Joe Rogan Experience #2454 - Robert Malone, MD

The Joe Rogan Experience. TRAIN BY DAY, JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY NIGHT. ALL DAY. YEAH, FOR APPLE TV. We were trying [music] to figure out how long it's been since you came on. It's been somewhere in the neighborhood close to 5 years. Yeah. A lot of water under the bridge. >> [laughter] >> Your appearance on this show, boy, did that create a lot of problems. [laughter] Um yeah, I I didn't expect you ever having me on again. I thought maybe Spotify was just going to say hell no. 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 doing the right thing." What was it like for you? First of all, uh you know, they were trying to label you a quack and a cook and They tried. I didn't I don't think it worked with everybody. I mean, it it worked with people that weren't paying attention. But it 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, and a total of about 15, I think. Yeah. And you also took the vaccine and had a horrible adverse event. A series of them, yeah. Yeah. That that at the time, it was so early. That was when the National Guard was still doing it, and that was Moderna. And um the I was embarrassed uh by to have these experiences. Um and I was embarrassed when I got COVID in early 2020. Um you know, looking back uh there was so much so much fear. Um so much uh uh anger and anxiety and everything wrapped around all of this. Mhm. And in retrospect, it was, you know, it was promoted, but it was also very organic. Uh, you know, it was it was, you know, looking back being honest about it, it was a frightening time, what was happening. And um And yeah, I I you know, I had those experiences. Uh, my uh doc, who was a cardiologist, was like, "Why were you so stupid to take this?" Uh Your doctor said that, too? In 2021? >> Yeah. Um, she was >> or 2021? >> 20 It was 20 21, 2021. Yeah. Um, I was going to a kind of a a cardiologist that had left um traditional medical practice at uh UVA and the associated um hospitals. And I was going to her for uh hormone replacement therapy. And uh bioidentical hormone replacement therapy. And um she was monitoring a lot of things. And and um yeah, that was her response, "Why did you do this?" Of course, I've had that question a thousand times since. You know, why were you so stupid? You were the one that should have known. Um, and so I have to answer that still. Uh, it's kind of gets a little tiresome. What was your perspective on the vaccine before you took it? Um to be honest, uh I was a little I was amazed. Uh, I was amazed that the that the claims that the problems that I encountered when I had been working on it had been solved. Uh, 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? Uh, in my hands, it was inflammation primarily. It was also, you know, the it was absolutely not localizable. Uh, it was in in the monkey models that we tested, it was incredibly inflammatory. It didn't give long, um, levels long prolonged levels of expression. It was hard to make. It was kind of, back then, it was, uh, a almost a little bit of witchcraft. You'd drop, 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 in a little tiny tube. And, you know, back in the late '80s, that was real money. And, uh, and it didn't always work, the reaction. So, you know, it was it was a little bit of a wing and a prayer. Uh, but then, um, as I started working with the 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, uh, I spent a lot of time trying to do that, optimize that, and what I ended up with is just seeing that it it really caused, you know, I'm sorry to use medical jargon. I'm that's kind of where I'm from, so that's the language I use. >> No, it's probably better if you do. It it caused a lot of inflammation. Uh, you know, white cell infiltrates, really aggressive white cell infiltrates in my hands in both mice and monkeys. And I'd abandoned it as as something that just, uh, you know, was was useful in in research, in particularly in cell culture, but I just didn't see it um maturing as a as an efficient delivery strategy with, uh, low risk, you know, acceptable risk in animals. And that also became the experience in uh, at this company that I had first joined where a lot of the original patents were filed, Vical. Uh they they abandoned the RNA because they couldn't make it. Uh and uh 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, than it was to use the positively charged fats. This Now people call them lipid nanoparticles, 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 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 Promega 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 you know, I had known anything about it. Uh were the ones that kind of came up with the magic sauce that uh 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 the 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 and I called um my colleagues uh um at University of British Columbia that I had known back in the day uh as I was um grappling with whether or not to take the product because I had to travel. And as you recall 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. Um yeah, so so I called uh uh Peter and 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 draining lymph nodes. Uh it was much more effective and that uh 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 I asked in detail cuz I knew some of the nature of the formulations. Again, I don't want to get too technical. But uh what what was claimed was that the incorporation of polyethylene glycol uh so this is, you know, you would know that as antifreeze. Uh but it's in the liposome world, it's long been known as a way 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 the liver and stuff like that. And so uh he was using uh the the gentleman in particular is named Peter Cullis. By the way, he is the one that should have got the Nobel Prize for these products as far as I'm concerned. Uh and um got slighted in the pic, but Peter Cullis said that he had, uh, they 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, uh, with cholesterol and other things. But then also added these, uh, shorter polyethylene glycol molecules attached with a really short organic, you could call it fat or or gasoline-like molecule uh, that that put the PEG into the liposome particle and but it, 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 this is these are self-assembling particles uh, that were used that, um, Peter uh, and his group Peter McColl? >> Uh, no. Peter Cullis. Uh, p i e t e r. Okay. Uh, from UBC and his group, um, built these products with, uh, in this technology and that was they they had it available, uh, um, the their choice cuz they created companies for this. I mean, a ton of money must have been made. Uh, because they licensed it non-exclusively to BioNTech and Moderna. And uh, that that's still kind of the core tech that makes this particular category of products work. And so this was enough to convince you that they had solved that problem. Yeah, I took his word at it. I mean, he's 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 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 you know, 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 if you had this symptom of this chronic malaise and 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 all my life because I've always been a farmer. And a carpenter and 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, you know, nobody knew anything about this, what was causing it, whether it was even real. But I was experiencing it. You know, there's 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 it was promoted that if you took the jab and you had this symptom Yeah. then it would kick your immune system up. You 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 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 uh conference on drug discovery, computational drug discovery, high throughput stuff. Um uh very high-tech MIT. And staying in a a little firehouse that had been converted to a hotel right across the street from the biotech company where the that the initial Boston outbreak was associated with. And I came home sick as a dog. I thought that I had uh influenza B cuz that was the what the narrative was that was circulating at the time. And uh I was just I remember laying in bed just feeling sick as hell. Uh hard to breathe. And my wife came in, it's just been on the TV. Uh um COVID is circulating right there in Boston where you were. Uh so so that was that was pretty early on and it hit me pretty hard. So, that would have been um the uh Wuhan one variant. And then there was a couple of of uh genetic changes that occurred apparently in Boston around that time. So, how long did this affect you? This this long COVID? Uh I was I was sick until I took the jab. Um you know, just not not having stamina, just feeling uh how many months was that? I I had never even thought about it. Many months. Yeah. And did you try anything else to mitigate those symptoms? >> Yeah, I did. So, uh, um, what my whole story, you know, the whole bunch of what I did back then that never gets discussed and that's okay. But, uh, I, you know, the kickoff was that I got this call from Wuhan, I think. It was from Wuhan from this guy that uh, used to be CIA named Michael Callahan, uh, who I'd worked with in the past and had 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. You know, I'm a vaccinologist at core. Uh, but, um, developing a vaccine in the face of an outbreak historically has taken a decade. And, uh, 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, um, building on the technology that I'd been working with at USAMRIID during Zika for uh, rapid identification of uh, of repurposed drugs, uh, to address, uh, you know, new crisis. And, uh, 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 uh, in SARS-CoV-2 based on the sequence that got published from Wuhan in this January 11th, I think. And uh 2020. And uh um we started doing what's called computational docking of very, very large uh virtual libraries using uh Amazon AWS and and high throughput parallel processing. And came up with a list of compounds. And uh then kind of screen those against uh problems, adverse events, um that kind of stuff. Uh more coffee, good. That's it. Uh I would, thank you. And um And what was the first one you >> list, I had I had this list of compounds, and then I was sick as a dog. And you know, what you get trained in if you do clinical research is docs don't um experiment on themselves. That'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 already at that point I'd spent a lot of time already looking into the virus and what it was causing and what people were saying it was causing. >> old were you at the time? Um let's see. I'm 66 now, so that's 60 61, yeah. >> So you were in a high risk group. Yeah, for sure. And and I was obese. I don't know if you noticed, but I've dropped about 40 or 50 lb since we last met. So uh So I started taking some of those compounds, and one of them was uh this drug that is normally taken for stomach acid called famotidine. And uh I got an immediate response with that. And uh so I also tried isochorcitin. That didn't seem to make so much of an impact on me. But I experimented on myself, and uh famotidine at higher doses um now it's 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 Ivermectin and other things. And then that went on I mean there's a whole thread