McCairnDojo.comPast episodes & related streams

Hello, this is Robert. Hey Robert, I think we're still waiting on Lara to join us. We want to just wait a couple more minutes. I think she's about to jump on. Okay, so in any case, I've done what I needed to do and it's working. Perfect. Okay, I just sent you an invite to be a co-host. So I don't know if the alert popped up or not. I've accepted that. Okay, perfect. I've added Erin as a speaker as well. Okay, I'm going to shoot Lara a text real quick and make sure that she's on so we can get going. One second. Robert and Lindsay, this is Erin. I'm on. Hi Erin. So glad you're joining us. Thanks. Hi Erin. Robert. Hope you're doing well. I'm doing well. Thank you. Likewise. I hope you've been well. Yeah, a bit jet-lagged. I can understand why, for sure. Jill, can you bring me that coffee? I'm sure.

Hey, thank you. It's nice to see everybody. This is Warner Mendenhall, one of Brooke Jackson's attorneys. Hey, Warner. This is Robert. Hey, Robert. Nice to hear from you. Warner, it's Aaron Kheriaty. Great to have you. Hey, Aaron. How are you? I'm doing well. Thank you. Following your case very closely. It's so important. This is yours. Thanks. Goodness. Yeah, we've heard from a number of people at University of California. We've heard from a number of people. Oh, really? I would, I would be interested offline to. Hear more about that. Yeah, there is a couple of groups, you know, Chris Ray. You know, I'm, I'm working on his case. And we do have that file, by the way, you know that, right? No, I hadn't heard that. Yeah, it's, it's an Alameda County. And, and a number of professors have reached out to us. So I would love to link everybody together. Yeah, let's do that. Let's let's have a conversation about the university. Yeah. Can you, can you let us know the status of your case, Aaron?

So we just got a ruling from the ninth circuit. And basically they have held, unfortunately, the district courts ruling. That. Under a rational basis review. They. They don't actually have to examine the empirical evidence. On natural immunity. As you know. Yeah. It's really impossible to. Get a hearing and actually do the evidential fact finding, unless you get an intermediate. Or strict level of scrutiny. So the court disagreed with our argument that a constitutional right. Was at stake. And, you know, we made the argument based on. Equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. And the court, of course, cited Jacobson. They, they made the strange claim, which I can't wrap my head around. That the Jacobson precedent imposed, an even harsher sort of penalty. For the 1905 smallpox vaccine mandate in the city of Boston. And my reading of that history is that that's incorrect. It was actually merely a $5 fine, which even if you would adjust for today's massive inflation is still only around $160. Which is, you know, a far cry from losing one's job and losing one's employment. So. I think one of the problems is the court has never articulated a limit to the Jacobson precedent. And we know that Jacobson has been misapplied. For example, in Buck v. Bell in 1927, infamous case upholding state eugenics sterilization laws. And. That's a case that. Has actually never officially been overturned by the Supreme court. Strangely enough, it has never been overturned or repudiated by the court. Because the laws that it upheld have been legislatively reversed. But Buck v. Bell itself has never been overturned or repudiated by the court. Right. And so. So unless we can establish. Some claim. That there is. Some constitutional right in principle, then it will be the right thing to do. You know, we're at the point where you can't really argue the science because basically all the institution in this case, all the university had to show was that they had a plausible public health rationale for implementing the policy. They don't have to show. That the policy was narrowly tailored. They don't have to show. That it achieved its intended public health purpose. They don't have to show that the benefits outweighed. or doing it that at least at the time was plausible. And so, you know, with that standard of judicial scrutiny, it's really hard to know how to proceed with vaccine mandate cases.

The cases that have prevailed seem to mostly be cases of either, you know, this particular entity not having the authority to institute a mandate or doing it in a way that's obviously sort of arbitrary, you know, a mandate only for people with red hair and not people with brown hair, you know, something absurd like that. Or the claim that my religious exemption was arbitrarily denied. And with the religious exemption cases, those have tended to go well because there is clearly a constitutional right at stake. There's a clear First Amendment right, so they have to give those cases a stricter level of scrutiny, which allows you to get into the details about, you know, about the exemption submitted or the policy itself. So at this point, I don't know if we're going to appeal again because I don't know that the Supreme Court is in the mood to actually look at the science. It seems like the cases they've decided so far, they've steered away from actually digging in to the empirical evidence and just, you know, focus on procedural issues. And-

Erin, oh, I'm sorry. Don't mean to interrupt you. I don't know how much time Senator Johnson has, but he just joined and- Let's dive in. I'm sorry, that was a very long-winded answer. No, no, no, not at all. I have a question on my case. I just, Lara's trying to join. She's having some technical issues with her mic, so. Senator Johnson, can you unmute and say hello to everyone? Yes, I unmuted. Hello, everyone. This is the first time I've ever used this, so not quite sure how this goes. So I'll sit back and listen until I'm addressed. That works. Steve, you're also on. Steve, do you want to say hello real quick? Sure, hi. This is Steve Kirsch, and I'm here and listening and happy to chime in as appropriate. And we have Jan here from the Epoch Times. Jan, you want to say hi? Hey, there. Is this all working? I hope so. Nice to be here. You're still muted. OK, it looks like Lara is joining us. I'm going to get her set up as a co-host real quick. OK.

Still muted now.

Jan, I heard your comments before. This is Robert. So I think you were unmuted. At least that's what my display shows. We're still having technical issues with Lara. I don't know if Jan can hear or not. We also have EcoHealth Alliance whistleblower Dr. Andrew Huff set up as a speaker as well if you want to say hi. Hello, good evening, everyone. OK, I am going to give Lara a call. Aaron, if you want to finish what you were saying, I didn't mean to interrupt you. I just wanted to do a quick intro of everybody before. Yeah, no, I'm pretty much done.

That's the summary of my legal case against the university, although I'm involved in two other legal cases that may be interesting as part of tonight's conversation. One is challenging Assembly Bill 2098 in California. It's five of us physicians based in California. Challenging what is essentially a gag order on physicians, empowering the medical board to discipline any physician who contradicts the quote unquote current scientific consensus on COVID, which is never clearly defined in the law. One of the issues with the law is that that definition is not clearly defined and is impossible to know whether you're abiding by the law or not. But the law itself will have a chilling effect as a consequence of that. And we're arguing also that it's a clear First Amendment free speech violation. And the other case that I'm involved in is the Missouri v. Biden case, which was filed by the attorney generals of Missouri and Louisiana against several senior members of the Biden administration, many of whom served under the Trump administration as well, alleging that the government has been colluding with social media companies like Twitter to suppress free speech of Americans. Arguably, Twitter can deplatform people as a private company. But inarguably, the government cannot do that. The government cannot lean on or suborn other companies to do its bidding when it comes to censorship.

And given the recent Twitter files drop, I think number seven and number eight came out today and a couple of days ago, we're getting a lot of corroborating evidence. And we've gotten a lot of evidence on discovery in our case that not only is this censorship happening, but the censorship regime is quite vast and has been operating for several years. And if what we're alleging turns out to be true, this will be probably the most consequential free speech case. It sounds exaggerated to say this, but it may turn out to be the most consequential free speech case in American history because just the sheer number of violations of constitutional rights will surpass anything that we've seen before, given just the vast reach of social media and the scope of the censorship regime that's been operating for the last few years.

Yeah, we have a state actor doctrine case at the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals against the Smucker's Company. So that's going to get argued the end of January. And then back to Chris Rake's case, we did not allege religious discrimination there. Even though Chris is religious, he felt that he had protection under the whistleblower statutes in California and his bodily autonomy. And the whistleblower statute is just that he's warning everybody that this is a bad deal. Don't take this shot. And he was able to examine that with his qualifications as an MD and came to a conclusion that it was a danger that needed to be reported and needed to be resisted. So we have a number. I think we have seven causes of action in his complaint, but those are a couple of those.

I have a general question. So if the president signs the spending bill into law and repeals the vaccine mandate by law for the military, is that something that we can point to in other cases against the government to repeal mandates from other agencies or from the executive branch? I personally don't think that's something that's going to help my cases. The issue with us is that we wanted to bypass the normal administrative processes and say that these companies that are doing this, these violations of rights, are acting in the shoes of the federal government because of bribery, coercion, and other things. So we're going directly at that issue. But I don't think that the fact that this changed. I mean, I think there's an environment that we all exist in. So that certainly helps the environment, along with all the injuries and deaths that we're seeing, as judges begin to know people that have been injured as well. I think that's just happening in all of our personal lives right now. So the environment is important. In that context, the longer this goes, I think the better shot we have.

But our argument itself is focused on what's called state actor doctrine, meaning the United States is acting through all these entities. And these entities no longer act in any way independently. So we can sue as if we're suing the federal government directly. The court of public opinion does matter in court cases. Judges are more swayed by that than they or we would often like to acknowledge. But directly, in terms of citing precedent, what matters is case law precedent. And when you're arguing in court, you're saying that this law was either unlawfully passed because of the procedural issue. Or there's a higher law, namely the Constitution, that this law contradicts. And so it can be struck down under some provision, for example, in the Bill of Rights. So if the legislature makes a change, that's good. That's definitely a positive development. It's a sign that the climate around vaccine mandates is changing. And the political will to force these vaccines on the military has declined sufficiently that they don't want to try it any longer. They don't want to fight it any longer. So I think indirectly, it's a very positive sign. But directly, in terms of setting a precedent that could influence other cases in federal court, it's not directly going to help that cause. So Robert, we've been talking about legal issues. But I'm not sure that that is necessarily on the agenda for tonight's conversation. So I don't know what direction you and Lara would like to take things. But maybe you can introduce things a little bit. And we can open up the topic that was on the agenda.

