essay about this. It was maybe the biggest reveal on what's going on in Spain right now. There's a Spanish research lab that's been collaborating with the USDA that is investigating swine fever virus. And they're actually doing gain a function research on swine fever virus. Swine fever virus, African swine fever virus kills pigs like crazy. And already China has locked down and will not accept Spanish pork. And it is a lab leak. And there was a bunch of dead hogs last November around this facility. And now it's the Spanish and the European Union are blowing a circuit over this because it's really compromised the Spanish pork industry. So this kind of stuff, when this happens, the reaction is we just have to kill all of them. We have to kill all the potential carriers. And this has been the wisdom, quote, of in this kind of agrarian animal husbandry world for a long time in the context in particular of factory farming. So the logic is that if you were to vaccinate these birds with a leaky vaccine, which, you know, COVID was a leaky vaccine, influences leaky vaccine. If you give the birds a leaky vaccine, what you'll get out of that is precisely vaccine resistant flu. And so we have no choice. It's been the logic. But to exterminate, you know, like the ostriches in Canada, you remember that story? That was shocking. There was no logic behind that. It's gone. It's become entrenched as policy, as kind of this reflexive knee jerk thing that if we have an outbreak, what we do is we kill because we can't control the virus. And the things that we could do to control the virus aren't really going to control it. And it's actually going to make things worse. Is there any logic to that? We can argue with the margins. But when you've got something that if you had something that didn't have a natural reservoir, then you can make the case that you could eliminate it in that geographic population and keep it from spreading outside. But when you have a natural reservoir, explain that. Explain the natural reservoir. Okay. The case of avian influenza, waterfowl and migratory birds are amazing vectors for carrying and propagating influenza. And influenza survives in water for a very long period of time. And so you've got ducks and geese traveling north to south all over every continent. That are susceptible to infection by avian influenza and all the other migratory birds. But in particular, the waterfowl, a California, my wife would wrap me on the head if I didn't use the right term. So she's an avian specialist. So these birds carry the flu and a number of them are relatively resistant. They've been subjected to avian influenza for centuries or millennia. And sometimes you'll get a variant come out that'll wipe out a whole bunch of birds. West Nile virus in crows is a great example. And now you have crow populations coming back that are resistant to West Nile. We haven't gotten rid of West Nile. We've just bred more resistant birds. That's kind of, you know, that's Bret Weinstein space, right? That's evolution. Isn't magical. And so if you have a natural animal reservoir like the ticks and lime and deer, what are you going to do exterminate all the deer? No, that's not practical. Bow tried to exterminate the birds because of the thesis that they were eating up all the spare grain and compromising availability of food to the populace, right? And what happened? Major ecological catastrophe. You can't eliminate the birds. You can't go and kill all the waterfowl. That would just be ecologically insane. But you know, sometimes we do insane things. And in the case of avian influenza, it's there. It's endemic. It's in all that migratory waterfowl. They poop an amazing amount of influenza. It gets in the water supply. The water supply goes everywhere. They, you know, small birds are interacting with, I don't know if you've ever been around a chicken barn or turkey barns. Okay, yeah, there's chickens and then there's commercial chicken production, right? So these operations are like petri dishes for bad stuff happening. And the only way you can interfere with that and by the way, the omniscience starting to do it is put something in the water supply. And with the omniscient using is a compound called hypocloris acid. And it's stopping these things and it's stopping the E. coli and a lot of other stuff. But the US, that's another problem, is, you know, when you have these, the momentum of these large government agencies with their consensus about the way things are done. You know, this is saying that the only time the FDA ever changes is if somebody in a key position retires or passes away. They kind of get entrenched in, this is how we do things. We kill chickens. If we have A/B and influence that come out, we kill chicken barns. And this is the beauty of Secretary Kennedy coming in being kind of not invested in the way things are and the way we do things. And being willing to ask the questions, but does this really make sense? And that has been heresy. It's obviously is still heresy to do that, to ask those questions to, you know, have the president say, we need to restructure the vaccine schedule. Oh my God, the sky is falling. Kids are going to die left and right. There's going to be death on the street because we ended the thymarous soul in multidosin influenza vials. It's this kind of catastrophic thinking, but Kennedy has and the president have the courage to question these narratives, these long held standing beliefs. And in the case of the bird flu, you know, he called me up. I said, Bobby, I don't think this makes sense. I think that what we really need to do is we need to breed resistant chickens. And the way we breed resistant chickens, and by the way, we've written about this also in our sub-stack. There are in the domain