here. We could go on for an hour about about what was done with the repurposed drugs. I was working closely with the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. And uh Um I managed to capture a few hundred million dollars and direct that towards drug repurposing adaptive clinical trials etc. And uh The thing that I zoomed in on through a collaboration with a doc up in uh Minnesota was the combination of famotidine another anti-inflammatory called celecoxib and then the thing that really kicked it in high gear was the forbidden horse medicine uh Ivermectin and uh we got I managed to working with DOD got um over a hundred million dollars set up a contract uh um it got managed by SAIC and we were going to go after that using very cutting-edge clinical trial um design. And uh And remember this is the DOD. We submitted initial drug applications for using this combination of licensed drugs well-known licensed drugs and the FDA just dug in um 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. Uh and so in the end the DOD caved and they dropped the Ivermectin component and proceeded with the uh famotidine and celecoxib which showed some effect. >> Why were they so hesitant or what was the resistance? I your 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 uh and still to this day are perplexing. I just don't understand it. >> Ivermectin. Oh it was it was uh like a high sin. Yeah. >> They they they deployed uh what do we want to call it? Propaganda, psychological warfare, nudge, everything just like they did after you and I had our little discussion. Um it was it was stunning. I mean the like after we had our chat uh um I don't know if you remember you asked me about what is this about uh mass formation psychosis? Yeah. And it I mean the use the term broke the internet is overused. It broke the internet. Yeah. >> the search results on Google went nuts and >> Well because it perfectly described what was happening. >> Oh and couldn't be it no 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 >> hear our first discussion, please explain mass formation psychosis. So since then I've had a a shitstorm come at me for using the term psychosis coupled with mass formation. I you can't you know the the grief you think you got a lot of grief from Spotify and from uh Spotify was actually great. I had no grief from them. It was from like Neil Young and Joni Mitchell and Oh, I I other artists. So, you prob- then you probably don't know the whole backstory. >> okay. Um that's we should that's fun to dive into because it relates to the psychological warfare domain that now I've become a pseudo expert on. Um just in trying to understand what the hell I experienced and what's going on. So, so Mattias Desmet, he's a friend um at University of Ghent 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 where which is where that book had not come out yet, but it was uh the mass formation hypothesis is what was the kind of core of that book that's now published and and widely regarded. Uh so, so Mattias uh came Mattias is somebody who uh as a PhD, a full professor, had long taught uh 20th century uh uh psychology work relating to totalitarianism and thought uh 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 of philosophers in the 20th century associated with uh trying to make sense of Nazi Germany and what had happened to the German people and really all over the world. Uh but particularly relating to the Germans and Mattias 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. It we're experiencing it. We're experiencing this process of the formation of masses. Um and the the 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. Uh, but you know, it's not in the the the attack was that it's not in the diagnostic and statistical manual uh, for the American Psychiatric Association. So, therefore it doesn't exist. Uh, um, uh, but you know, all the attacks uh, but um, 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 uh, offer, let's to simplify it, um, 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. It's what you do. I mean, you connect. That's That's the essence of the Joe Rogan experience, I think. Um, so we need to connect with others. And in in certain situations where people are threatened, um, and in particular in the modern era where we have all of these things that drive us into isolation, most notably are electronic tools. Uh, we become disassociated from our community. And when that happens, we have a strong need to become associated with community. And a and a leader can come into that environment and basically say, "I have the solution to your pain, your psychological pain." And uh, what will happen is a strange phenomena where people will rather than building social networks, let's say horizontally 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 attached attachment to that leader and following the edicts of that leader. And this leads to this phenomena that gives rise, you know, enables to totalitarianism. But uh gives rise to this whole cluster of things that Matthias described. Uh that um you know, he he uses the term mass formation. In a way that's kind of an odd artifact of translation, I guess, from the Dutch. Uh it's an easier way to think of it is a crowd formation. Um and uh And in his uh examination of the history of what happened in Nazi Germany, where things people really went crazy. I mean, mothers were turning their children in. Uh you know, children were being executed on the on, you know, consequent to mothers' testimony, which is really strange when you think about it, just you know, in a fundamental way. Uh you know, we had all of this uh dear leader kind of stuff. Uh the the um uh linkage of of the self and the soul to this central figure and deriving a sense of identity and belonging from that. That went on and and, you know, there's still uh people from that generation in Germany that um are still caught up in in a lot of that. That's why the German laws uh And um so that's that's that's the short version. When we spoke before, I gave a much more technical, precise uh definition of Matthias's uh core thesis. Uh but um this 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? Uh but now uh it's kind of coalesced into an understanding of of the fact that uh 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 could call it psychological warfare. And what it distinguishes the present from say uh Sun Tzu. And you know, ancient propaganda has always been part of warfare in humans. But uh 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, um perception, feelings, emotions uh that have become commonplace. And that you know, is is and has has you know, this this suite of technology and capabilities that we saw deployed on all of us were uh 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 uh successful insurgencies that we keep losing wars over. Uh you know, Vietnam being a notable example all the way through Afghanistan. And uh um So that that's why it was built uh but then that tech um got deployed by governments against their own citizens. And this was really launched uh in large part uh in the United States by a presidential directive from Barack Obama. I'm not making this up. Uh you can look it up. And by the way, the presidential directive is still in place that established the uh um 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 we're barreling right to that end point, same as Canada has. Uh you know, we're just a little bit behind. And uh there they you know, we have the benefit of the First Amendment and a Constitution. And um you know, often on courts. But uh there they 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 is 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 what you and I experienced what you experienced with Ivermectin what you experienced with uh you know, just talking about your own experiences uh and the blowback that happened after we did that little hit. Uh um is is a super powerful clear case study in understanding this intersection of modern psychology uh warfare technology and uh the digital world uh and and algorithmic control of information the uh creation of digital avatars for all of us, the application now in present of artificial intelligence to custom craft a messaging uh that gets fed into our digital domains on a regular basis in order to you know, sell us whatever uh but also to shape how we think. And uh 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 Substack was talking to me the other day. She she just gave me a couple examples where uh um stories that were in corporate media in the United States that weren't listing certain key names or whatever. Um she said, "I just go to the Hindustan Times. Hindustan 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 in an environment in an information environment where you cannot um uh rely on But we all know that. You can't rely on corporate media, but the but the the rules, the boundaries that are being set up about information are profound and are completely distorting our ability to uh process what's happening around us. Can I give you the example of what actually happened? You you said in in our example with the blowback in Spotify. This is documented by a a report out um 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. They for some reason they didn't really want to go down the road to the vaccines. They did talk a lot about the um events around uh the let's say lab-leak hypothesis. Uh which is allowed. You're You're allowed in DC now to talk about that. Finally. Yeah. You're still you're Well, and >> It It was about 4 years later you were allowed to >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Um uh so what was documented was that uh the 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 is one of these global aggregators that controls advertising. The Global Alliance for Responsible Media, which by the way had a dust-up with uh 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 AdSense. 