And I'm unclear what that topic was. I was under the impression that Lara, who I think just joined us, I noticed her icon. And it doesn't seem to have a microphone disabled on it. Lara, are you there? It looks like she's marked as a listener. So Lindsay, is there a way to designate her as a speaker? Right, so I've sent her a few requests. And so she just got a new phone, as I found out. And there's some technical issue. So I sent her another invite again to be co-host. So, Lara, if you can hear this, if you can check your DMs, it's going to be in your DMs to accept that. And so I don't have an agenda here.

I was inferring that Lara is going to drive the bus. Certainly the legal side is fascinating. I've learned more than I knew in the last 10 minutes about the current status of things. Erin, have you had a chance to look at Twitter drop 8, which I infer came today? What's the scope of that? Yeah, so I took a quick look at Twitter drop 8. And basically, this is a drop from Lee Fang, who's a journalist at The Intercept. And he's a guy I actually had a conversation with a week or two ago on an article that he's working on. I don't think that piece came out. But in that context, I did talk with him about our Missouri v Biden case, where we allege government collusion with social media companies to suppress free speech. And Twitter drop 8, what was indirectly about that, basically what it detailed was the fact that the Department of Defense was engaged, starting around 2017, going back at least that far, in psyops, in military and intelligence grade propaganda, basically standing up what looked like very convincing pseudo accounts, or bots, or some of these pseudo accounts, I think, were manned by people, but were claiming insider information about military intelligence in some of our foreign wars. And if there were drone strikes, these accounts would claim things like there were no, they were very laser targeted, there were no casualties of civilians, and so forth. So basically running propaganda for our military.

And the revelation that Twitter drops was not that this was happening, which the military, it's not surprising that DoD was engaged in this, but that at a certain point, Twitter gave up on trying to stop it and became more and more cooperative. And Twitter Drop 7 had a similar sort of narrative in terms of cultivating some top Twitter executives, and including this guy, Joel Roth, who's received quite a bit of attention in these Twitter drops, that initially Twitter mounted some resistance to the government trying to kind of suborn it for its own purposes. But gradually, over time, many of these executives were cultivated in the same way that the intelligence community would cultivate an asset that they were going to use. You give them access to special classified information. You make them feel like they're part of a more and more elite sort of set of people that have access to specific sort of information, and that their mission is very important, and the well-being of Americans depends on it, and so forth. And gradually, over time, with Twitter Drop 7, Schellenberger laid out a pretty clear narrative of kind of the ways in which the social media companies and specific executives were more or less kind of brought into the intelligence community fold, and then instrumentalized and utilized as assets.

In the case of Twitter Drop 7, it was about censorship. And in the case of Twitter Drop 8, it was about sort of the government being able to expand the narrative reach of its propaganda through Twitter by basically wearing down Twitter's defenses against bots and fake accounts and sort of backdoor operators that weren't being honest and upright, or that were misrepresenting themselves. And so I think the pattern that's emerged from the last two Twitter Drops especially is that this and probably the other social media companies operating in more or less the same way and engaging in more or less the same way have been gradually, over time, more and more doing the bidding of government agencies and, quote unquote, deep state operators, not just Health and Human Services, but more importantly, Department of Homeland Security, FBI, CIA, so on and so forth. So the biosecurity model of governance that we saw during the pandemic, but also being deployed in terms of election issues, being deployed apparently in terms of foreign war issues all the way back to 2017. So you keep going down the rabbit hole, the story keeps getting more and more interesting.

But I think tonight we want to focus on probably COVID issues and maybe start with vaccine issues. So maybe while they're sorting out Lara's issue, I can play journalist to you and just put some questions to you about new developments, new information on maybe we'll start with vaccines because there's a continued push for boosters, for the bivalent booster. At the same time, we're seeing some cracks in the narrative edifice with doctors coming out publicly. There was one recently, a day or two ago, I think, in Australia. Of course, Dr. Malholtra in the UK and others in the UK that he's been pointing to coming out and speaking out against vaccine related harms and vaccine related risks. So what's your read of the current landscape in terms of the narrative being pushed by our public health agencies about vaccines versus what some other independent voices and other physicians and scientists are starting to say regarding the mass vaccination campaign?

Well, most notably, we've seen even in retirement, Mr. Fauci continues to assert that these products are both safe and effective in the face of a growing volume of data indicating that to the extent that there is any benefit from the, quote, booster, the bivalent product, from getting an echo. I think Lara's on now, but Lara, maybe you can just join. Until you're time to talk, that would be great. Yeah, we may have to do that. So we have a situation in which, to the extent that there's any demonstrable benefit associated with the bivalent, quote, booster, it seems to be short term. And if you draw a line through the data in general from all over the world, it seems to intersect zero benefit at about two months after administration in the multiply inoculated population, after which you see negative efficacy, which for the uninitiated is to say that your risks of becoming infected or dying are greater if you have been multiply inoculated and then receive the booster, starting in about two months post administration, which underscores the logic of why there are advocates for boosting every two months. So in that scenario, we would receive six jabs per year, is the empiric data that you move to negative efficacy or effectiveness at about two months after inoculation.

And then I think there was a new data set today, suggesting fairly clearly that the outcome associated with the language that's used is natural immunity, that being what is derived from infection of the not previously vaccinated and recovery. The immune response, the broad-based immune response associated with that is now increasingly acknowledged as being superior both in duration and breadth to that associated with the monovalent and now the bivalent inoculations. So I think we're seeing those data from all over the world. And then we're seeing the data that is coming out of the insurance actuaries and the work of Ed Doud, Theo Schuders in the Netherlands and others indicating this increasingly tight correlation between vaccination waves in those regions or countries that employ a wave vaccination strategy and excess all-cause mortality. So rather than the vague association of increased excess all-cause mortality after the availability of the vaccines not seen prior to availability of vaccines when, for instance, we were all subjected to the pressure of Wuhan 1, now we're seeing more and more data that allows us to correlate in time vaccine waves with following excess all-cause mortality, which is kind of akin to a clinical re-challenge study in that you see these dose-response relationships. So have I answered your question, Eric? Yeah, no, that's helpful.

And maybe just to clarify that last point, so to definitively establish causation, the best way is a double-blind randomized trial where people are selected in a random fashion to be either in a vaccine arm or a booster arm in this case versus a placebo arm. That's never going to happen again with these vaccines now that they have been authorized. So whatever data we have in terms of randomized controlled trial is what we got from the original trials that were submitted to the FDA. Short of that, it's not impossible to establish causation. It's just a little more difficult. But of course, we've established causation for all kinds of things in public health where there was never randomized controlled trials. So the association between cigarette smoking and lung cancer is a great example of that, that through somewhat more sophisticated techniques of statistical analysis and time-based temporal association based analysis, you can get increasingly closer to establishing definitive causation over time, which no one doubts now that there's a causal role between cigarettes and lung cancer. So that's all feasible. I think critical to this discussion is upon whom the burden of proof lays. Exactly. Because here we have a situation where there is a growing body of evidence that, at a minimum, one has to conclude there is evidence supporting a correlation between administration and significant adverse events such as death or hospitalization. And very little evidence of medical benefit or effectiveness in terms of prevention of infection, replication, spread, and increasingly disease associated with administration of these products. So on one hand, we have the beneficence problem that you, I'm sure, can speak to more clearly than I that we do have evidence supporting significant risk, medical risk. And on the other hand, we have an increasingly weak case that there's any evidence of significant benefit. Do you concur?

It's actually, as Steve, I'm chiming in here, it's actually worse than that. I agree with your point, Robert, about the burden of proof. I just did a survey of a few thousand people, a little over 2,000 people who are followers of mine. But I didn't ask them about their own situation. I just asked them, do you know anyone who died? And if you do, in 2021 or 2022, do you know anyone who died? And if so, can you tell me about them? Can you tell me their age, whether they were vaccinated, and the date that they died? And just using that very objective data in 2,000 people, we were able to show through pretty sophisticated statistical analysis that there's not a possibility that the vaccines are beneficial from an efficacy or immortality point of view. In other words, it's either zero to negative. So we actually now have that data. And the beauty of the approach that I used is that anyone can verify it. So any health authority, I mean, it took me 24 hours to run the study just because I waited for 2,000 responses to come. But any health authority can run this and do the analysis and see that there's no benefit. So it can be replicated by anyone. You don't have to rely on any government statistics. You don't have to rely on surveying any hospitals or what have you. You're basically collecting data that can be verified. And it shows very conclusively that there is no benefit.