of chicken cultivars. You have chickens. You know, there are people that are just freaks about chickens. And all of these, but because of that, we have this huge repository of different cultivars of chickens. You know, we could say they were all generated through gain of function research the old school way. And a number of those are relatively resistant to bird flu. Well, in a logical world, you would have Tyson's, and you know, maybe the government has to incentivize this. It shouldn't have to. You would have Tyson's in there saying, well, guys, what we need is a bird flu resistant chicken. Let's get on it. Okay. And that is essentially the position that the secretary took as is this policy of just extremely aggressive mass calling is not producing the outcome that we want. It has never produced the outcome that we want. It will never eliminate bird flu because it has an endemic reservoir. And we've got to think different. And now that's starting to percolate through the system. And there is more research into alternative strategies, including the possibility of various prophylactic interventions in feed and in water. That's, you know, and a lot of these chicken houses missed. You'll recall they have the mistors because they got to control the temperatures. So they are set up with a mistors. And that can also be a way to deliver things that are non-toxic like H.O.C.L. that can knock out these viruses and E. Coli and other things that cause reduced growth and loss of weight in chickens, which is the metric that Tyson's and those guys is food conversion. That's the metric they all pray to. There's different, we can think differently and we have been locked into, you know, consensus that has emerged over decades based on old ways of thinking. And the same people are in charge so they don't want to change. And they kind of often kind of have these lineages where they're passing power on to the people that they've mentored. So that's my HHS world and then the State Department world is a new thing that's come in. I have a, I'm starting to support the group under Secretary Rubio that's responsible for the various treaties having to do with arms containment in particular, the BioWeapons Convention. So this morning I got up early and you know there was, so I'm honest to God, I don't want to pump you up too much. I mean you might get an ego or something. So I say to the State, they say Robert, we want you to go to Geneva to give this talk on the use of AI for monitoring BioWeapons threats because we have no way of monitoring compliance with the BioWeapons Convention right now and it's been a historic problem. And the President has said that we're going to, we think that we can apply artificial intelligence to this problem set of monitoring and verifying compliance with the BioWeapons Convention, which is heresy. It's another one of these thinking outside of the box links. So they say we want you to go to Geneva and give this talk and be the keynote. And I say, and what's the date? Oh, it's February 12th. And I say, I don't talk about this because you know it's the general thing. You don't tell people that you're going to be on Rogan. You let Rogan say that when Rogan's ready. And so I said, but I'm scheduled for Rogan that day. And they're like, oh Rogan, well, okay, absolutely. You got to go on that one. That's way more important than going and speaking at the UN. So you're the State Department thinks you're more important than me talking about BioWeapons and they let me web exit. So that's what happened this morning. And it is a, so I'm supporting that group now and maybe increasingly over time and I don't know where that goes. So you were talking about these pigs that it's a lab leak that's giving these pigs in Spain and what is it another gain of function laboratory where they're. So this is truly a breaking news thing. Our media is not covering it. And shocker. It is being covered in Europe and particularly in Spain. This is a major economic threat because there I think the number two poor producers in the world. And in the hogs that are feeding on acorns, et cetera, that's a big specialty market space. So last November, this laboratory that is ostensibly working, this is, I mean, it's Wuhan 2.0. Only the good news is that this is not swine flu. People get that confused. I'm not talking about swine flu. This is African swine fever. It's been around for millennia. It's never crossed into humans. It's a very different virus. So just make sure we got that clear. So this highly lethal African swine fever virus is a threat to the global pork industry. And so this laboratory in Spain is cooperating with the USDA to try to develop a new vaccine for African swine fever. And in doing so, that the. Our government once again was unaware that this even existed. There's a cooperative agreement between USDA and this laboratory to engage in. If you read, they don't call it gain of function research. They call it building recombinant viruses and experimenting in different virus structures to allow them to build a better vaccine. Exactly the same logic that was used in Wuhan. Now then last November, so this is ongoing in this little laboratory. What this relates to Joe is the idea that is being promoted for justice and equity and sharing. We need to enable there being a distribution of highly infectious pathogens all over the world in separate laboratories so that we in the big bad West are not imposing and enabling our industries to pray on name your emerging economy by taking biological resources from them in other words, new viruses. And using them to build stuff, we have to cooperate and they have to have access to these regions. So the logic right now that's in play and being promoted by the WHO is that we should have high