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 going to we're threatening to pull your advertising. Okay? Now, what happens between that and your experience, I don't know. You know, it's not transparent to me what you experienced. Uh yeah, we all remember the um Laurel Canyon crowd saying they were going to pull their catalogs, which they didn't actually own, right? That was That was another thing. And then they they went after you uh with this uh mashup of N-word uh historic uh events. Um you know, there was clearly a concerted effort to take out Joe Rogan. Uh much more than to take out Robert Malone. And uh so then the question comes, why the heck would Coca-Cola be the socket with the Global Alliance for Responsible One of the biggest advertisers in the world, right? Why would Coca-Cola give a hooey about what Joe Rogan said to Robert Malone on you know uh New Year's Eve. Uh Coca-Cola is really tight with the CDC. Coca-Cola has funded buildings at the CDC. Coca-Cola funds the um CDC Foundation, Foundation for the CDC, as does Bill and Melinda Gates, as 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 uh WHO to not implement restrictions in messaging about sugar use. Mhm. Okay. They didn't want those messages. Remember, this is at the heart of the inverted food triangle now. The 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 it's like having the cocaine lobby, >> [laughter] >> right? Well, and you know, that's an interesting analogy because of course the history of Coca-Cola. Right. Uh but um so sugar's addictive. Uh the the CDC Coca-Cola didn't want the CDC wanted the CDC to influence public health policy to avoid um uh global positions on the risks associated with sugar intake because it would potentially hurt their market share. Wouldn't you know, they're a a major globalized company. So that's that little ecosystem that I just described illustrates what we're dealing with here. And the many ways that um all of this kind of influence and 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 recall, you you gave this, you know, I 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." Uh it was like out on your porch or something. Um I remember I was sitting around a campfire in Maui quite literally when somebody said, "Oh, Did you just see this from Rogan? And uh as a matter of fact, I was sitting around Gavin de Becker's uh campfire at that time, somebody that you know. And uh so um 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. Uh it was it was basically blacklisted from the search engines, etc., etc. But you it carries an 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 that those kinds of banners popping up all the time on YouTube. If you if you talk about vaccines or COVID vaccines, that will get if if you pass the filters, if if YouTube will allow that to still be up um cuz you didn't say something, whatever it is, uh 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 it's basically still uh public policy consequent to the old Obama presidential directive that still hasn't been rescinded. Uh you know, I love President Trump. I think he's doing amazing things. I think he's amazingly brave. Uh I would just mention our friend Gavin de Becker referred to Trump the other day when I saw Gavin in in uh Maui as a once-in-500-year leader. And that's that's not that's not nothing coming from Gavin. And uh so I'm I'm a big supporter, but the president has still left in place this mechanism that exists uh that directs the federal government to use nudge technology and related uh what I assert is psychological warfare technology on the American populace. All right, this is from back in, what was it, 2015 or something like that? >> Yeah, it's it's quite early. Um, and then you had his you had Obama's subsequent like the notorious speech at Hoover at Stanford. Where he talks about in order to preserve democracy, we're going to have basically says we're going to have to have censorship. Right. Uh, in order to preserve democracy or whatever democracy is. >> for people that don't know what we're talking We're relating to the Smith-Mundt Act. >> The Smith-Mundt everybody focuses on Smith-Mundt. Okay. >> Um, but as I examined Smith-Mundt and we did an essay on this in the Substack, um, you know, like 3 years ago. Uh, cuz that was the kind of the narrative that was coming out in, let's say, our side of alternative media. Right. And uh, in my examination Smith-Mundt's impact is a lot more limited. It has to do with Voice of America and some other things. The broad impact wasn't quite, in my opinion, what was believed to be of of enabling propaganda domestically. Mhm. More specifically, um, there is a presidential directive that nudge technology that established a nudge office that nudge technology shall be used by government. >> They don't call it a nudge office, right? >> They they I don't know. It's it's got They've They've gone through various iterations and I'm sorry I don't have the latest version and it's kind of become decentralized. >> called the Social and Behavioral Science Team. Wikipedia says that that was stopped in 2017 but continued under the Trump administration under, sorry, uh, the General Services Administration's Office of Evaluation Science. >> Well, there we go. Yeah. >> Boy. Yeah. Yeah, it's and it's kind of become it's been like I said, it's been pushed out into a lot of the agencies. Mhm. Um, they don't use that that lexicon because then it's easy to find them. Okay, they use there's other euphemisms they use uh, to describe those kinds of activities, but it's become normalized. The the weaponization of propaganda has become normalized. >> There's the wording 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. This is when it was implemented. >> 2015 >> Executive order President Obama signs an executive order requiring federal agencies to incorporate behavioral insights into their evaluation efforts. That's a nice way of saying use of propaganda on the American people. >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And so, this this is kind of become Thank you so much for for pulling that up. That's super helpful. So, um, this this is like I said if I can illustrate, I was on a Great Britain News broadcast about 4 years ago. Uh, at the time when they would, you know, I was there was a window time where they would have me on, but it was sketchy. Um, and GB News was the only one that would do it. And uh, 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. Mhm. So, that's uh, implemented by basically the UK has an active censorship organization that controls news media. And uh, so I'm on with this guy, Great Britain News, pinstripe, bow tie, you know, it just uh, reeks. And um, and I'm talking about psychological warfare and uh, the 77th Brigade, which is part of the British Army, which is their uh, psychological warfare unit. It's very open uh, that that's the case uh as is the existence of of uh um 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 under Starmer they just censor you and send you to jail. Uh they they just cut cut cut out the middleman. Uh but back then they were still uh kind of buying civilians. And so I'm talking about this. And uh that's that the the guy says, "Yeah, but here in the UK um 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, CyWar, which is our most recent publication. And uh uh and it just kind of all coalesced in my mind that oh my god, what all these things Matthias's teaching about mass formation, what I saw, what I experienced with you, what I experienced with the concerted attacks of the media. Um and then subsequently it's been validated by this congressional report that talks about, for instance, the Jira ticket system. Jira tickets are are what it's a system that all the software companies use to track uh glitches and uh complaints and stuff like that. Well, the government had their own Jira ticket system set up to log um information about activities of persons that they wanted to have censored and suppressed. And they would build these Jira tickets with information. And so one of the things that's out in the congressional report was that I actually had a Jira ticket. I was surprised that this is the case, or maybe not surprised in retrospect. Uh and and my personal sins were that I was listed as an anti-vaxxer and a conservative. Even though you're a vaccinologist. And a conservative, that's interesting. >> And a conservative. Yeah. Yeah, exactly right. I mean, the stuff that's coming out >> That's wild. >> It's It's fascinating to query things like Grok, even Grok. Um uh um about uh certain subjects and and you will find where they have algorithmically built firewalls. And and you can you can approach them and detect them because um it will it will act dumb, oh, you know, 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 we had all of the disclosures, the Zuckerberg uh oh, I'm so sorry uh apology tour that happened. Remember when basically he got outed by Congress. And and the rest of the tech bros uh and of course, the thing that catalyzed all of that was that Elon decided to pony up a good chunk of change and buy 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. Uh there's how 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. It's It's all coming out now in spades. And and we're dealing Now, the lovely thing about all of this, I mean, let's let's try to It is morning in America, in my opinion. I mean, a lot of people get very dark and and there's a darkness to the times, but there's you know, not to push the metaphor too far, but there there is um new light coming in. And the fact that we can now see this and we recognize that you and I are of a similar generation. I mean, one of my earliest memories was the assassination of the president. And all of the propaganda around that, the propaganda around Vietnam War, ever since we've just been swimming in information control that's gotten increasingly sophisticated. And uh fortunately as Americans, we also kind of have become more and more immune to marketing and propaganda over time cuz 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 is just try to, you know, have the conversations to be able to get to the bottom of the [ __ ] Uh but um that we've we've been swimming in it and now we can see it. We can see the the structures that, you know, the the power of artificial intelligence and influence mapping and all the things that are going on in the internet right now that are the cutting cutting edge technology, they're scary because they could be weaponized against us, but they're also super cool because we can now see those relationships. If you want an example of that, look at the the threads that are coming out on X uh illuminating the uh networks of affiliation associated with this latest Epstein file release. Just mind-blowing. >> Mind-blowing. Uh and and it is just just like you know, we can we can sit here and [ __ ] and whine saying, "Oh, they didn't release that and blah blah blah. This is This is redacted." All that's true, but still the the impact of of that information and we're still getting to the bottom of it. It's completely changed most people's narrative of what happened. Like we had this sort of vague understanding, you know, but when you see in the email like clear evidence that they're talking about children. In in pretty obscene ways. >> Horrifying ways. So that was the thing that like even I when I talked to Mike Benz about that, he was sort of incredulous about that. He's like I don't think they would use children. It just doesn't make any sense if they got caught, but it just seems like Yeah, if if Mike Benz was incredulous, that's pretty big. I Well, I just don't think we really knew until we saw those files come out. And then you go, "Oh, well, you There's no denying it now." My my position on this completely shifted. I thought there's probably some really sick people that have an appetite for that, but I hadn't seen any real evidence for it until these files. And now I'm like, "Oh, this is demonic. This is clearly demonic." >> I the Okay, so thank you for saying that. Um uh I'm somebody who was raised a Christian and went to Bible school and that kind of stuff as a kid. And youth groups uh and then growing up in Central Coast, California, let's say um weird in different ways. Mhm. Uh but uh 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 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 prey on children and torture children. And there was the one where there was a suggestion where a child was praying to Jesus that like there was a joke that someone should dress up like Jesus. I'm I Did you see that one, Johnny? >> No, I'm I'm not I'm not watching this >> even want to. I don't even want to. I don't even want to. People send it to me and I go, okay. People send it to me and I go, okay, cuz I'm pretty for the most part off social media. But every now and then someone will send