And so if there is no benefit, then the burden is on the authorities to show us how we got it wrong and where this benefit is, because it's not showing up in the numbers. And then I did another survey of health care providers because there are a small number of health care providers or people that work in health care organizations that keep track of the number of people that are vaccinated and the number of deaths. And the numbers vary quite extensively. But in the military, the numbers are large. And it's 5% to 10% of these young servicemen who are extremely fit, 5% to 10% of them are being disabled by the vaccine. So we're essentially robbing ourselves of 5% to 10% of our force. This is about force readiness. And things the wrong way. And that data is pretty compelling. And then the final thing is that from a death point of view, we're seeing numbers that range from people can see no deaths at all. And some people are seeing on the order of four deaths per 1,000 vaccinated. So that is extremely significant because that's, in fact, and some people are seeing more than that. But four deaths per 1,000 is essentially a million people killed by this vaccine. This thing should be halted. It shouldn't be used by anyone. And I actually was talking to Aseem Malhotra this morning about it and totally agrees. There's no reason for this, especially when we have early treatments. So that seems like a good moment for me to jump in here, if you can hear me. Can everybody hear me? This is Lara. Yeah, I can hear you, Lara. Great to have you. OK, so I apologize for the technical difficulties on this side. But I have been listening to you. And I want to welcome everybody. I know it's a little bit bladed. We've already into the conversation.

But since we are at this point, why don't we just jump in head first onto the Twitter files and address what it is that we learned. I mean, I know that Senator Johnson is on here. And why don't we put you in the hot seat, Senator? For those of us who have been following these releases, it's pretty devastating. And unfortunately, of course, typically and unexpectedly being ignored by much of the mainstream media. But yet, what it lays out for us, I mean, the most striking observation so far, is that there is no longer any separation between big tech and big government, and our intelligence agencies, our law enforcement agencies have been working with social media to violate the First Amendment and to deny us our rights and to target innocent American citizens and criminalize the First Amendment. Is that your assessment? Would you agree with that, Senator? Yeah, since really what I've been trying to warn Americans about for the last four years plus, I started my investigations into corruption within government, really with the Hillary Clinton email scandal. That same cast of characters in the FBI that exonerated her transferred over to Crossfire Hurricane. That was the corrupt investigation into the Russian folks. Yeah, and General Michael Flynn. And it just continued on. And so I think the biggest impediment we have across the board is the public's unwillingness to accept the truth. They don't want to really believe that the government could be this pervasively and thoroughly corrupt. You also have the problem with just basic human nature never wanting to admit you're wrong. And this is really almost universal. So as I always call it, the COVID cartel, the Biden administration, the federal health agencies, big pharma, mainstream media, and the big tech social media giants, that's the COVID cartel. But you basically have the deep state across the board. We've seen the corruption of our federal law enforcement, the FBI. You saw in the Twitter files, you're seeing exactly how they suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story. But not only when it was revealed, they were planning on it for over a year. And they were playing center-grassing myself, you know, unsolicited breathing. So again, I'm not going to get into the detail there, other than to say that this corruption in the deep state is pervasive. But our problem in terms of the vaccine, I mean, I've listened to talking about data, talking about what, to those of us whose eyes are open, it's just obvious. I mean, this has been obvious to me before the vaccines ever were approved, just reading Gert van den Bosch's Letter to Who, listening to Michael Yeadon, then the groups of doctors that I've been fortunate enough to be engaged in, people like Dr. Malone. But the whole cast of characters testified before my committees. This is obvious to us. And it just frustrates all of us that we simply can't get other people to open up their eyes. The latest example was today. I've got one of my staff members. Mother has been suffering massive migraine headaches, all kinds of neurological issues. She's talking to her neurologist, who admits to her, yeah, I've just seen an explosion of cases of this over the last year or two. And her mother said, well, sorry, are you attributing this to the vaccine? And his reaction was, absolutely not.

I mean, that's a classic. That is what we're up against. No matter what the evidence, no matter what the data, obviously, the covert cartel, they can't afford to be proven wrong. They have the power to make it impossible to prove them wrong. And you just have across the board, nobody wanted to admit that they were wrong to get the shot. I mean, people don't want to hear this. They don't want to hear the dangers of all the things that those of us who are awakened that are listening to Stephanie Seneff's and Ryan Cole. And nobody wants to understand they have a ticking time bomb in their body. So right now, I hate to call it a public relations problem, but that's what we have on our hands. We just, nobody wants to face the truth. Nobody wants to face the facts, including in Congress. I'm talking to senators who literally have acknowledged they believe they're vaccine-injured, but they're not stepping up the plate. Well, I mean, people have vaccinated their children. They've had their elderly parents be vaccinated, right? I mean, there are many people who didn't get vaccinated, who are looking at facing the reality that their entire families have been vaccinated and they could be the only ones left, right? And so this is a, it is a difficult thing for anybody to face, especially if it's based on the fact that you were lied to, right? And if you admit to this one lie, then you have to admit to all the other lies, right? Because if they lied to us about this, well then, and these people are right. But wait a minute, I thought these people were crazy because what we've seen here, if we go back to some of the beginning of this, right? It's not the very beginning, obviously, for people listening, but part of the origins of this are the term conspiracy theory. And I think it's very apt that we have, you know, Robert Kennedy Jr. has done so much work since the pandemic began in opening people's eyes and in terms of being honest and taking it on the chin, his phenomenal book, book taught us a lot and about Dr. Fauci, even though it's just scratching the surface, but really what the Twitter files show us is that it's not since Kennedy have we had a president that hasn't been run and controlled by the CIA, right? I mean, isn't that what we're looking at here with the Twitter files? I mean, do you wanna tackle that Senator or you wanna pause the both?

Well, no, I think that's exactly what we're looking at. It's certainly what I've experienced. Again, I was chairman of the Senate Oversight Committee. I subpoenaed the FBI for records that the president of the United States wanted released. We could not get those records released. These, again, the deep staters view every president as this too shall pass and they are the permanent government. They are the permanent, they are above the law. I mean, I just had Christopher Ray before our committee a couple of weeks ago and I asked him because two and a half years after that briefing in August of 2020, that Senator Grassley and I did not ask for, that was later leaked to the press to smear me and impact the 2022 election in Wisconsin. I still do not know who direct that briefing. We've requested that three times in public letters. And they just ignore you. No, and Christopher Ray goes, well, you know, Senator, I'm sure you can understand. You know, we've got investigations in place, which is exactly what they always use to remain above the law. So these people are the law. They are above the law and they could care less about elections. We couldn't care less. They can care less about the public. They are the power and they guard it jealously. Well, and what you see, you see that in the Twitter files because, you know, they're not scared to be brazen about what they're doing. I mean, they open up Slack channels to communicate. They're training, they've got staff inside there that are working with them blatantly. They're not hiding it inside Twitter. This wasn't a shock to people working inside Twitter. This is, you know, it's not that any different really from Perkins Coy, the Clinton campaign's attorneys, the Hillary Clinton's lawyer, from the FBI having someone in their office. I mean, if it doesn't shock the conscience that the FBI set up an office inside the law firm of a political candidate during, you know, one of the biggest political scandals in the history of this country, if they can get away with that, what is it, you know, what do they care that people know that they're operating inside of Twitter? And just real quick, you know, I started reading Paul Alexander's book and just very early on, I think in the prologue, he's talking about how Fauci, you know, in reaction to his challenging Fauci inside the administration, not publicly, but behind the closed doors, was out to destroy him. And they did destroy him. That is the power these people have and they wield that power and they do it with impunity. They do it with impunity. And they have made sort of an art form out of going after the messenger and ignoring the substance of the message, right? And that's what we're dealing with here. Yeah, Lara and Senator, I think you're both absolutely correct. I just wanna chime in with two points.

Lara, what you said earlier, just the fact that it's become so normalized. We've seen that on the documents that we received on discovery in our Missouri v. Biden case, which is all about federal government polluting the social media to suppress free speech and violate first amendment free speech rights of Americans. And basically what we found is that the scope of what's happening is much deeper, much broader and more pervasive than even we suspected. So at least 17 federal agencies now implicated, not just within Department of Health and Human Services, but also within the Department of Homeland Security. And the Department of Defense as well. Absolutely, the Department of Defense. So to circle back on kind of the COVID related issues, we now know based on some research from people at the Brownstone Institute, that if you look at the org chart in terms of who was really responsible for our COVID response, you would assume that it would be our public health agencies, which would be HHS where we have the FDA, the CDC and the NIH. No, in fact, the Department of Health and Human Services was subordinate to the Department of Homeland Security, which houses of course, the intelligence agencies and the FBI and so on and so forth. So the kind of biosecurity model of surveillance and control, which I describe in the new abnormal, and which I argue kind of drove our pandemic response, we got confirmation of that from the research at Brownstone showing that at the top of the org chart was actually Department of Homeland Security. That's further being confirmed by what we're seeing in Twitter files, especially drop number seven and drop number eight that we just got today and yesterday. And then the recent kind of hints and leaks about the Kennedy assassination that show the theorists were right about the involvement of the CIA all along. It just makes me a little bit worried, first of all, that Americans have just gotten so used to this idea of the deep state and these defense and intelligence agencies kind of running the show behind the scenes and using their special ops, not only against foreign threats, but against the American people themselves that unless we have the political will to dismantle this infrastructure, it's not gonna happen even when we do have the political will.