pathogen repositories and research programs all over the world decentralized in these emerging economy states. In Spain is not Germany. But so there's a Spanish lab. USDA is cooperating with them. They're going to build an African swine fever virus vaccine. They're doing gain of function research. And then by the way, just like in Wuhan, there's some construction going on related to that. And then suddenly and it's an area that is very dense in wild hogs. Now, somehow we gotta get this through our brain. Okay, you don't put the facility in a place that's proximal to the thing that might get infected if you have a lab leak. I mean, that ought to be like rule number one, stamped on everybody's brain. You don't do it. Like the Rocky Mountain labs make a lot of sense. If you're gonna be working with nasty stuff and you gotta do it, put it somewhere obscure, not in Boston, right? Um, so they're doing it. They're surrounded by dense wild hog population and suddenly last November people detect there is wild hogs dead all over around this facility. Look at possibly have happened. So they start investigating. The police have been in, grab the records, grab the digital information, et cetera, because the entire Spanish pork industry is now compromised. Their major client, China has already pulled their trade barriers. No more Spanish pork going into China. I advocate that President Trump ought to drop the curtain right now because when I looked at the distribution of wild hogs, I mean, you've traveled enough. You know how important wild feral hogs are in the economy in Italy. The wild hogs are all over in Europe. And this place in Catalonia is right near the French border. I don't, and then like right on the other side, a couple hundred miles is Italy. And the band of high density wild hogs spreads like that up through the mountains and then down into Italy. And I think that if I was sitting in the White House right now, I think to protect both for the president core constituency is Ag. Voted for him three times. And he holds that near and dear. And I think that it's good politics and it's good public health. It's good health, agricultural decision to raise the barriers now. Until we can see that Europe has resolved the risk associated with this. How are they going to resolve that? So once again, what's wild hogs? This is not like it's anything that's contained in to your point. I don't know the answer. I mean, that right now what they're doing is they're using drones to try to find, you know, how hard it is to hunt wild hog. Yeah. Yeah, I'm not a helicopter here in Texas. Yeah. And and and and and and the hogs are winning. It's like the Emo wars in Australia. My friend Monty Franklin from Australia actually has a joke about that. That we fought a war with the Emo's and we lost. It's true. We have emlies on our farm and and they're weird animals, man. It's like living with dinosaurs. But they're dumb and shit too. They are they're weird. They are. The wife says they don't have two brain cells to rub together. I talked to a lady who's a falconer and she said the dumbest birds by far. Emo's second dumbest or owl, she said. Oh, really? I didn't know the owl. That's crazy. Yeah. I didn't know that. I thought there was so smart. Give a who don't pollute. They're always wearing a monocle. Yeah. They're always the wise professor. Well, right. He goes back to it goes back to Athens, the symbol of learning. His brain is very weird. Yeah. So Emo's a word. But so they get the hogs. I don't know what they're going to do. What they did to control in Europe. So the former assistant director general of the WHO who I knew this was her claim to fame was she had led the development of rabies baits. And they would bait with a rabies vaccine to try to control the incidents of rabies in particularly foxes was the problem throughout Europe. And a lot of the foxes were crossing from the less developed part of the European Union into France, which was not acceptable. She was French. And so what they did is they developed these baits with a vaccine. And they would distribute them out of helicopters. And there's a whole science about how dense the baits have to be to get immunity against rabies in fox populations. Whole science around it. But that they they was successful. They controlled fox and wolf population rabies in Europe, largely eradicated it through the use of baits distributed by helicopters. Do they have a vaccine for this? Don't that's what they were supposed to be developing. That was the purpose. They were supposed to be developing. Really what they were developing is well they were transmissible strain. Whatever. Yeah. In order to prove that they could I don't know. You know, it's the same story over and over. On two point out exactly. And how how are we not going to see this as an increasing trend? And there's the whole dark side that you know, when I you know, I read my comments. Maybe I shouldn't sometimes, but I do. Don't do it after this. Yeah. So so you know, you get the blowback. Well, this is all by intention because they're building market for whatever it is that they want to market. Right. That's the there's one of the dark themes about COVID was that they wanted to promote the spread of COVID in order to sell the vaccines and probably about you know, so that's the the narrative. And so in this case, well, they want to spread African swine fever because somehow they're going to profit from that while destroying their pork industry. You know, but this is this is the armchair strategist on the internet. But that has it gotten into the domestic pork market? Interesting question, not to my knowledge yet. But I have this interesting colleague that I work with closely at the ACIP named Retsuf Levy, who's the chair of the