me something that I have to look at and 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 Pizzagate. Yeah. And which was widely dismissed. You know, everybody's like, oh, this is a bunch of cooks. Here it is. Uh 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. Um it it is it is dark. You should dress up like Jesus when you see her. What the [ __ ] I and well, look at the line >> about a little kid. >> at the line that Jesus Look at the line above it. How do I How am I supposed to interpret, I'm coming trick? The oh Jesus, I'm coming trick. >> [sighs] >> It's just the the whole thing but so so we see this darkness. It involves uh leaders in academe, in science, in industry, in politics. >> Yeah. And and it it just, you know, I I remember point in this arc of the last 6 years where a film crew came onto my farm and wanted to shoot some segments. And they were talking this and frankly, I thought it was crazy talk. Um I kind of smiled and and you know, tried to be civil and nice. Not contradict them. Uh uh about the New World Order. And um uh and then along comes, you know, then my wife one day says, "Hey, you ought to look at this book from Klaus Schwab." It's called the New World Order. >> [laughter] >> Like, what? I mean, he was just saying it out loud. >> Yeah. I mean, the World Economic Forum had those ads where they were saying, "You will own nothing and you will be happy." >> Yeah. And 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 that you can if you you can go use your use your favorite AI and track it down yourself. Uh 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 um information has been crafted and manipulated. And the same tools of uh of de-legitimization of uh um a promotion of uh these messages uh that you are a conspiracy theorist or uh um 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 the the narrative of uh um uh uh being a a collaborator uh surreptitiously is called bad-jacketing. Uh and and it has its own its whole 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 uh a huge amount of social uh 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 it we're swimming in it. I from as as somebody writes on a daily basis these essays on Substack cuz that's how I make my living now cuz I can't do what I used to do. Uh um it's it's you're kidding the candy shop. There There's so much corruption. There's so much falsehood being promoted. There's so much of this uh manipulation of of reality. And so, if if you're in the business of of trying to help people to make sense out of that, which is kind of what I do now for a living, >> uh 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 anymore. So, so you talked about Ivermectin. I mean, the Ivermectin 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 Ivermectin in cancer. And there was immediate blowback uh along the lines of oncologists are outraged. You know, the narrative is uh 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 uh because scientists are going to investigate the use of Ivermectin and and other drugs >> why Ivermectin? So, this is the this is the core question and this is one of the things that puzzled me to no 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 Chappelle 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 had COVID. I had no idea it was going to be even controversial. But I listed a bunch of things that I took. >> And the [ __ ] hit the fan. >> I talked about IV vitamins. I talked about monoclonal antibodies. I talked about >> Which were allowed. prednisone. Yeah, all these things that I talked about, Z-Pak. 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 was no demonization of monoclonal antibodies, but they did make them much harder to get and eventually pulled them. >> It's true. 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 them. >> What went on in the hospitals is a whole 'nother thing. But you mentioned crazy. >> But so so the the why? The why that one medication >> two threads that I can pull on at all is that ivermectin is a miracle drug. I mean, Nobel Prize, right? >> Right. Uh 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 immuno immunostimulant. Pro-inflammatory or or pro-immune response in some way that's subtle. Uh because it has this broad spectrum of activity against things that have a an immune response component in 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-Pak. So, that's another fascinating one. And to say that it was only ivermectin Ivermectin was the most prominent, but they're actually effective in shutting down uh the the Z-Pak um uh the use of hydroxychloroquine. And hydroxychloroquine has a fascinating story. When you mention Z-Pak, you're talking about Zelenko. 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. Um we have a huge uh portfolio of experience in using it. Um millions and millions of doses. It's safe in pregnancy. Uh what's not to like here? In In the story of that is is a fascinating microcosm. Cuz it goes back to Ralph Baric. Ralph Baric had published that um 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. Uh so he had published that this drug was effective against coronaviruses. And Zev uh Zelenko, who's passed away now um uh got engaged in trying to find some way to help his patients in New York with uh recovering from COVID and uh treating COVID. And he went back, did a deep dive into into Baric's work pulled out this drug, hydroxychloroquine that had been recommended wrote to the president about it. Start he got clinical experience with it. Um and you know, caveat um uh Mickey Willis is doing a uh bio uh on Zev now. Um and I'm involved in that, so conflict of interest. But uh 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, you know, economist, went to town. I remember uh the company I was working with all came 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 trashed 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. Ivermectin, though, that was a new threat. And one of the reasons why it was a threat was there was a um meta-analysis that had been done at the Cochrane. So, the Cochrane Institute in the UK is like, you know, the holy grail for analysis of drugs uh and biologics. And uh 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 Ivermectin was quite effective. Uh and um then something happened. And uh there was some influence exerted. And suddenly that meta-analysis got quenched. It got squashed. Um there were two investigators that uh were involved in building that. Um 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 Tess Lawrie. And uh she really objected to what happened. But Ivermectin 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? >> Mhm. Uh Uttar Pradesh. And and Uttar Pradesh and and uh and it I guess it had kind of it's like the cat was out of the bag. And they had 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 and I'm pretty sure remember who was it that held the original patent? Merck. Now, I was involved um as an observer on behalf of of Ditra to the active trials that were going on under the Foundation for NIH, which is sponsored insignificantly by Merck. And which is now headed up by the former head of Merck vaccines, Julie Gerberding. 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 Ivermectin was 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 uh to a process to enable fast-tracking of these vaccines uh using this new technology uh would no longer be valid. Cuz those are the rules. Is if there's an existing countermeasure, then you can't uh implement those clauses. So, it was all about emergency use authorization. >> It it's the I don't know that that's the case. It's It is. >> It only thing that makes sense when you see how much profit they made. Which which was enormous. >> Enormous. So, it was effective. And all that propaganda, regardless of how much exposed them and exposed their methods, they made hundreds of billions of dollars. >> Uh it Well, and and that that the ugliest 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, there's 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. With the lockdowns. Lockdowns, all the the what was done to small businesses, what was done uh to the economy, the stimulus packages, they're still digging out of all of that fraud. Uh it it, you know, in retrospect uh for for average folks uh that are just trying to put food on the table and pay their rent uh to look at in retrospect what was you know, quite literally done to them. The middle class was hollowed out in like on hyper speed. Uh this So, yeah, I'm still pissed off about this. >> [laughter] >> Well, 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, and because when you say that's the propaganda along with fall 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 Karikó and Weissman was that these products, which they had the thesis is they had been playing the central role. I disagree. I think Peter Cullis is the one that should have got it if you're going to give it for if you're going to give it for these vaccines, it was Peter Cullis and his team at UBC that really was the enabling tech. But be that as it may, the decision's made and the committee said basically uh you know, millions of lives have been saved. And by giving this Nobel at this time, we are we hope that it will promote more people to accept this product. That that was explicitly the logic given at the time. And that reflects what was really a thrust vector. Joe, I I've you know, it's what a bizarre world since we met. Very. And and so I've been sucked into uh 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, Giorgia Meloni and everybody else. But you know, compared to the far left, uh 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, the UK, and the Canada were 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. Uh look at the poor suckers in Australia and New Zealand. Yeah. Uh 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 uh alternative party, you know, calling it center right, let's say, but um uh that uh you know, recently, I think it was the vice president who came out and said specifically that that last election was stolen. It was in in Romania. Georgescu, uh they tried to put in jail and the logic was that uh 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 they don't you know, they ain't got a constitution. And they can just step right in and and throw you in jail, inactivate your candidacy, do whatever if you represent a populist threat to the existing structure. We talk about the deep state. But it's it it doesn't you know, yeah, it's a problem here. But and and thank Mike Benz I defer to as as a notable expert in that space. But uh it's it's a lot worse in Europe and Australia and Canada and the UK and uh I think you know, we're we're in a 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 uh 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. Um you think they've been mean to me, then look at what they did to Bobby. And then if 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. Uh think about what's really going on at the higher levels where where the big games are being played. And uh 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 2 years mostly trying to convince people about. I hardly ever talk about RNA. I sit Oh, I Joe, I got to give a caveat. Um forgive me. Um 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. Um but you know, we we're in a moment where we're seeing this how the levers, the gears