If they can take out top level scientists and doctors and even, God forbid, the president of the United States, we've got a serious problem of Leviathan on our hands that has not been under democratic control for quite some time. And that helps to account for the disastrous results of our COVID policies that if you're scratching your head wondering why policies that obviously haven't worked and have done enormous collateral damage, why we're still doubling down on them, the answer to that question makes a lot more sense when you realize that maybe this wasn't a public health operation in the first place. Maybe it was a bio warfare preparation or dry run operation or something done for other purposes that haven't been made entirely clear at this point. Well, what's frustrating for everybody, especially people who will be listening to this with an open heart and an open mind and sincerely trying to understand something here and look for a path forward, the frustration is we don't know what they know. And it's, Senator, I mean, I'm sure you come up with this against this all the time, but it's like we judge things based on what we know at the time. And so we give somebody a pass because we don't know any better. But actually when you start to peel back the layers here and that's where the Twitter files have been very helpful is you start to see what they did know and what they were doing at the time.

And there's some very basic questions here, beginning with why was the Department of Defense so heavily involved in every single aspect of this? And why were they so active in suppressing and censoring? I mean, we've seen the FBI criminalize in the Department of Justice, criminalize the First Amendment, and they're going to continue to do so as long as they get away with it. And when I go up to Congress, I speak to members on the Hill, they say, you know what, when we take a stand and we get attacked, the public doesn't stand with us. Then you talk to people in the public and they say, well, there's no advantage yet to standing up because I'm gonna get savaged, I'm gonna lose everything and nobody's gonna stand by me. And so they have this vicious circle that benefits them extraordinarily, but at the heart of it, now we have something, it's not everything, but now we have the beginning of some understanding of the depth of the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security and our intelligence agencies led by the CIA and the depth to which they have their hands on all of this. And as you said, Senator Johnson, just a small point for people who may not know.

I mean, when we talk about the deep state bureaucracy, this is actually a physical thing. This is not just something made up, this is the SES, right? The Senior Executive Service, which is a whole category of bureaucrats who are exempt from the rules, the normal rules, who are part, I mean, Obama added, I think, 12,000 people to the ranks of the SES. This is actually something that people can look up. It's part of our government. It's not just a term that people made up in order to try and understand what was going on. It's based on this bureaucratic structure that is absolutely entrenched and immovable.

And if Congress isn't powerful enough, if elections don't mean anything, if all of our intelligence agencies and our law enforcement, our separate branches of government are bought into this, then what is the incentive for people to accept a reality that tells them they've got a death sentence on their heads and maybe they did the same thing to their children? So for a couple of points, first, one thing I've learned doing investigations is they're very difficult to do. The perp traders are crying, particularly smart perp traders, and these people are smart. They don't leave a whole lot of evidence. So they know what the whole puzzle looks like. We just have small little pieces. So that's the first thing everybody has to understand, okay? Second, I'm not as disturbed about DHS and the Department of Defense's involvement here because they're the ones that actually, in the case of a true national emergency, I don't think COVID was one, but it was blown up to be one, okay? But in a true national emergency, it's those departments that actually can do things. I mean, the Department of Defense had the freezers to move the vaccine. So there's logical sense to using them. There's nothing necessarily nefarious about their involvement, okay? So I'm worried less about that than I am the pervasiveness of how effective the deep state was. You mentioned trying to destroy Paul Alexander. Well, look what they did to the writers of the Great Barrington Declaration. Look at all the power that Fauci has accumulated over the decades with all those federal government grants. Look at how he- And the money, right? I mean, that's- And look at how he corrupted medical research, all these medical institutions, medical journals. Look at how they're destroying people like Dr. McCulloch. But he didn't do it alone. And he's not the mastermind, right? He's being directed. He's just a useful idiot.

Well, again, it's the pervasiveness that concerns me the most. So Senator, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but this is what I think will be frustrating for people just listening to you is you're not wrong in terms of the capabilities of our traditional military, our defense forces and so on, right? We know what they're supposed to do and what they were built to do and how they should and can protect the American people in an emergency. What worries us now about their involvement that's been revealed is not that. It's the fact that they knew from the beginning that this was a lie. They knew from the beginning that this was a bioweapon and they didn't stand up to anyone. They didn't stand up to the Fauci's in this. They didn't stand up to the CDC. I mean, let's face it. We know, I knew from day one because I know what the intelligence agencies do. They monitor every single thing that the Chinese do. So the moment they started constructing that lab in Wuhan, we were all over it. The NSA is the jewel of intelligence collection worldwide. You can speak to anyone like Bill Binney, an NSA stalwart who they've tried to discredit as well. Unfairly, that man is a truly heroic figure and they can tell you that there isn't a digital signature on the planet that the NSA doesn't collect and have the ability to store and analyze and utilize. And yet we're supposed to believe that they had no idea how this virus got there and we know that's a lie. We know this was developed as a bioweapon and we know that the United States had their hand in that. Well, yeah, so again, what evidence we have is the Fauci was obviously covering up his agency's involvement in the funding of what probably produced the coronavirus. I mean, you know, that's pretty obvious. Well, that's not exactly the true center. Let me hop in here. So with this one testimony that I sent to your office and I've actually done in a deposition, the funding for this gain of function research actually began under USAID PREDICT, not with Dr. Anthony Fauci. If you actually look at the understanding that the risk of back-coronavirus submergence proposal, they specify that in their own words that this actually began one to two years before Dr. Anthony Fauci was involved. And what is USAID? USAID is a front for the agency. That's what they are. I mean, you want to find the spies that aren't in the agency, they're in USAID. That's one of the primary locations. That's just more evidence that the CIA had their hands on this. And that's absolutely correct. I mean, if you go back and look at USAID history, there's 70 years of failed CIA operations that have went down under the guise of USAID.

Pretending to be humanitarian aid, taking out tax dollars and using it to slit our throats.

So again, I'm not, and I understand that just got done reading the book Viral by Matt Ridley. So I understand all that, okay? What I'm saying is, and this is what I try to do a couple of weeks ago when we had our event on the vaccines is I'm trying to get people back to some fundamental, building blocks of knowledge that the public needs to know to win that public relations wars, to open up people's eyes. And if we get too far down the weeds of what clues are available, who funded what, what agency, again, it's the pervasiveness of the lies is the effectiveness of them, as opposed to the, okay, this was the funding agency. I'm less concerned about that. I'm concerned about it, but less concerned about that than right now, how do we get more people admitting what happened here? Because we have to, we have to prevent further harm. Because Senator Johnson, the way you do it, the way it has to be done is with the whole truth. That's the problem, I mean, you're not wrong. And I sympathize, I understand, you know, and the instinct to stop more people dying is a valid one and a noble one, and an absolutely necessary one. But at the end of the day, the only thing that is gonna get people to stand up and do the right thing and not take any more of this is the whole truth. And if our own deep state, you know, was responsible for inflicting this bioweapon, which was a plan with our own leaders to do this, not just to the United States, but to the rest of the world, then we need to be able to expose those agencies and the leaders, the political figures that they were working with, and the medical figures, and we have to hold them accountable. And Lara, and I completely agree with that, but I also understand how difficult it's going to be to dig that information out. So there's easier information to glom onto now to present to the public to awaken them so they're ready, so they can handle the truth, okay? Let me chime in here too.

I wanna riff on this chicken and egg problem and say that the kind of investigations, Lara, that would reveal the whole truth and manifest it to people, and also the conditions under which people would even accept that truth when it came to light require things on the part of ordinary Americans. And I wanna bring it down to the level of, you know, most of the people listening in on this conversation are probably scratching their head, wondering, okay, if this problem is so vast and pervasive in these agencies and in this system that I have very little power over, what can I do as an ordinary American? And I think the first step is to recognize, first of all, what happened to us over the last three years. So circling back to COVID pandemic policies, if you see these policies not as just a novel method for trying ineffectively to manage a respiratory virus, and you see them as a new paradigm of governance and control, then you can start making sense out of, okay, what happened to us starting with lockdowns? People were locked down, they were forced to do all of their human interactions behind a screen. They were told that they had insufficient expertise to help manage this crisis, and so they should listen to the experts, which for most people meant listening to the television.

And then you've got people getting all their information from their computer screen and interacting with their friends and neighbors only through the computer screen. Then it's easy to control the flow of information, apparently now, if you're in bed with the social media companies. And by controlling the flow of information, by isolating people, the ordinary American is easier to control. You've convinced them that they're helpless against this novel, invisible, pervasive threat, and the only way they're gonna survive is by doing what they're told. And we had the better part of three years of this. And if we're going to develop the political will to demand answers, which is the only thing that will empower, whether it's Congress or the courts, to actually investigate what happened and bring it to light, that's gonna require that the American people demand answers. And that's gonna require that the American people overcome our fear and reclaim our ability as citizens of a democratic republic to participate in our own self-governance. And I like to tell people, yeah, you may not be an expert in epidemiology. You may not be an expert in virology, but you are a rational human being in possession of common sense. You can spot a logical contradiction. You can see and observe things with your own senses. I mean, Steve Kirsch's work has been very helpful in helping just ordinary people observe once again, what's happening in my family? What's happening to my friends? What am I seeing with my own senses?

What am I observing? How can I learn how to trust my own judgment again?