COVID working group and has given the pharmaceutical industry a run for their money right now. And it's of course being vilified by the press, et cetera. And Retsuf is a full professor at MIT. And his core competence is risk analysis and mitigation. And he he reads my sub stack because we're friends. He doesn't subscribe. I'm pretty sure everybody reads it. And so he were talking and he says, yeah, I read that thing that you put out about that virus. And he said, I wrote a proposal years ago about risk mitigation and the need to do something about that because of it, the ease by which it can enter the domestic pork population. So I infer from that that there is a whole body of science and logic about, and he said it's very readily transmitted into commercial pork, which is why the Chinese have already dropped, you know, dropped the curtain and said, no, we're not going to allow any of that into our into China because of the risk. I mean, what we're talking about, so I wrote an essay about low risk high impact events, which is what we're talking about. Another example of a low risk high impact event is gene drive technology that gates is promoting to exterminate the mosquitoes, for example. Gene drive technology can be used to exterminate a species, particularly ones that have a high reproductive rate. And it's another one that is a CRISPR application. But there's a whole school of thought that gene drive tech should never be let out of the box into the environment because what's, you know, there are those that are actively promoting its use to eliminate bad stuff. And, you know, we're all for eliminating bad stuff. You know, organisms, insects, worms, flies, stuff, and yet it, and we can do experiments where we say, oh, we'll cultivate this kind of fly together with that kind of fly, and only these flies are going to have gene drive. And we're going to look for whether or not it gets over into these flies. And if it doesn't, then we can conclude that it's unlikely. But as Brett would tell you, we're dealing with ecosystems here. Really complex ecosystems. And the risk environment now that I think grownups have to acknowledge coming out of COVID, you know, the big lessons. We can, we can, we can talk about these egregious things that we've all experienced that have been put on us. But the big picture is this thing came out, and I'm convinced it was engineered. I believe the most likely hypothesis is not that it was intentionally released. I still think that's a possibility. But that it was an unintentional release, an infection of a lab worker or something like that, that let it get out. Because that's what happens again and again in these facilities. The, these low probability events can have extremely high impacts. And as we've seen global impacts, And we have to rethink how we're managing risk, which is, as I mentioned, Redsiff's kind of core competence. And that logic runs up against this belief that, well, it hasn't happened so far and I'm an expert and I have the right to play around in this sandbox that I've helped develop. I know more than you do. How can you tell me that I shouldn't be doing that? You don't have the right to tell me. I'm the expert in this space. And to come into that environment and say, look, guys, you're playing around with stuff that could have a very high impact even though it hasn't happened yet. And you got to rethink what is acceptable. And I think that we were talking a moment about the State Department and weapon control. We're now in an environment where the speed of growth of the power of biotechnology is accelerating. It's going exponential just like what we saw with semiconductors. And our bioethics, our regulatory structures, our way of thinking about those risks is completely unable to keep up with the pace of the advance. And that is creating a whole new threat, see, not to scare people. And as I was thinking about coming on here, I was saying to myself, okay, Robert, just take a deep breath. It's only Joe Rogan, he's a human. And you want to stay positive. And I don't want to go dark and just scare people. But we've got to take, we've got to recognize that this is a different world now. We have all of this digital tech and what it means and information control and suppression and manipulation psychologically, basically programming, customized programming through avatars and all of this power. But we also have in parallel this world of rapidly advancing biotechnology. That is, you know, for the likes of Yvall Harari and those that are imagining a future of transhumanism. And all of that means we are moving very rapidly into a world that we can hardly even process. One of the big thrust vectors in Silicon Valley right now relating to reproductive rights has to do with the development of artificial wounds. You know, these wealthy, privileged people don't want to carry their own babies. And I guess surrogates are too cumbersome or risky. So they're really talking about a baby that's not talking. They're, we're going to run an essay about this soon. They already have a lamb that they have grown denovo in an artificial wound. We're there. Okay. And these people see it as freeing. This is, this is more women's rights. You know, we don't need to have the organic process of carrying a baby. And that's a good thing, they believe. You know, completely disregarding that there is a whole lot of subtle, complex interactions that occur between mother and fetus in the womb. Okay, that gives rise to. Right, you're, who knows what kind of humans you're going to develop with no interaction with the mother at all the entire nine months where they're developing. But that exchange of hormones. But for the sake of convenience we want to do that. Oh God. Okay. And that, what that, you know, zoom