of how all this works. Give you an example. Tomorrow, Friday, February 13th, what could possibly go wrong? Uh um hopefully my plane flight out of here works okay. And they don't have a drone attack or something, right? Um so, tomorrow there's a lawsuit uh filed on behalf of the American Academy of Pediat- Pediatrics that seeks to shut down the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and uh the changes that Bobby has implemented there. Uh and uh 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. They They They We talk about this, you know, propaganda and weaponization and and uh lawfare and those things and we talk about it as if it only happened in the last administration. It's It's still ongoing all the time. And it is going to go big time if if the house turns, which I think it probably will. I mean, there's a good chance that They've already drawn up articles of impeachment against Secretary Kennedy. They're talking about articles of impeachment against President Trump. We're about to go into another 2 years of stagnation uh and and um you know, functional uh what do we call it? We can't call it civil war. Um uh you know, um war by other means uh is is where we're heading right now. But at this moment, uh I'm seeing major movement. You know, Kennedy is doing great stuff. The president is doing great stuff. We're seeing a transformation in America's global reach. Uh totally restructuring global politics. And on the health side, the Make America Healthy Again movement, you know, there's there's some pushback against that and a heck of a lot of propaganda being deployed against it. Well, 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. Uh profound. A simple but profound. Yeah. >> I mean, this is the the COVID thing with Ivermectin and alternative medications, off-label medications. Why? Money. I think it also has to do with control. Right. >> I think there's >> more money, more access to money. >> it's it's it's money and power in my mind. But power They don't want power without money. They want They want to benefit from that power. I 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 a It's uh like chips. You're stacking up exactly. >> Right. They're scoring in a video game. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. And 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's stuff that he did in Africa. Oh. Giving children polio with that polio vaccine that was from the AP news. >> and India. Yeah. I mean, he's kind of banned from India. Uh the Yeah, so I don't get it. I don't get where these people live. I I'm 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. Uh who wouldn't take it? Well, I guess a lot of people wouldn't. But I don't have a need to have power. I have thank God for my Substack subscribers. I have all all that I need. My wife is happy. My horses are fed. My farm is paid off. It's 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 and hunger. >> 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 was involved in a bunch of antitrust lawsuits in the past, that would be what you >> Not that we're naming any names. Not that we're we're naming any names that bribed off multimedia corporations to the tune of 300 plus million dollars so that they wouldn't write bad stories about him. >> Or or uh owns, you know, functionally owns the World Health Organization. Right. And a giant chunk of American farmland for was for a while trying to put that push that fake meat [ __ ] on everybody And the company >> dropped off a cliff. >> Yeah. And yeah, so this the business models aren't working out so good for the globalists, are 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 [ __ ] and no one got in trouble for spreading that [ __ ] There was no corrections, no redactions, no no apologies. >> Yeah. And so >> People now, more than ever in my lifetime, mistrust mainstream media. And polls show that. That polls show that the trust of mainstream media is at 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 trusts them. So, to this thread, uh about 4 years ago, I I read a uh report from the Trusted News Initiative. You remember the TNI? >> Yeah. >> It was launched by the BBC Right. >> uh to counter Russian disinformation and then repurposed to counter vaccine disinformation. Uh and they and I read this report about I'd gone on your show. Mhm. So, I was a little bit of a fan. Uh forgive me. Uh and um so, I'm reading this report and they're talking about threats to the industry. Because T and I is basically another trade organization. It's another guild. Mhm. Uh it's a global uh major media guild. And uh so, they're they're doing this internal analysis and reporting and 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 uh that that was that was their uh 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 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 um event occur which what By the way, blew up my subscribers on Substack. Thank you so much. >> Congratulations. I still get a wave every year about in the in the month following So, January, I get a big bump in revenue because >> our subscribers on Spotify, too. During the heat of it, we gained in 1 month, we gained 2 million subscribers. I had >> Yeah, I heard that now. I heard >> had Oh, yeah, please. Share. >> What is the What's the Spotify subscribers? I never even 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'm about to have my 47th wedding anniversary. >> Congratulations. >> Thank you. Um I'm proud of it. Um uh I would have 20-year-olds come up in the street and fist-bump me. I'm like, >> [laughter] >> "What the hell?" Yeah, well, they don't have a representative. I mean, they don't see anyone. >> All males. >> Yes, males. Those males don't have anybody in mainstream news that represents anything that resembles them. I mean, 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 zinger, right there. >> Yeah. Young men that have freedom in life. >> Yeah. >> And then they compromised themselves. >> 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 [ __ ] [ __ ] life? I don't want that. I know I'm being lied to. I know the news is full of [ __ ] and I know that this one guy who is also a cage fighting commentator and a comedian and doesn't have to lie. Like, 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. Cuz 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 All I know is I got a message uh from through X. Yeah. Uh saying, "Joe Rogan, do you want to come on?" >> That was actually me. >> [laughter] >> 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 sent it to my guy and he takes care of it. Like, that's it. There's no one else. There's no one involved [clears throat] in and that, which you could still be you that way. As soon as you get involved in enormous groups of humans and a bunch of board, you have to sit down at a 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 crew. So, as I look back, you know, the question why were you able to do this, Malone? Um why were you able to you know, oh you were so brave, Dr. Malone. I I could Well, Robert Malone, that name became like a pejorative. It became like, oh yeah, that Malone guy. Yeah, it's it's all weaponized. Yeah. But but then on the other side, you know, I tour. I do these rallies and stuff like this and you know, my wife it really makes my wife nervous. I I'm the middle-aged women come up to me and they want to have selfies. Uh and 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 um yeah, there's a lot of heroes. Really? >> Why why why why was it Yeah, yeah, the guys that that, you know, um defend the nation. Right. Uh um but why was able to speak? I think a big part of it was I had no debt. Um I wasn't beholden to anybody. Right. And uh like you say, I'd been decade being a consultant, free-living consultant. And it gotten under my skin. I've always been independent, you know, farmer, carpenter kind of stuff. Uh and um that's I guess been part of my problem is I just don't fit in in corporate life. I 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 think. It's just Good word. Um yeah, so so yeah, so so uh the this decentralized subscriber base model the the epiphany was, and I'm being quite sincere, you know, it was one of those moments my wife and I looked at each other and we said, "What the hell are we going to do now?" Um 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. Uh and this has been promoted by all the top liberal publications in the world. >> Yeah. And uh 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 Kirsch had told me you ought to get on Spotify, and we will We took it on seriously. We published thousands of essays now, almost every day. It's, you know, for Substack. >> Substack. What did I say? Substack. I apologize. Yeah, I apologize. Um and and so we just work at it again and again and again trying to put out content. And we're we're shadowbanned and small-roomed on X in a serious way. Uh you know, we got 1.3 million subscribers, of which uh you know, all the time I get feedback, "I never see your stuff." Uh well, it's algorithmic. Whatever it is, you know, and you can ask Rock about Robert Malone on and you know, you get back um uh you know, I'm a I'm a controversial figure. Uh but you know, not whining. Uh and so we have we have a lot of subscribers, but we just have this core of paid subscribers. And they send in their five bucks a month. And uh it's all we need. And it totally sets us free. We 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. Um cuz cuz there's I have the the truth is um I have guardrails that that constrain me in a way that I didn't used to be constrained uh for talking about some things. You know, I I have to uh live in this world. I interface with uh the secretary and and with the deputy chief of staff and other people. And now I'm working with the State Department more. Uh and um so you know, I have to I have to be more mindful. What is your function? Like what what do you do over there? At State or >> Yeah, both. When you're working for the government? >> Like how do they use your services? So, um 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 without all the money. Um uh so uh he was a SGE without pay. I'm an SGE without pay. And uh because I serve on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices at the CDC which is this uh they call it It's a FACA committee, Federal Advisory Committee Act that advises the director of the CDC. That's its only job. On vaccine policy. Okay? Um 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 birth dose, which was uh just a a slugfest. Ugly. The worst meeting I've ever had to adjudicate my entire life. Um but for the most part I sit on the subcommittees. I sit on the COVID working group subcommittee. Um I'm not supposed to talk about the next meeting. I was told to uh um uh 2 days ago. Uh so uh that's one of my my guardrails. Uh but uh stay tuned uh for what is going to come down if the AAP lawsuit doesn't prevail and we're allowed to actually have the meeting. Uh but so that's that. I'm also the chair of the influenza working group. Uh stay tuned for that. Uh and now I am So and I from time to time the secretary asked me to help him sort out some issue. You know, I'll get a phone call. I once got a phone call on um on the Big Island. Uh I did this recent series of rallies to try to um what you know 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 That was the subtext for that as you recall and I forgot