And so I certainly don't have all the answers, but I do believe that nothing meaningful is going to happen until ordinary Americans overcome our fear and begin trusting our rationality and common sense again. And, you know, we look at the TV and we see Anthony Fauci or whatever talking head it is, you know, saying something that manifestly contradicts what he said, you know, a month ago, with no explanation of why he changed his mind, we can say, okay, maybe this is not a person that I need to trust. Maybe this person doesn't represent the science with a capital T and capital S. And I think we need to find ways to start moving ordinary Americans, including everyone on this call who's listening in.

So let me interrupt because that's exactly what I tried to do a couple of weeks ago. And that's why I keep talking about these building blocks of foundational information. The public has to, first of all, be informed of, and then accept before they can move on to the next step and the next step and the next step to understand the full truth. I mean, there's certain things that, you know, we all may be aware of that people are just not willing to accept yet, but when they see somebody in their family who got incredibly sick within hours of the vaccine, and they start hearing more and more cases, their minds start opening up, their eyes start opening up, and that's how you gotta get to them. But it's a linear process, it's a step by step. You can't leapfrog too many steps here. You know, maybe some unbelievable revelation might open up their eyes, but I'm just not, we're not gonna get those unbelievable revelations because, again, these people are good, they're smart, they know what they need to hide, and certainly the Chinese have hid their involvement. I mean, we're never gonna get to the smoking gun there, I doubt. You know, maybe Dr. Huff can enlighten us there, but again, it's a step by step approach.

Can I jump in on this, please?

This is Robert. Yes, Robert, go ahead. So I've been listening to all of this.

I'd like to just point a few things out.

Number one, Anthony Fauci was not head of the NIH, I'm sorry, of the NIAD. Anthony Fauci was head of the entire biodefense complex.

He basically gutted the DoD after the anthrax attacks and captured control of what had been the DoD budget for biodefense, and that's further demonstrated by the individual that has been selected to fill his position now that he's resigned, who is deeply connected to the intelligence community and has been his primary lead lieutenant for managing the whole biodefense, bio warfare complex that we have. Point number two, the American people are not the only ones that have been subjected to this. What we have observed, and I just saw more validation of that in Austria when I just returned yesterday from Vienna on Graz, the same exact policies, procedures, buy-off of influencers, et cetera, happened simultaneously around the globe in the Western nations. What we've experienced here in the United States is not unique to the United States. It has happened in a harmonized fashion globally in the NATO, EU, Western States, and Latin America.

Third point, we speak of the American people as really, if you listen to the subtext of what's being said, they have been hypnotized. They have been subjected to military-grade propaganda, psychological operations. Since before the vaccines were deployed all the way through this, they have been subjected to the most powerful propaganda and psychological operations campaign in the history of the Western world. It's no surprise that they are cowed, hypnotized, convinced that a reality is something other than what it is because they've been subjected to, I hear various budgets well north of $10 billion of US government investment in promoting a psychological warfare, PSYOPs campaign against them to convince them that reality is what we're tossing around this term, deep state, reality is what these government actors purport it to be and not anything otherwise. So it's no surprise that they have difficulty in hearing any other message. On top of all of the financial co-optation that's occurred throughout the entire biomedical complex. So I hear Senator Johnson's frustration and I share it, but at the root of this inability of the public to perceive true reality is a coordinated, massive global campaign to shape reality to be perceived as that which whoever these actors are, whoever the puppet master is, and I don't know at this point, after spending a year writing the book that I just put out, I still cannot say who is behind all this, but there's no question that this COVID crisis, this campaign wrapped in a public health event that is clearly overstated is supporting agendas far larger than that of a vaccination campaign or a public health management. You cannot square the circle. The behaviors and actions are not consistent with advancing a public health agenda. They make no sense from that context. They have to be understood in a broader sense, but there's no way that the public can perceive it as such because they are bombarded by highly sophisticated propaganda campaign. And this is my concern with, to be frank Senator, with just focusing on the nuance of early treatment or the nuances of the flaws of the vaccine technology or how it's been deployed or the corruption of the FDA, the corruption of the CDC is this is global and it is way bigger than those nuances. Those are just symptoms of something much larger. So, Dr. Lone. No, let me, let me quick respond because, you know, Dr. Lone, I don't disagree with you. You know, two years ago, three years ago, somebody would have talked about, you know, Klaus Schwab and World Economic Forum. Why don't you guys just go over and talk to those people in the corner over there? No more. So I do not disagree with you at all, but what I'm saying is in order to get to the bottom of what I'm saying is in order to get people to accept the larger truth, you need to first call it spoon feed. You've got to give them what they will accept. And that's my point is you've got to start at a more foundational level. And I appreciate that. And what I'm trying to suggest is that the bigger picture that I believe the story that needs to be told and is we're being given the ammunition to tell it is that this, whatever we want to call it, deep state administrative state has waged war against its citizens in the form of this propaganda campaign.

And that is the deeper truth is that they have employed military grade, psychological operations technology designed for offshore information combat against their own citizens for some agenda that is not yet revealed. But we can all see that we've been subjected to a massive propaganda campaign. And we can see it very clearly in the form of the Twitter files and this concurrent truth of Tucker Carlson's and Bobby Kennedy's that the CIA has been at the center of manipulating our whole reality space. That's right. That's the underlying truth is we've been living a lie since the early 1960s, a lie about the integrity of the US government. Every single president, every single CIA director since the assassination of JFK has known that this was the intelligence community that did this and they have done nothing and they have obfuscated blocked withheld the data.

And they've done more than nothing. They created the term conspiracy theory to suppress any conversation about it and to suppress the public's curiosity and to control people. And then on top of that, how many people have they gotten rid of that we don't know about, right? Because they knew too much or they looked in the wrong places and so on. And there's one important thing that I think on behalf of people listening to this, I need to say, is that in spite of this very sophisticated, well-financed effective propaganda campaign, millions of people are not deceived. So we spent a lot of time on this call talking about all the people who are still deceived. And I understand, Senator Johnson, you have your hands full, you're on the Hill, you're in the heart. I mean, goodness, in Washington, D.C. and Maryland, I think it's 80% registration for political party is Democrat. And so you're in the heart of denial where you are, right? But the rest of the country and the rest of the world doesn't live in that place. There are millions of people that see the truth and COVID more than any other single subject, because I share your frustration with Crossfire Hurricane and the whole Russia collusion lie and the Ukraine impeachment lie. I mean, there's been one after another after another.

It can really wear you down because you can see the truth is obvious if you're not blinded by ideology or under some kind of spirit of deception, as Pastor said to me this last week. But in spite of all of this, people see the truth and they do use their judgment. They do use their instincts. They do know that I may not be a virologist or a doctor, but I can tell that this doesn't add up. That one minute you're telling me, this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated and now all these people are vaccinated and they're all the ones in the hospital. So this is the unifying issue, COVID. What I'm disappointed in and what I'm surprised by and maybe Dr. Malone or one of the other doctors here wants to jump in, but I'm just surprised because I thought that when you watch people die in front of you, that when you watched the vaccine injured, I mean, for me, when I see the vaccine injured and I see young Maddie and I see what's happened to her and I see the other videos where I hear a parent crying out because their child is dead and you look at the numbers at VAERS and you look at what's happened all over the world where vaccines have been rolled back. My heart just stops as a mother and as a human. And yet, I know that, for example, I know people in PR, Trevor Fitzgibbon, he sends stuff to 60 Minutes and he's got read receipts on his emails and they know it's about the vaccine injured. That's the headline and they don't even open it. They won't even look at it. That's how far we have traveled from being a real mainstream media has traveled from being real journalists. And I say to people, but it's like going onto the battlefield in the middle of the Second World War and asking the Nazis why they didn't cover your victory on the battlefield the previous day. I mean, they're not working for the American people anymore. You know, and that's the problem is neither are these institutions. And what we're finding out in the Twitter files is that we're not crazy. We're not conspiracy theorists as the CIA wants people to believe. And I mean, you know, Senator, I know you don't have the luxury of doing this, but I stopped caring what people who don't want to face the truth, I stopped caring what they think, you know, and I don't worry about the systems and the structures that they've created because I can't control that. I can only, I mean, my job is to try to get the whole truth. And that's, you know, there's other people like Christine, my friend Christine Dolan, who is an amazing journalist, who has been digging into COVID for a long time. I mean, and she's like, she's like a honey badger. She never lets anything go. There are journalists out there. There are brave doctors out there. Some of them are on this call. There are people willing to stand up. And focusing on all the people who are not makes us lose hope. And it also distorts the reality because part of this very sophisticated propaganda campaign has been to convince us that these people are the majority. Just because they have power and because they have the microphone doesn't mean they're the majority. When you look at the defeat, the mandates marches, when you look at the anti-lockdown protests all over the world, you know that the power of the people is what they fear because the politicians, I'm sorry, they're weak and they're scared. And some of them are deceived because they're just ordinary people. And they're not gonna stand up and do anything. And they've got 3 million people bearing down their necks like on the streets of Brazil. No, Lara, I disagree. They still won't do anything.