in on that. Okay. That has all kinds of implications. It has implications for organ transplantation. My friend, Jan Yackeleck, I don't know if you know Jan, if you've ever had him on, you might want to sometime. Interesting character. He is the Washington Bureau chief for this newspaper that is defamed all the time ridiculed epic times. Okay. Which I think is like the only print newspaper left in the United States. It's worth reading that ascribes to classical journalism. But he's just come out with a book about organ harvesting in China and organ harvesting on demand documenting that they are using live prisoners and keeping them in compounds and testing them for their genetic background and characteristics and then harvesting them when necessary to provide organs for transplantation largely to Westerners because it is enormously profitable and also to leaders in the CCP. This is what all this bruhaha was about the open mic event with Putin about we can use transplantation to let us live another hundred years. That, remember that little clip. So that this in a world in which we can have artificial wounds, we can grow our own clones to provide donor tissue, to provide an insurance policy. We are right at the doorstep of that. Okay. Again, demonic. It sounds demonic. I mean, is a soul a real thing? Just because it can't be quantified by science, you can't measure it. I mean, the concept of the soul is existed. If that's a real thing, who knows what you're doing, creating a human being from an artificial womb? Who knows what kind of processes are happening? We know that stress on the mother imparts all sorts of unwanted characteristics in children. We know that. We know like all kinds of interactions in place. The playing of music. That's real. Yes. Okay. The soothing playing of music. Yeah. So, so that's happening. That that vector is proceeding. And once you have that in the in a world of crisper, okay. You can do genetic modification of a very small number of cells and then grow fetus from that. Okay. So that opens the door to, did you watch the movie, "Gatica"? Yeah. "Gatica" absolutely recommended. If you want to understand our brave new world, the one that's really coming at us and the ethical conundrums associated with that, watch "Gatica." And by the way, it has great production value too, Desmond. It's a great movie. It's a great movie. Great movie. And terrifying. Yeah. And that's really what our future is. And the title, "Gatata. G-A" refers to a DNA sequence, by the way. That's why the name "Gatica." Oh. Okay. So, so watch the movie. You've already seen it. Yeah. You get it. Okay. We are moving to that space where we have custom-built humans. Now it's being, you know, what's driving that? Convenience. You know, it doesn't want to have a child that's better than it's like you, but better. Stronger. Bigger. You know, smarter. Better vision. Get rid of all the problems that I've got. Right. Or you've got it. Or whomever. And you're in your next offspring. And all you got to do, because here's another fun fact. At bulk, whole genome sequencing is now about 300 bucks. Whole genome sequencing is the portal for selective engineering with Cas9 CRISPR systems. So we're, we now, we're right on the threshold of that entire spectrum of capability of manipulating animals, life fundamentals of life in every species and humans. And that's what we're going to do. We're going to have a lot of work to do. And we're going to have a lot of work to do. Like, what is, what kind of psychology does this child have with no exposure to its mother? For mom, it's a lot more convenient. And she can get the perfect baby that she wants. It's a fucking serial killer. And you put it on SSRI. Well, this is the thing about, do you know the story about Ted Kaczynski? One of the stories. Tell me the things that happened to him. And the Netflix documentary, they go into this. He was very sick when he was a boy. When he was a baby. And they kept him in this nursery with no contact with human beings for a long time. For a long time. No one picked him up when he cried. He just sat in this crib with no contact with his mother. Nothing. And he was a baby. For a long time. from then on, I mean his brother always described him as just like off, just off. Yeah, he never had that early stage neural development is amazing and profound. By the way, this looks back to the vaccine story. When we're doing all these jobs and these little tiny kids like hepatitis B birth those, they are at a stage where this thing is just growing like crazy. And so is their liver and everything else. And you're injecting toxic chemicals into their body. Which you really haven't characterized well and you're stacking them. Yeah. And no one's done the studies. So this is-- Are you doing it for profit? This is another thing that the secretary is adamant about and that the president has led on. Well, having them exempt from any legal ramifications, the adverse side effects of vaccines, what they did during the Reagan administration, it's really, it gave them this-- Free license. Yeah, free license. It's just go crazy. And jack up the vaccine schedule as high as they could justify. And then along with it, corresponding profits rise. That's what's fucking scary. So if you want to go and dump that rabbit hole, it's even worse. Once functionally, because of how difficult it is to prove an endpoint and get a vaccine licensed, once you get it licensed, you basically have a cash cow in perpetuity. And if you get it down on the pediatric schedule-- in other words, you managed to jam it through the ACIP. Because the ACIP, but the wisdom of Congress, is vested with the authority of authorizing the vaccines for children program acquisitions. So if the-- there's no other program