to even mention it. We had to go back in to 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 in Hawaii. I'm going to another one of these rallies. I get 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 uh biodefense initiative. Um so I get that kind of stuff. Uh 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 that's interesting. That now we drive into a kind of public health and vaccinology. Uh you're asking the why. Yeah. And it's been a long-standing policy. >> millions of chickens, right? >> They do it every time. Every time there's a bird flu. Yeah, it's it's in in any other outbreak. So right now in Spain, I just wrote an essay about this. It was the 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-of-function research on swine fever virus. Swine fever virus, African swine fever virus, kills pigs like crazy. Um and already China has locked down and will not accept Spanish pork. And it is a lab leak. Real. >> Yeah, and there was a bunch of dead hogs last November around this facility and now it's the the Spanish and the European Union are are you know, blowing a circuit over this. Um because uh um it's really compromised the Spanish pork industry. So So this kind of stuff, when when this happens, the 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, uh of in in this kind of uh um 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, influenza is a leaky vaccine. If you give the birds a leaky vaccine, what you'll get out of that Fair answer. is precisely vaccine-resistant flu. Okay? And so, we we have no choice has been the logic. But to extern you know, like the ostriches in Canada, you remember that story? That was shocking. Yeah. Okay, there was no logic behind that. It's 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? Well, uh we we can argue at the margins. We can argue at the margins, but when you got something that if you had something that didn't have a natural reservoir, uh then then you can make the case that that you could eliminate it in that geographic population and keep it from spreading outside. But when you have a natural reservoir, like >> Explain that. Uh >> Explain the natural reservoir. Okay, in the case of avian influenza, um waterfowl and migratory birds uh are amazing uh vectors for carrying and propagating influenza. And influenza survives in water for a very long period of time. And so, you got ducks and geese traveling north to south all over um every continent that are susceptible to infection by avian influenza, and all the other migratory birds. But in particular, the waterfowl. Uh, galliformes, my wife would uh um rap me on the head if I didn't use the right term. Uh, so she's a avian specialist. So, uh So, these these birds uh carry the flu and a number of them are relatively resistant. They've been subjected to avian influenza for centuries or millennia. And uh sometimes you'll get a variant come out that'll wipe out a whole bunch of birds. Uh, 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 got rid of West Nile. We've just bred more resistant birds. That's kind of, you know, that's Bret Weinstein's space, right? That's evolution. It's magical. Uh, and so you if you have a natural animal reservoir uh like the ticks and Lyme and uh and deer. Mhm. What are you going to do? Exterminate all the deer? Uh, no, that's not practical. Um Mao 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. Um they, you know, small birds are interacting with I don't know if you've ever been around a chicken barn uh or turkey barns. Okay, yeah, there's there's chickens and then there's commercial chicken production, right? Um, so 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 Amish are starting to do it, is put something in the water supply. And what the Amish are using is is a compound called hypochlorous acid. And it's 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 is, you know, when you have these the momentum of these large government agencies with their consensus about the way things are done. Uh, you know, there's a saying that uh, the only time the FDA ever changes is if somebody in a key position retires or passes away. They they kind of get entrenched in this is how we do things. We we kill chickens. If we have avian influenza come out, we kill chicken barns. The and this is the the beauty of Secretary Kennedy coming in being uh, 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? Um, and uh, that has been heresy. It's obviously is still heresy to do that. To ask those questions, to 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 thimerosal in multi-dose influenza vials. Um, this this kind of catastrophic thinking, but Kennedy has and the president have the courage to question these narratives, these long-held standing beliefs. In the case of the bird flu, you know, he 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 we've written about this also in our Substack, there are in in the domain of chicken cultivars and this you you have chickens, you know, there are people that are just freaks about chickens. >> Yeah. Uh and and all of these but because of that we have this huge repository of different cultivars of chickens. Uh you know, we could say they were all generated through gain of function research, the old school way. Uh and um and a number of those are relatively resistant to bird flu. Well, in a logical world you would have Tysons and you know, maybe the government has to incentivize this. It shouldn't have to. You would have Tysons in there saying, "Well, guys what we need is a bird flu resistant chicken. Let's get on it." Okay? Um and that is essentially the position that the secretary took as is this policy of just extremely aggressive mass culling 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 and now that's starting to percolate through the system and there is more research into alternative strategies including the possibility of various uh prophylactic interventions in in feed and in water. Uh [snorts] that's you know, and in a lot of these chicken houses mist. As you'll recall, they have the misters cuz they got to control the temperatures. So, they are set up with uh misters and that can also be a way to deliver things that are non-toxic like HOCL that can um knock out these viruses and uh and uh E. coli and other things that cause reduced growth and and loss of 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. You know, there's some different we can we can think differently and we have been locked into um 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 and they kind of all often kind of have these lineages where they're passing power on to the people that they've mentored. Um so that's that's my HHS world and then the State Department world is a new thing that's come in. I have a I'm I'm starting to support the group under Secretary Rubio that's responsible for uh the various treaties having to do with uh arms containment and in particular the bioweapons convention. So this morning I got up early and you know, there was so um honest to God, I don't want to pump you up too much. I mean, you might get an ego or something but 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 and the president has said that we're going to we think that we can apply artificial intelligence to this problem set of of monitoring and verifying compliance with the bioweapons convention which is heresy. It's another one of these thinking outside the box things. So they say, "We want you to go to Geneva and give this talk and be the key keynote. And I say, "And what's the date?" Oh, it's February 12th. Um I say, "I I 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. Um you let Rogan say that when Rogan's ready." Uh And so I said, "But that I'm scheduled for Rogan that day." Um and they're like, "Oh, Rogan. Well, okay. Absolutely. You got to go on that one. That's way more important than 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 uh WebEx it. Uh-huh. So, so that's what happened this morning. And and uh it is a So, I'm I'm supporting that group uh um now and maybe increasingly over time. And I don't know where that goes. So, you were talking about um these pigs that it's a lab leak that's giving these pigs >> Spain. And what is it another gain of function laboratory where they're So, this is this is truly a breaking news thing. Uh our media is not covering it. Uh and Shocker. Yeah. Um it it is being covered in Europe. It in particular in Spain. This this is a major economic threat because they're I think the number two pork producer in the world. Um and you know, in the hogs they're feeding on acorns etc. That's that's a big specialty market space. Yeah. Uh so last November uh this this laboratory that is ostensibly working this is I mean, it's Wuhan 2.0. Only the good news is that this is not uh 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. >> Okay. Um So, this highly lethal African uh swine fever virus uh is is a threat to the global pork industry. And uh 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 they our government once again was unaware that this even existed. There's a cooperative agreement between USDA and this laboratory to engage in if if you read, they don't call it gain of function research. They call it building recombinant viruses uh and experimenting in uh different uh virus structures uh to allow them to better build a better vaccine. Exactly the same logic that was used in Wuhan. Okay? Now then last November, so this is ongoing in this little laboratory. And what this relates to, Joe, is the idea that is being promoted that uh for justice and equity and sharing we need to enable there being uh distribution of highly infectious pathogens all over the world in separate laboratories so that um we're we in the big bad West are not imposing and enabling our industries to prey on name your uh emerging economy uh 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, so the logic right now that's in play and being promoted by the WHO is that we should have a high pathogen repositories and research programs all over the world. Decentralized in these emerging economy states. And you know, Spain is is uh not Germany. Uh but so so there's a Spanish lab USDA is cooperating with them. They're going to build a African swine fever virus vaccine. They're doing gain of function research. And then And by the way, just like in Wuhan, there's some construction going on uh related to that. And then uh suddenly and it's an area that is very dense in wild hogs. Now, somehow we got to 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's 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 going to be working with nasty stuff and you got to 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. What could possibly have happened? So, they start investigating. The people Police have been in. Uh grabbed the records, grabbed the digital information, etc. 