When you look at what's happened in the EU around Brussels, look at what's happened with the farmers. Look at the Canada, New Zealand and significantly Australia are now client states of the World Economic Forum of this thousand largest companies. What we've been subjected to is a long-term, a relentless campaign to gather power and capital on the part of a tiny fraction of the population. And it has been ruthless, continuous. And in terms of my profession, clinical research, regulatory affairs, the entire biomedical complex, it has been completely compromised. All of the journals, it's profound what they've been able to accomplish. And yet even in the face of that, as you point out, we only have 11 to 14% uptake of this bivalent quote booster that is completely ineffective. We are, you're right. I completely concur that we need to emphasize the positive also. And keep in mind that it only took less than 10% of the population of the United States to overthrow the Mad King.

That's right. It is historically true that the vast majority of the population just wants to follow. They wanna be told what to do. And you only require a vanguard of 10% or less that are aware, awake, activated, in order to promote an alternative to the forces that are trying to shape us into a new, literally a new world order. They've been talking about it for a long time. And here we have it. It's being deployed very actively. And we can see the steps. We can see the central bank digital currency being test-fired. We can see the digital IDs. We can see the G20 all buying off on digital passports in order to have travel. We can see the beginnings of the deployment of individual carbon credits to restrict our travel, our purchases, and all of our activity. We can see what Justin Trudeau and his finance minister, Christopher Friedland, deployed in response to the truckers, that being complete lockout of their own bank accounts. We know this is coming at us. And I think in some, what needs to be recognized is we are experiencing a form of warfare.

The phrase that's used to describe it is fifth generation war. It's all about control of people's minds and emotions.

Twitter is one of the social media tools that have been specifically designed and empowered for this purpose. That's why I found all this fascinating, all this jabber.

Well, and if anybody wants to- Twitter is not a business. Twitter is a weapon. Okay, so let me just jump in there. For people who are not familiar with fifth generation warfare, General Michael Flynn and Boone Cutler, who was in psychological operations, PSYOPs for many, many years, have written a book called The Citizen's Guide to Fifth Generation Warfare. And it just came out, and it is very significant. It puts it in terms that I think really will help people understand if it seems like every time you turn around, you're fighting on a different front, it's because you are. Because in fifth generation warfare, they're taking over the colleges, the education of kids, the medical institutions. As you said, it's pervasive. It's the same thing across the media, whether it's Hollywood or it's the music industry or it's the publishing houses or it's the magazines or it's the news agencies. I mean, you're dealing with the same thing, and it spreads across to the PR agencies and then the corporations and the law firms. There's organizations like 65, I think they're called 65 Stories, but all they do is go off to attorneys and file ethics violations if they dare to take a case, say representing Kyle Rittenhouse or a conservative course. They've created structures and counter-structures, and yet the vast majority of people, I'm not saying this to be positive. I'm saying this because part of the deception is to make us believe that we're not in the majority, that most people don't wanna face the truth and most people don't wanna know what's happening. But as the stat that you pointed out, 11% don't wanna get the booster. It's even less when you go around the world. I mean, I'm South African. And in South Africa, people barely got the vaccine, let alone the boosters, which is why they don't have the health crisis that more vaccinated countries do. The one thing I wanna point out here real quick though is whatever we've been doing for the past six months, year, year and a half, it's working. The narrative has shifted. I think more people are coming onto our side of the battle, our side of the camp, however you wanna frame it. I actually agree with Senator Ron Johnson. There's a big education problem or a big education gap we have to get over with maybe another five to 10% of the population. We have to get those people onto our side. Otherwise, we're not gonna make any progress against this complex beast that we're up against.

But first of all, that- The historical perspective is very important here, and I just wanna offer a few thoughts there. I agree with Andrew. People are coming over to our side in terms of public mainstream narrative.

Very few people will support lockdowns anymore. Almost no one will support school closures. It's much more possible now to question safety and efficacy of vaccines than it was a year ago. So there is a shift happening in the conversation. But I think the other thing that we need to recognize, and this is not to have a naive or Pollyannish optimism. I actually think things are going to get worse before they get better. But if you take the really long view of history, any regime that is built upon lies eventually collapses under the weight of its own contradictions. That's the good news. The bad news is that with lots of tools of power at their disposal, you can prop up a regime built on lies for a very long time. So the Soviet communism is probably the prime example of that from the 20th century. Nazism collapsed much more quickly. Italian fascism collapsed much more quickly. But from whatever it was, 1917 to 1989, you had this regime that obviously destroyed countless lives and did enormous collateral damage while it was able to prop itself up even under the weight of its own contradictions. And so I think the question for us, and it's a very, very hard question, is how do we manifest those contradictions and force the regime to collapse sooner rather than later to try to minimize collateral damage? Aaron, the answer I believe quite strongly and master fifth generation warfare.

We're already doing it. We're doing it in the form, for example, of this teleconference. But we need to comprehend what it is and implement it because they are trying to shape the belief system, knowledge and emotions of the general populace using techniques in which their activities are shrouded.

That's the core of fifth gen warfare is that the leadership is not visible. The energy is low and it is designed to force, we call it narratives or belief systems or whatever, or cultures into the general population as a way to capture the battlefield, which is bad minds.

And if we understand those techniques, we are already employing many of them and we can employ them much more effectively, particularly once we have cracks like the increasing openness of Twitter.

Yes, and what we learn and what is now exposed from the Twitter files, they can't deny that they were working inside Twitter. They can't erase the emails, right? They can't erase, they may not be able to reach everybody. You may still have CBS, NBC, ABC and all them in denial, but they can't change the truth. And when people, when you look at Sri Lanka, you want to know what it is that people can do. I don't know, Senator Johnson, I feel for you in many respects because it's bricks in the Grand Canyon up there. But if the GOP isn't gonna come in on day one and impeach Biden, Harris and Merrick Garland and Christopher Wray, then they're, the signal that, and I know people say well, they don't. Mayorkas. You know, no, Mayorkas is just, I mean, he's worthless, but if you really want to go, it's gotta be the Justice Department and law enforcement because what is terrorizing the average American is what happened on January 6th, that you had a deep state operation that was plain for everyone to see. I mean, even there's videos of people that day chanting Fed, Fed, Fed, right? Because they know as this person is trying to tell them to do things that are illegal, they know they're being set up. Even in real time, they knew they were being set up. And you've got 92 or so Americans behind bars who've never been convicted of a crime, never been convicted, never had their day in court. And some of them are in solitary confinement, had been there for, you know, two years almost. And they're denied all visits to their families. We treat serial killers and foreign terrorists better than we do the prisoners of January 6th. And you don't hear senators and governors on either side of the aisle ever, you know, coming together to say, we're not gonna allow this to happen any longer. So let me quick jump in here. And then I see Jan's got his hand up. Let me make a couple of points. The reason you don't see other politicians coming forward is because those of us that have our eyes awakened are still a minority. You don't have the enormous public pressure giving elected officials the courage. So, you know, again, you know, the fifth generation warfare, those folks are winning. Okay, I guess my bit of optimism here is, I've been pointing out the fact that we have been affected because there is such a low uptake on these boosters and with children, that type of thing. And COVID has given us an opportunity for people to see the greater truth because these truths are pretty obvious. But again, it's still not a majority. It's not, you know, there's a majority of people that are at least starting to question, which is why they're not taking the vaccines. But to see the whole truth, we're still a minority. But I think Jan wants to say something here.

I just, actually, I wanna echo a bit of what Senator Johnson just said. I mean, there's, it takes multiple steps for people.

I'm a pretty, I know, conservative, not in the left, right sense, but it takes me a while, you know, as a journalist to kind of accept a whole series of facts and understand what they mean.

And maybe I was, you know, slower than some of the people here in understanding some of the realities that we're facing. It was this step-by-step process. And I think that a lot of people need to go through that step-by-step process and figure out what the puzzle pieces actually mean, whether they're, you know, the extent is as great as Lara and Robert are saying right now, or it's something else, or it's actually just, you know, an emergent property. There's a lot of ways that one can explain this. There isn't just one answer, and people need to have the ability to go into that, to have that exploration for themselves, right? So this is the thing I wanted to share. What strikes me is that, and this is a terrible reality, and I find it horrific, actually, is that I'm convinced that this, you know, based on the work of some of the people here and some actually, you know, and some of the doctors that I've interviewed over the past few years is that the scale of the harms is great. The scale of the harms is caused by these genetic vaccines is massive. And this is, I think, part of the reason why, you know, these uptakes are low, because people, basically, everybody knows someone, something's happened. You know, the v-safe data shows, you know, I think it's like seven or 8% of various hospitalization level reactions. I mean, that is an unbelievable percentage, right, for a product that's on the market, that's been deployed to billions of people, right? So, you know, it's horrific, and I feel like this is also the opportunity, in a way, because there's no way to hide it. The excess mortality is massive, it's connected with this, the mechanism of action exists, multiple mechanisms of action exists, and it's just happening. And, you know, this is the thing that we will, that people will have to notice. There's no way to hide it. There's no way, and with, there's the question, okay, so how the hell did this happen, right? And that's the point at which this bigger picture that many of you have been discussing this evening can be, I guess, revealed or discussed or understood, I think. Yeah, that's my two bits. Jan, so I think that's right. I think that the scale of the harms is both an opportunity for individuals to wake up and to start asking questions, but it's also part of the reason why it's challenging for people to accept the truth, because, you know, if you've just been going along watching CNN and sort of just passively absorbing what's been coming at you, and then you were to listen in on this conversation and this sort of explanation or thesis that's been put forth here, for most Americans, it's just too overwhelming and too terrifying to think that I can't trust our public health agencies or our government or that the level of corruption is really this deep. And as a psychological defense against that, and against the terror induced by reality, people, I think, willfully, consciously, unconsciously, whatever, just choose to decline to look. And so that's a really hard problem. I mean, I wrote a book to explain why I got fired from the university after challenging the vaccine mandate, and the subtitle of the book ended up being The Rise of the Biomedical Security State. And I realized to explain what happened during the pandemic, you have to explore these bigger questions. But, you know, an interviewer recently told me it's reading, it's like nonfiction Orwell. I said, oh, I didn't set out to write nonfiction Orwell. I just set out to tell the truth. But the truth is very difficult to swallow. And I think this is why both end approach. Senator Johnson's kind of bring people along and give them the next step of what they're able to recognize and accept, but also efforts like this, to really tell the big picture and to those who are open to listening and considering it, you hit the very high level kind of global issues. I don't think these two approaches are in contradiction.