in the entire U.S. state government that is outside of congressional oversight. The ACIP can decide that this vaccine needs to be purchased for the vaccines for children program. And historically, because the ACIP has been captured by Pharma and by the CDC itself and by academia, those decisions, they never go backwards. Right. And so you get the product down onto the VFC, the vaccine for children program, and the pediatric schedule. And then that triggers the indemnification clause that you're talking about, which by the way is different from the one that kicked in with the COVID situation, with the PREP Act. That's even worse. But what you end up with, Joe, is a situation where, as the vaccine manufacturer, think it. You now have no legal liability. You have guaranteed purchasing, distribution, and marketing because the CDC does all the propaganda. Vaccines are safe and effective. You must take this, right? And then you end up with, in many cases, its school district level. It's not even state level. The states have the right to regulate the practice of medicine, the federal government doesn't. That means the CDC can advise that this is the vaccine schedule. And many states, because they don't have the infrastructure to actually process what's going on, they say, well, if the CDC advises it, then we're going to mandate it. Okay? Or school districts do. And so you end up in this situation where you as the manufacturer get your product on the market, you get it down into this special program, you got guaranteed purchase, guaranteed profit, full indemnification, marketing, purchase, distribution, all paid for by the taxpayer. And no liability. It's perfect as a business model. What's not to like? It's so scary how many people just go along with it too. They don't just go along with it. They are propagandized into believing it as a-- And promoting it because of the theology. They've administered it to the exactly. I was going to say it's religious dogma. They've administered it to their children. They believe it in wholeheartedly. And when someone says something like vaccines don't cause autism, the whole audience will applaud. And you're like, how do you know? How do you know that? Where you're so confident that you're applauding? Well, it's because what I've heard. I've heard it so many times. Of course, I believe it. That's what's twisted about it. It's just-- well, it illustrates the power of what we're dealing with. Yeah. And once you get it by thinking through the vaccine story, I mean, you've-- You're ruined now, my friend. Because once you get it about vaccines, then you see it everywhere. Well, I had Suzanne Humphries on who wrote that book, "Dissolving Illusions." And, you know, that book is a must read for anybody who wants to really understand the history of vaccines. And what really happened in terms of the end of pandemics and the introduction of these vaccines? Like what actually took place? Yes, yes. Oh, that-- Yeah. And, you know, there's this whole thread of how prevalent lead was in the population, in the powdered wigs, and so many things that we had. And then when they got rid of the lead that was concurrent with the onset of widespread vaccination. And so the loss of life associated or the improvement in loss of life and birth outcomes associated with getting the lead out of the population. Well, that's a scribe to the vaccines by the people that are busy marketing vaccines. And likewise, the all the work associated with water sanitation and all of that, no, that's all true. The first time I--to credit what credit to do as a vaccinologist, the first time I really encountered that logic was Candacea Owens head me on years ago. And she said, you know, we've done this deep dive and we've looked at this thing and these infectious diseases go down before the vaccines come up. And yet we're told this narrative. Right. And of course, we're told this narrative. Yeah. Dipliodeo ones, the nuttier one. Because when people are so concerned about polio and polio vaccines and we've cured polio, they're going to bring back polio if they stop the vaccines. When I tell them what percentage of polio do you think is asymptomatic? And that most people think like none, right? It's 95 to 99% of polio is asymptomatic. And then you find out through Suzanne Humphrey's work that they were spraying DDT ubiquitously all over the country at the same time. Absolutely. And it gives you the same exact symptoms of paralytic polio and then subsequently the actual first infections that started occurring in this country were occurring in rural areas where they spray DDT everywhere. Yeah. So one of so there's a if I can kind of throw another log on the fire on the narrative. One of the cool things that I'm getting to see from my perch at the ACIP is people working at the cutting edge of modern genetic technology investigations about cause and effect and genomic effects. And one of the things you talk about this rare incidence of paralytic polio or myocarditis. And yet it happens at a significant rate. It happens more in certain populations and other populations. This was heresy at first. And now they were forced to admit it and stay tuned later in February. But there's a group that had a big grant to look at genetic links associated with risk factors for this. And strangely halfway through their program during the Biden administration all their funding got caught. But they still made a lot of progress and they kind of limped along with volunteer stuff. Modern I mentioned the genome costs 300 bucks a genome. So these guys have gone through and they've identified seven genes that represent high risk factors for myocarditis after vaccination. Myocarditis after vaccination by the way was a major side effect associated with the