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 you've traveled enough. You know uh uh how important uh wild feral hogs are in the economy in uh 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 and the band of of high-density wild hogs spreads like that up through the mountains and then down into Italy. And and I think that uh if if I was sitting in the White House right now, I think uh to protect, you know, both for uh the president core constituency is ag. Voted for him, you know, three times. >> [cough] >> And >> [clears throat] >> he's that he holds that near and dear. And I think that uh it's good politics and it's good public health. It's good health uh agricultural decision to raise the barriers now. Um 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. >> I I In And to your point, I don't know the answer. I mean, right now what they're doing is they're using drones uh to try to find, you know how hard it is to hunt wild hog. Yeah, they hunt them out of helicopters [laughter] here in Texas. Yeah. And and and >> can't even contain And the hogs are winning. It's like the emu wars in Australia, right? [laughter] My friend Monty Franklin is from Australia, actually has a joke about that. About that we we fought a war with the emus and we lost. >> true. >> [laughter] >> We have emus on our farm and and they're weird animals, man. It's like living with dinosaurs. Uh but >> They're dumb as [ __ ] too. They are They're weird. They My wife says they don't have two brain cells to rub together. No, I I talked to a lady who's a falconer and she said the dumbest birds by far are emus. Second dumbest are owls, she said. Oh, really? I didn't know that owls >> Isn't that crazy? Yeah, I didn't know that. I always thought they were so smart. Give a hoot, don't pollute. They're always wearing a monocle. You know? [laughter] They're always the wise professor. Well, that >> Right, it goes back to It goes back to Athens, the symbol of learning has been the owl. Very weird. Very weird. Yeah, so emus are weird. But so they the hogs I 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 uh um with a rabies vaccine to try to control the incidence of rabies in particularly foxes was the problem throughout Europe. And a lot of the foxes were um crossing from the uh less developed part of the European Union into France, which was not acceptable. Uh she was French. And so what they did is they developed these baits with a vaccine. Uh and they would distribute them out of helicopters. helicopters. There's a whole science about how dense the baits have to be to get immunity against rabies in in um fox populations. Whole science around it, but that they they were successful. Um they controlled uh 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 whole purpose. They were supposed to be developing, but really what they were developing is a more transmissible strain. >> Well, whatever. Yeah, in order to prove that they could I don't know, you know, it's the it's it's the same story over and over again. It's Wuhan 2.0. Exactly. And how how are we not going to see this as an increasing trend and and there's the whole dark side that you know, when I you know, I read my comments. Uh maybe I shouldn't sometimes, but I do. Don't do it after this show. >> [laughter] >> Um Uh so so, you know, you get the blowback. Uh 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 uh they wanted to promote the spread of COVID in order to sell the vaccines and blah blah blah. 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. Uh you know, but this is this is the armchair uh strategists on the internet. Uh 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 Retsif Levy, who's the chair of the COVID working group and is giving the pharmaceutical industry a run for their money right now. And it's of course being vilified by the press etc. And >> [cough] >> Retsif is a full professor at MIT. And his core competence uh is risk analysis and mitigation. And he's he he reads my Substack uh cuz we're friends. Uh he doesn't subscribe, I'm pretty sure, but he reads it. Um and uh Um So he he we're 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 it's 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 uh because of the risk. I mean, what we're talking about So, I I wrote an essay about um uh uh low risk high impact events which is what we're talking about. Uh another example of a low risk high impact event uh is gene drive technology that Gates is promoting to exterminate the mosquitoes, for example. You know, gene drive technology can be used to exterminate a species. Particularly ones that have a high reproductive rate. And uh you know, it's another one that is a CRISPR application. Uh but there is a whole school of thought that gene drive tech should never be let out of the box into the environment. Because in in that that what's, you know, there are those that are that are actively promoting its use. Uh and uh to eliminate bad stuff. And uh you know, we're all for eliminating bad stuff. Uh um uh you know, organisms, insects, worms, flies, stuff. Uh and yet it and 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 to these flies and if it doesn't, then we can conclude that it's unlikely. But, as Brett would tell you, um we're dealing with ecosystems here. Really complex ecosystems. And the the risk environment now that I think grown-ups 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'm I 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 uh release, uh an infection of of a lab worker or something like that that let it get out cuz that's what happens again and again in these facilities. Uh 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, Red Sif's kind of core competence. And 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 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 uh 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 to rethink uh what is acceptable. And and I think that that, you know, we were talking a moment about the State Department and uh um uh weapon control. We're now in an environment where the speed of of um growth of the power of biotechnology is accelerating. It's going exponential just like what we saw with semiconductors. And uh our bioethics our regulatory structures our our way of thinking about those risks is completely unable to keep up with the pace of the advance. And that is creating uh a whole new threat scene. Not to scare people. I mean, I I 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 uh you want to stay positive. And I I don't want to go dark and just scare people, but we've got to take um we got to recognize that uh this is a different world now. We have all of this digital tech and and what it means and information control and and suppression and and manipulation psychologically uh basically programming, customized programming uh 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 for the likes of Yuval Harari and those that are imagining a future of transhumanism. Uh and all of that means Uh we're we're moving very rapidly into a world Uh 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 wombs. You know, these these wealthy Um 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 >> It's not talking. They're They're We're going to run an essay about this soon. They already have a lamb that they have grown de novo in an artificial womb. We're We're We're there. Okay? And And these people see it as freeing. This This is This is um more women's rights. Uh you know, we we don't need to uh 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 9 months where they're developing But that >> 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 Yanya Kelek, I don't know if you know Yanya, 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, Epoch Times. Mhm. Okay, which I think is like the only print newspaper left in the United States that's worth reading that ascribes to classical journalism. But he's just come out with a book about um 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 brouhaha was about the open mic event with Putin. About uh we can use transplantation to let us live another 100 years. That Remember that little clip? So that this In in a world in which we can have artificial wombs, um we can grow our own clones to provide donor tissue. To buy provide an insurance policy. We're we're right at the doorstep of that. Okay? Again, demonic. It sounds demonic. I mean, is a soul a real thing? Just cuz it can't be quantified by science, you can't measure it? I mean, the concept of the soul has always 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 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. The playing The playing of music, that's real. >> Yes. Yes. 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 CRISPR, 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 Do you remember Did you watch the movie Gattaca? Yeah. Gattaca, 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 Gattaca. And by the way, it has great production value, too, does it? It's well made. >> movie. Great movie. And totally under appreciated. >> And terrifying. Yeah. If that's really what our future is. >> And And the title g a t t a g a refers to a DNA sequence, by the way. That's why the name Gattaca. Oh. Okay? So, so watch the movie. You've already seen it. >> Yeah. You get it. Okay? We're moving to that space where we have custom-built humans. Now, it's being you know, what's driving that? Convenience. Who doesn't want to have a child that's better than that'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, or whomever, you know? And And in your 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 is the portal for selective engineering with 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 concurrently, we have the incoming vector of robotics technology and modern computational advanced, you know, we're moving rapidly. I you know, people say, "Oh, it's going to be next month we're going to have general artificial intelligence." Well, they keep saying that month after month. What do we got here? Video made about the >> [clears throat] >> the artificial wombs. Yeah. Oh, boy, that's messed up. >> this. I was trying to figure out who made this. I don't think the company who Oh, this is so creepy. >> Yeah, I'm not BSing. I mean, doesn't this look like it's something straight out of the Matrix? 