I think they both need to occur, that this sort of step-by-step, slowly leading people up the inclined plane, and the big, powerful, shocking revelations.

And different people are going to be in different places in terms of their willingness slash psychological ability to consider both of those modes of trying to tell the truth.

Let me put a couple of questions out here. You know, there are some key players that we have not heard from for a while. Like, I mean, for example, Ralph Baric, right, from Chapel Hill University, who did this gain-of-function research for the NIH and Dr. Fauci. He's got a lot of the answers, and yet, you know, he just gets a free pass, right? Nobody's talking about him. He gets more than a free pass, he gets more funding. Yeah, he gets more funding. Well, and the same goes for Peter Daszak. I mean, all these people involved, they continue to receive more funding, and they're the key players in all this disaster and tragedy that's happened to us. And so my point there is, you know, Senator Johnson, are we going to see people like Ralph Baric and Peter Daszak, are they going to have to, you know, come before Congress and explain what they were doing and what their relationship with Wuhan was like and why they were saying things before this even happened that indicated they knew exactly where we were headed? Well, if we would be in the majority in the Senate, and I'd be chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee Investigations, absolutely. I'm trying to talk the current chairman, Senator Ossoff, into exploring these things. And by the way, he's cooperating a little bit. We're the ones working together. We got the 400 pages of Fauci's emails unredacted.

We're down to the last 50 pages. We don't get them handed to us. We have to go into a reading room 50 pages at a time. We're down to the last 50 pages. HHS will not let us see those unredacted pages. So we know where the good stuff is. You know, we're working with Jim Jordan. We're working with people in the House. You know, Rand Paul's interested in the origin story. We may get some bipartisan support for that. So, you know, I think we'll get some answers to this. But quite honestly, you know, read the book viral. I mean, the answers are hiding in plain sight in many cases. You know, I think Dr. Huff can certainly attest to that too. I mean, there are things we just may never know. I think there are things that are stored at Wuhan. But, you know, we're getting productions out of some of these universities. But, as I said, these investigations are not easy. People know what they did. They know what they don't want disclosed. And they don't disclose it. You know, if there's 5,000 pages turned over to you, you know, they'll hold the 10 pages that really got the good stuff in it.

What we're going to receive, even if you get the House to hold those hearings, we've already had a foreshadowing of what we're going to hear with Anthony Fauci saying, I don't remember 160 times. I don't remember. I don't recall. It's kind of the same thing over and over. That's why you need documents. I mean, I always hear these people, call them in before Congress. It's meaningless if you don't have documents. And Lindsey Graham did that with the FBI. I kept telling him, until we get the documents, holding a hearing is useless. He held the hearing and everybody dodged it. You know, again, you need documents. Okay, so then if they withhold the documents, like the FBI has done over Seth Rich's death, first they denied they existed. They've managed to hold on to them. So then you never have the hearing. I mean, what people are, what they hear when they hear these things over and over again and they see no action and they see nothing changing. They lose faith in these institutions. So then what are our options then? Can I weigh in here? You can still hold hearings and can put people on the spot if they're well thought out. There's no doubt about that. But you can also prompt whistleblowers, which we're getting. We're getting a lot of FBI guys coming in forward. But I have a recommendation that I'd like to put forward. So Senator Johnson, would it be possible to FOIA HHS and find out what classified systems that Anthony Fauci had access to? That'd be the first step. Then the second step would actually then have a closed briefing, top secret, and then take a look and see what we're in those communications with, someone like the Department of Defense. How about we stop funding all of this? How about we just say, put your money in escrow, in the states. There are enough Republican states, if it comes down to, I hate saying Republican or Democrat, because those are fake constructs in themselves in fifth generation warfare. It's not. That's their terms and the enemy's terms. But why do we pay taxes to do this? Why do Republicans not take a stand? Why do not all the governors stand together? All the Republican governors, all the Republican senators, why don't they stand together and take a unified position and stop paying the taxes, let their people pay them into escrow accounts in the state so that people don't run a foul of the law and stop funding Fauci and the NIH and all these programs? Because the American people are not demanding it, Lara. Because the American people are not demanding it. Well, you know, you can't just blame it on that. If you had American leaders standing up talking about it. Yeah, and the significant fraction on both parties are co-opted. Yeah, all the general public needs right now is plausible deniability. All the administrative state has to do is provide plausible deniability and no one will wake up because no one wants to wake up in that whatever it is, 40 or 60% of the population that is asleep and just wants to go about their daily life. They don't wanna be bothered. They don't care about what Klaus Schwab says. They don't care about Anthony Fauci. And all they need to do is be given a story, a narrative that they can accept that will provide the necessary cover and they're never gonna question it. Over. And Larry, first of all, I'm not gonna defend my colleagues. I mean, if you wanna insult me, say you guys, okay? I'm not of this world. I'm not, I was never involved in politics. I ran for the US Senate and became US Senator. This place drives me nuts, okay?

But, you know, so I'm not gonna defend the politics, but you say, why not defend this? Are you not watching what's happening with this grotesque omnibus bill? Yeah. Yes. I mean, 1.30 in the morning, this morning dropped 4,155 pages and we had, I think, 20 Republicans vote for that together with all 50 Democrats. So, you know, but this, okay, Senator Johnson, there's got to be something that people can do because, you know, I get frustrated by hearing all the time about what won't work. We can't do this, we can't do that. This won't work, that won't work. I went through it with Afghanistan, with the disastrous withdrawal, you know, and I'm still living with photographs and videos and letters every day of people that we trained, that we spent 20 years sometimes fighting alongside us, being executed and tortured and murdered and no one did a thing about it. And they stood up and they lied and they lied and they lied and they got away with it because it didn't affect Americans the way COVID affected them. But I don't ever hear anyone talking about what we can actually do beyond, you know, we had hearings into Benghazi and you mean to tell me they couldn't find anything? They couldn't dig anything up? They couldn't actually figure out the truth about what happened there? We had hearings into the IRS and we let Lois Lerner just say that they lost everything. We allowed the FBI to limit the investigative window into Hillary Clinton's emails to four and a half seconds and allow Susan Rice, who wasn't even her attorney, to come in and claim attorney-client privilege.

Hey, Lara, look, nobody can out-frustrate me, okay? Not even you. Trust me, you cannot out-frustrate me. So no, I understand the frustration. I truly do. And all I can do is try and push the truth. I think most people who know me, who've been involved with me, realize I've been pretty fearless. I have not worried about the politics of it. But the fact of the matter is, you know, I just ran for reelection, won by the slimmest margin, but it shouldn't have even been close. I mean, there's the reality of the situation. If we believe the results, I mean, how bad is that to get? I don't believe any of those results. I've traveled the length and breadth of this country and even across California, I struggle to find people who actually support Gavin Newsom or any of these policies, you know? I mean, we talk all the time about the vast majority of Americans. And the truth is, we have no idea. We don't know how many Americans because the vast majority of Americans who are awake and who don't subscribe to this don't have a voice most of the time. They don't vote. I mean, in our country, it's who wins the election. And right now, the left is winning. Can I re-in here a minute? Real quick, we're gonna have Warner, who's Brooke Jackson's attorney, the Pfizer whistleblower, jump in here real quick because he's got an update that's really important and significant for this conversation. Well, I wanna address part of the conversation and then I'll address what's going on with Brooke's case. I mean, the first thing is we are doing a lot. Look at the sea change in Ohio politics, for example. Look at the people resisting the mandates. Our state legislature has been partly responsive to the objections of the people. I do not see Ohioans as not awake. They may not understand, but they're awake to what's going on. They are rejecting mandates right and left. We have a super majority in the House and Senate in this state. We have Ron DeSantis starting a criminal prosecution at the state level. State power is really important. Our federal system can come into play here and we all know how to operate in our own individual state. So I think that's part of the answer. I think Dr. Malone has mentioned that in his book as well.