small box vaccines or one of them. It's been associated with vaccines for quite a while. We just kind of haven't heard about it and it's particularly bad with these. But one of the you know trying to continue my theme of it's not all dark. One of the things that's coming out is that if we commit to it and do the research like team Kennedy is committed to doing. We may well be able to detect those people that the character at genetic characteristics of those people that might have been at higher risk for say paralytic polio or myocarditis. So that we can have genetic tests and you can have that test and determine whether you actually have that risk factor. It looks like because of the dynamics of clinical research and epidemiology in infectious disease that this kind of application of genetic diagnostic technology may give us whole new insights into those small populations that that had those rare events. We know the big picture in in COVID and the COVID vaccination post vaccination syndromes of the high risk individuals with obesity and elderly and basically people with a high inflammatory set point. But now we're getting down into some of the nuances and I think that that's you know I talked about some of the dark sides of biotechnology but there's some real. So right sides that offer hope and will what will happen is that kind of starts to roll out. is that manufacturers and academic surrogates and others are kind of not going to be able to continue to hide behind these narratives that they have promoted now for decades. Because the true true is going to come out. It is going to come out. Is it going to come out during this administration? No. To do long-term follow-up studies, it's going to take a decade. That's the unfortunate truth. We're going to have a lot of grief around that. How come you haven't already feeling the blank? Right. But it's going to happen. That is another big plus of what's going on right now, kind of behind the scenes at HHS. Hopefully they get a chance to still do it after the midterm and they don't get hogtied. But I'm optimistic that these narratives that have been promoted these false narratives, we're going to be able to break them through doing actual science for a lot to do it. And this new technology is particularly with sequence analysis and identification of risk correlates. The intersection between sequence analysis and epidemiology is going to really open up new understandings about what's going on in human disease. I'm absolutely convinced. What we do about it is that's a whole another kettle of fish. We can do the science until the cows come home. The public policy part is wicked hard. Yeah. But at least there's some positive developments. Yeah. That's what I want to say is it's bright light at the end. There is all this dark stuff. Yeah. And we have to allow ourselves to see it. You see it and you get the reaction like you did. I don't want to see that. That's too much. It's too overwhelming. It's too scary. But we look away at our own risk. And we have this tendency to say it's all dark. We have these individuals, I mentioned you've all Ferrari, you know, believing that man is God now. We no longer need God. We have become gods. We have become as gods. Does he actually say that? Yeah. Really? Well, is it talking to us from metaphorically about our technological potential? I don't know how to discern the beating of a very demonized guy. He says a lot of dark stuff. And I think so. You probably read the book. Did you interview the author of the Sapiens? Did you read the author of a dark aon? No, no, I remember that. So that's talking. This is talking more about kind of the Silicon Valley culture that's pushing transhumanism and how integrally it's become involved in this space. I mean, what I don't have, I don't pal around with Elon and not to say he is or whomever you want to talk about in that space. That's not my pay grade. But my understanding and I read these things, maybe that's also propaganda. That a lot of these people of let's say the Bill Gates cast and the younger ones associated with that would our advocates for a world in which they are able to upload their avatar consciousness in a digital space and live forever. That's very Kurzweil, right? That's I, you sounds like you know more, maybe you're the you're the um um uh UAP guy here, which by the way is another fascinating domain that I'm learning more about more about. It's bizarre. That's a rabbit hole you go down and like, oh, this is an empty. This is not an empty rabbit hole. There's a lot of money behind this and it seems like there's been a lot of black funding and business. Yeah, business a lot of business. Defense contractors evolved. Yeah, it seems like there's some inventions that sort of emerge out of nowhere that supposedly are connected to back engineering programs. So I'm now I'm now of of the belief that there exists a capability that transcends uh uh physics as we know it. Let's say Ian Steinean physics uh and is more aligned with uh Hawking's physics uh that um we can't we don't comprehend right now uh and it has to do with extremely high energy systems and uh I I having I mean I've had some of these guys because I'm now known worldwide as a nut case I guess and conspiracy theorist. I've had them on my farm uh you know staying in our in our guesthouse and shooting the bull and me trying to understand their world and what they're seeing and what they've experienced and and observed and the information um and uh I'm I'm there's a lot of different models for what the hell is going on here and maybe it's all us right that's one model it's all us uh with with uh secret technology. Yeah um that's one model for the one of the call it TickTacks and uh I'm I'm increasingly convinced by the logic that