100%. This is all 3D obviously. >> Oh my Obviously, it's not real but oh my god, this is terrifying. That That This This is a business model. >> Like what is what kind of psychology does this child have with no exposure to its mother? Hey, but For the nine months this thing >> For mom, it's a lot more convenient and she can get the perfect baby that she wants. What's not to like here, Joe? >> serial killer. Oh, Yeah. I And you put it on SSRIs. >> Well, this is the thing about Do you know the story about Ted Kaczynski? One of the stories One One of the things that happened to him? In 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 in this crib with no contact with his mother, nothing. Yeah. And he from then on I mean, his brother always described him as just like off. >> Off. Yeah. >> Just off. >> Yeah. He He never had that >> Early stage neural development is amazing and profound. By the way, this loops back to the vaccine story. When we're when we're doing all these jabs on these little tiny kids like the hepatitis B birth dose, they're 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 which you really haven't characterized well and you're stacking them. Yeah. Um and no one's done the studies. So this is >> it for profit. This is another thing that the secretary is adamant about and and that the president has led on. >> Well, the the having them exempt from any legal ramifications of the adverse side effects of vaccines, what they did during the Reagan administration, is really like it it gave them this free license. >> Yeah, free license. >> crazy. To 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 [ __ ] scary. >> it's so if you want to go down that rabbit hole, it's even worse. Um 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. A And if you get it down on the pediatric schedule, in other words, you manage to jam it through the ACIP, because the ACIP, by 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 US States United States 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, um it 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 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 then you end up with and it's in many cases it's 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 a 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 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. Oh, they they they don't just go along with it. They are propagandized into believing it as a as a theology. >> They've administered to 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?" Well, 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. >> just well, that it and and it illustrates the power of what we're dealing with. Yeah. And it once you get it by thinking through the vaccine story, I mean, you've you've um you're you're ruined now, my friend. Cuz once once you get it about vaccines, then you see it everywhere. Well, I had Suzanne Humphries on who wrote that book Dissolving Illusions. Uh-huh. And you know, that 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 what actually took place. >> Yes. Yes. Oh, that that >> And you know, there's the whole thread of of how prevalent uh um um lead was in the population in in the powdered wigs and so many things that we had. And then when they got rid of the lead, that was concurrent with uh the onset of uh 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 ascribed to the vaccines by the people that are busy marketing vaccines. And likewise, the all >> DDT Yeah, all the work associated with uh uh water sanitation and and all of that. No, that's all true. The first time I To credit where credit's due, as a vaccinologist, the first time I really encountered that logic was Candace Owens had me on years ago. And she said, "You know, we've done this deep dive and we've looked at this thing and these these infectious diseases go down before the vaccines come up. Um and yet we're told this narrative." Right. And of course, we're told this narrative. Yeah. The polio one's the nuttier one. Cuz when when people are so concerned about polio and polio vaccines and we we've cured polio, we 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 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 sprayed DDT everywhere. Yeah, so one of So, there's uh if I can kind of throw another log on the fire on that 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 uh technology investigations about cause and effect and genomic effects. And one of the things you you talk about this rare incidence of paralytic polio or uh myocarditis. Okay? Myocarditis is rare uh with the vaccine and yet it happens at a significant rate. It happens more in certain populations than other populations. This was heresy at first and now they were forced to admit it and and uh stay tuned uh later in February. But uh um 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 cut. But they still made a lot of progress and they kind of limped along with volunteer stuff. Modern I mentioned the genome costs at 300 bucks a a genome. These guys have gone through and they've identified seven genes that represent uh um high risk factors for myocarditis after vaccination. Myocarditis after vaccination, by the way, was a major side effect associated with the smallpox vaccines, or one of them. Uh it's 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 there we it it one of the you know, trying to continue my theme of it's not all dark. Right. Uh one of the things that's coming out is that if we commit to it and do the research like uh Team Kennedy is committed to doing, um we may well be able to detect those people that the character of 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 um this kind of application of genetic diagnostic technology may give us whole new insights into those small populations that that had those uh rare events. Um you know, we know the big picture in in COVID and the COVID vaccination post-vaccination uh syndrome of the high-risk individuals with obesity and elderly and basically people with a high inflammatory set point. Uh 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 uh you know, bright sides that um uh um offer hope. Uh and and uh well, what will happen as that kind of starts to roll out is that um manufacturers and 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 uh the true truth is going to come out. It is going to come out. Um is it going to come out during this administration? to do long-term follow-up studies are going to take a decade. That's that's the unfortunate truth and then we're going to have a lot of grief around that. How come you haven't already fill in the blank. Right. >> Um but uh it's going to happen. And uh that is another big plus of of what's going on right now uh kind of behind the scenes at HHS. Uh hopefully they get a chance to still do it uh after the mid-term and they don't get hog-tied. But um I'm I'm optimistic that we're these narratives that have been promoted, these false narratives, we're going to be able to break them through doing actual science uh if we're allowed to do it. Uh and and uh this new technology uh is uh particularly with sequence analysis. Um and identification of of risk correlates, the intersection between sequence analysis and epidemiology is going to really open up uh new understandings about what's going on in human disease. I'm absolutely convinced. What we do about it is that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish. This I mean, 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 that's that's what I want to say is is a bright light at the end of There there is all this dark stuff. Yeah. Uh and and we have to we have to allow ourselves to see it. It's you see it and you get the reaction like you did. Uh, I I don't want to see that. It's too much. It's too overwhelming. It's too scary. But we look away at our own risk. And um, and and we have this tendency to say it's all dark. Uh, you know, we have these uh, individuals that I mentioned Yuval Harari uh, um, you know, believing that man is God now. We no longer need God. Uh, we have become gods. We have become as gods. >> Does he actually say that? >> Yeah. Really? Well, but but isn't he talking in sort of metaphorically about our technological potential? I I don't know I don't I don't know how to I don't know how to discern the meaning of that. >> demonized guy online. >> a lot of dark stuff and uh, I think so um, you you probably read the book book. Did you interview the author of of you know, the Sapiens? Did you read the author of uh, Dark Eon? No. No, I've never read that book. >> So that's so that's talking This is talking more about kind of the Silicon Valley culture that's pushing transhumanism and how how um, integrally it's become uh, involved in this space. I mean, what I I don't have I don't pal around with Elon. And not to say he is or or whomever you want to talk about in that space. That's those I mean, that's not my pay grade. Mhm. Uh, but my understanding and and I read these things. Maybe they're also maybe that's also also propaganda. That a lot of these people um, of let's say the Bill Gates cast and the younger ones associated with that uh, would are are advocates for a world in which they are able to upload their um, avatar consciousness in a digital space and live forever. That's Ray Kurzweil, right? That's I sounds like you know more you're the you're the uh um uh UAP uh guy here which by the way is another fascinating domain that I'm learning more about more about. >> It's bizarre. Um that's a rabbit hole you go down like oh this isn't 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 involved. It seems like there's some inventions that sort of emerged out of nowhere that supposedly are connected to back engineering programs. >> so I'm I'm now uh I'm now of of the belief that there exists a capability that transcends uh uh physics as we know it. Let's say Einsteinian 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 nutcase I guess and and a conspiracy theorist I've had them on my farm. Uh you know staying in our in our guest house and and um 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 of the there's a lot of different models for what the hell's 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 What do they call it? Tic Tacs 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 and uh transportation and matter uh and the ability to cross between matter states that is repeatedly observed uh and 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 the >> Transmedium devices that can fly and then go underwater as fast as they're flying. >> and and >> No ripples. >> Yeah. Um So, I 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 in you crossing over into the the economics Bitcoin or kind of space. Uh there's this logic that it all comes down to energy. Uh energy is is the one uh thing that uh fuels economic development and and everything around us. And uh there 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 really transformational. And if it matures, I remember Trump is invested in this in big way. Uh, that 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 nukes 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. Yeah, and it and it doesn't have to be dark and demonic. Hopefully not. >> If we let these bastards 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. Mhm. Uh but But there are plans to do something along >> going to 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 uh The pregnancy robot is not real? Yeah, there it was an uh they named a scientist that was working on it. Not real. It's not a real person. Look at that. That's all right. >> Yeah, but but the company working Nonetheless, nonetheless They are working on artificial >> they will our I Just saying. I we're we're going to come out so so see if you can find the since you're so good at Googling [snorts] or whatever you're doing. Um 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 the people thing is >> The factory thing with people. >> Oh, well that was obviously AI. I mean that was not that wasn't AI. It wasn't even a real company that was doing it. It was it's synthetic images. I don't want to give out fake news. Yeah, good. Well, God forbid 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. wasn't >> then. Yeah, it the world was. >> the I think your message was a lot more hostile in it's the way it was received. You know, like you were received in a hostile way. I don't think this one's going to 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 are 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. Uh that's kind. Um let's say to the community. Yeah. Uh and and of which I'm 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 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 give to share their voice through me. And I thank you for that. It was It was a moment in time and I think we did good. Uh but by God they came at us. It was wild. >> [laughter] >> Well, thank you, sir. Thank you very much. I really appreciate you being here. It was a lot of fun. All right. Bye, everybody. >> [music]