there is a physics beyond the physics that we know that is the physics of extremely high energy systems and in high energy systems a lot of the rules about motion and uh in uh transportation and matter uh and the ability to cross between matter states that is repeatedly observed uh in reported by responsible people uh military folks that have you know strong disincentives right for saying this stuff and yet still they're saying that's what I saw okay and trans medium devices that can fly and then go under water as fast as they're flying and and the ripples yeah um so I one of the models of that is that this has to do with uh having some extremely high energy source uh in a very small package and uh is that possible we're now moving into a new fusion world right we're we're talking about these micro fusion reactors that are going to be powering our data centers all over the world transforming the whole energy right I mean there's this logic and crossing over into the the economics bitcoin or kind of space uh there's this logic that it all comes down to energy energy is is the one uh thing that uh fuels economic development and everything around us and uh they uh I'm I'm not a physicist but I listen and learn and and it sounds to me like these uh micro reactors and the the technology that was involved strangely in this assassination remember that bizarre assassination in in Boston that happened um there was two competing companies okay um there's something yeah there's something going on there that's uh really transformational and if it matures remember trump is invested in this in big way uh it had to do with uh um him kind of leveraging truth social in a strange way remember uh he if if we if we emerge into a future within my lifetime probably of these micro-news uh as energy sources decentralized first driven by the tech bros because they want to have their data centers but then suddenly we have as that matures and the patents come off we have the ability to put uh power generation in very small packages wherever we want in the world suddenly the entire landscape of economic activity and the future of humanity is transformed like that and that's just the beginning if we push that technology we may find ourselves in some space where we have the ability to produce extremely large amounts of energy in a very small package and and use that you know of course it'll be weaponized use that for a variety of things uh but um i i think the guys that are speculating about these phenomena being driven by the existence of of of almost point sources of of unlimited energy functionally uh may make sense out of things that otherwise are really hard to wrap your head around well we're in for a very interesting future one way or another yes and it and it doesn't have to be dark and demonic hopefully not if we let these pastors have their way What is this Jamie? - Make a small correction. That video I showed you apparently isn't real, not a real company made by a Berlin filmmaker in 2022. Went viral. I found it in a New York post article that kind of said it was real. - Mm. - But. - But there are plans to do something. - Well, I was gonna say which is a little weirder. - It says at the bottom, this is getting confused with a pregnancy robot. That was announced in China in 2025. This though apparently also is not real also. - The pregnancy robot is not real? - Yeah, it was named a scientist that was working on it. - Not a real, not a real person. - Look at that. - Yeah, but. - We're doing the company working on it. - Nonetheless. - They are working on it. - Yes. - We're gonna come out. So see if you can find the, since you're so good at Googling or whatever you're doing. See if you can find the images of this artificial womb and I believe it's a lamb. - Yeah, no, we've seen the lamb before. But I'm just saying that the people thing is. - The factory thing was just. - Oh, well that was obviously a, I mean that was, that was transpel- - It was an even a real company that we're doing. - Yeah, it was synthetic images. - I don't wanna give up fake news. That's all. - Good. - Oh, okay. - God forbid. - All right, we might get banned. - Well, Robert, thank you so much for being here. I really appreciate it. And it was nice for you to come back and under less hostile terms in the world. - Well, less hostile then. - Yeah, but I think your message was a lot more hostile and it's the way it was received. Like you were received in a hostile way. I don't think this one's gonna be hostile. I think pretty much everything that you said, most people are aware of now and then the other things that you're saying, they're not far-fetched at all. And I think there's a lot more people that are more open to receiving information like that now than ever before. - Well, some of it can be attributed to you. - That's kind. Let's say to the community. - Yeah. - Sure. - And of which I am a vehicle have been at times. A lot of the stuff that I shared with you back then was the consequence of a community that I was embedded in, of others, physicians and scientists, many of whom were primary care practitioners. And I was attending weekly meetings with these people and I had frontline knowledge of what they were seeing and experiencing and I had frontline knowledge of the physicians that I was collaborating with at DITRA of what they were experiencing. I was never managing COVID patients except myself, but I knew what others were experiencing and you gave me an opportunity to share their voice through me. And I thank you for that. It was a moment in time and I think we did good, but by God they came at us. - It was wild. (laughing) - Well thank you sir, thank you very much. I really appreciate you. That was all I wanted. All right, bye for now. (upbeat music)