And I'm certainly gonna push that and help that as much as possible. A case is like Brooke Jackson's where you have a whistleblower who braved everything. And for people who don't know, she's the Pfizer whistleblower who talked about the clinical trials and what was really going on. Thank you. Thank you, Lara, for clarifying that. I look at her documents every single day and I look at these clinical trials and how horrific the process was, how they were basically fraudulent trials in my view. And we look at the numbers who, look at the all-cause mortality. Just in the clinical trials, it showed that those who got the shots died at a higher rate of those who didn't get the shots. So the all-cause mortality is terrible. The adverse events of those who got the shots in the clinical trials, there were over 5,000 adverse events for those poor people who are subjected to this in the trials. So cases like that are key. And in fact, Brooke Jackson has some power here. As a whistleblower, we don't have federal support on this. We don't have the federal government involved. They could have been involved. We saw an email this last couple of weeks saying that the Office of Criminal Investigation, some people there at least, were willing to go after Pfizer criminally. So we do know, and I appreciate Ron Johnson's point about our federal government. We have some good people in our federal government who want to do the right thing. And we need to support efforts like the whistleblowers who are out here and everything they're doing. And frankly, Senator Johnson, I would like to see the federal government re-intervene in the case and assist us with discovery. And I know that's probably very unlikely at this point. We just had a hearing with the judge on discovery. We're trying to get discovery. It's delayed now another three months until March. And he has indicated to us that he will have a decision on that case in March, whether to dismiss it or not. And just for everybody to know this, the official position of the federal government in that case is that it should be dismissed. They filed a brief supporting Pfizer's motion to dismiss, which is very disappointing. They have a further power that they did not exercise though.

The federal government in this type of case, it's a False Claims Act, Key Tam case, has the power to just dismiss it. And for whatever reason, that has not happened yet. So we feel like there is kind of a war going on within the federal government about this case and about many other things. And some good people in our government are lobbying for support. They're not succeeding in that. But I think as we see the death and destruction go, every week that goes by, we see more disabled, more dead, more injured.

Everywhere I look, I think that there will be a sentiment that grows. But I wanna end this on the fact that we have power in our own individual lives and in our own individual states, and we need to exercise it in every way we can. If the federal government is failing, let's look to our federal system and what we can do locally. That's right. All of us have a role in continuing to tell the truth.

I'm gonna go back to the Soviet example, what caused that regime to collapse? Yes, the political maneuverings of a Thatcher or a Reagan played a role in the 1980s and 1990s. But ultimately, that system began to collapse in 1978. Actually began to collapse even earlier when Alexander Solzhenitsyn published the Gulag Archipelago. There was a single copy of that manuscript had to be smuggled out of Soviet Russia.

It made it impossible after that for the Western elites, the useful idiots at US universities to continue supporting that regime and pretending like they didn't know what was actually going on. This is a man who wrote this thing in his blood, metaphorically, he was suffering in the Soviet Gulag and just telling the truth about what happened. We have whistleblowers like Brooke Jackson who are not just telling the truth, but they're willing to suffer for the sake of telling the truth. They're telling the truth when it costs them something. And the witness of that is very powerful. So, I mean, fear is contagious, but courage is also contagious.

The Soviets were terrified of a Polish man named Karol Wojtyła, also known as John Paul II, who made his first visit to Poland in 1978. Why were they terrified of this man? Napoleon remarked that the Pope has, you know, how many legions does he have? You know, he has no sort of temporal power, but this was a man who had lived under the Nazis and lived under the Soviets, and just stood up in front of the Polish people and told the truth.

That's why they were terrified of him. So, you know, the people who are actually involved in spreading lies are terrified of the truth. If they weren't terrified of the truth, they wouldn't work so hard to suppress it. And it's very powerful. Which is what you see in the Twitter files. You're 100% right. He's telling the truth in our own circle of influence. There's a very simple remedy here. And Senator Johnson, you know, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on this. You can address the vaccines by taking away the protection, the immunity from prosecution, and from liability that the pharmaceutical companies have that Reagan introduced, since you, you know, you mentioned Reagan, right? I mean, why do they, why is that still in place? That's something that is tangible that can be addressed, but it's not ever gonna change with Mayok, you know, with Biden, and Merrick Garland, and Christopher Wray, and, you know, Kamala Harris, still in power. And people say, well, you don't have a majority in the Senate, you'll never be able to impeach, but you can still impeach them in the House. Can I jump in with one request?

There's one simple thing that could turn the tide here, which is the declaration of public health emergency must be rescinded. It's clear that it is not valid. And as Bobby Kennedy said in the steps of the Lincoln Memorial almost a year ago now, they will not relinquish that power until they are forced to do so. And the only hand that can force them to do so right now is Congress. That's the one pressure point that I would like to see change, and it would trigger a cascading collapse, because all of the emergency use authorizations are predicated on that declaration. If that would cease, it would open the window for everything here, over. And if we tried to do that, at least if Congress tried to do that, even if they failed, you can expose the leaders who won't support it. Because one thing that is frustrating and I'm tired of hearing it is, oh, they'll never answer that question. Sometimes it doesn't matter, the fact that they won't answer it, the fact that they won't support it, that they won't do it is the point, which was exactly the point on January 6th. What they didn't want is those hundred congressmen who were going to ask for the elections to go back to the states and to be examined, they didn't want that to come before Congress because they didn't want to be exposed.

They didn't want anyone to know where they stood on that issue. And they wanted that never to be presented to the American people. And they wanted them never to see that there was support for it. So what about a bill to strip the immunity of the pharmaceutical companies and get rid of the emergency use authorization? Because you're 100% correct, that's what's obliterated HIPAA, and that is what is keeping all of this in place when there's obviously no medical or clinical justification for any of it. So again, you have to start with the stepping stones. And the reason I have focused on the vaccine injury, first of all, just out of compassion, they just want to be seen, heard, believed so they can get treated. Yes. But once we have, you know, members of Congress acknowledging that these vaccine injuries are real, these people have been harmed, then Congress will be, you know, hopefully willing to act. And that would be the predicate. But the declaration of public health emergency is independent of the vaccine harm. I know that, Doc, and you know what? You know, we add, I offered an amendment, you know, it was five of us, and we weren't good, we weren't, we weren't, we weren't. Ron, listen to me, let me make it clear. I am in no way criticizing you. No, I understand. You're an absolute hero. I know, it's what I'm saying, it's not gonna happen right now. It's not gonna happen, okay? You don't have the votes, the Democrats are gonna line up against Biden. They're not gonna support that. So that's not gonna happen.

Here's something that might happen once people recognize what has happened here in terms of the truth. That's why it's step by step. They recognize the harm done by these vaccines, the vaccine injured, that gives you the chance to remove the liability. But I think even more important, we have to stop them from being to, from advertising. That is what has given the pharmaceutical companies so much power. I mean, these ads are incredibly stupid. The only reason they run them is to, so they can control the media companies. And so they control the narrative. So I think you gotta break that bond. By spreading around the money once again. Yeah, I mean, you gotta break that bond. But it is expressly illegal to advertise and market an unlicensed medical product, and yet there are no repercussions for doing so. And furthermore, the advertiser is not just Pfizer, it's the US government. That's right. I know it's sick. And on top of that, it is also illegal and a clear violation of the First Amendment to have the FBI directing social media and the CIA to target American citizens and violate their First Amendment rights. And so what are we doing about that? What's Congress gonna do about it? So here's why that's happening and why it's gonna continue is because right now, the partisanship in the deep state favors one side. Again, the left has infiltrated every institution, our education systems, our media, law, our courts, and they have control of it. They've got control of all these agencies. And so you don't have an independent media holding people accountable. Listen, I don't think the scandals would be occurring in the FBI if you literally had an unbiased media. But we have a highly biased media and all of this deep state, all this control favors the left. And so, again, you just don't have the political will to fix what needs to be fixed. Senator, can the House defund the COVID propaganda?

Is that something that's doable?

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Well, I'm saying this methodology was used a few times when the Republicans had the House last time to basically extract information from the Department of Justice and the FBI, basically fencing certain money and basically preventing some of their funding from going through. I'm wondering if that same technique could be used to, for example, stop the COVID propaganda from being funded, because it's funded to the tune of huge amounts of money. In a functioning appropriation process, possibly, but here we are three months into a fiscal year. We never brought up one appropriation account. We're doing a 4,100 page omnibus to fund the whole pig. So again, there's just not that fine tuning of funding things. Again, it's gotta be done on a more massive scale. Maybe without the Senate, this isn't possible, but I've advanced a proposal, and it wouldn't even necessarily require ending the state of emergency now, which I believe has to happen, but at least putting a constitutional system of checks and balances on the declaration of the state of emergency, because right now we have the executive empowered, actually his delegate, the secretary of HHS, is empowered to declare a public health emergency. Under a public health emergency, the president gains 128 additional extra constitutional powers that he wouldn't otherwise have. As Robert said, he and his administration are gonna be reluctant to relinquish those powers, obviously, and those powers are most often delegated to unelected public health bureaucrats and others within the administration. What about Congress just saying, okay, there's gotta be some threshold that is set legislatively for what constitutes this kind of emergency?

Again, you guys, you don't understand the profound dysfunction of Congress. It's completely broken. So the check right now has gotta come from the courts, and we are seeing progress in the courts. Listen, I'm a business guy. Lawyers are not my favorite profession, okay? I've learned to appreciate them as a constitutional balance. So, I mean, that's why we got the Fauci email. We got them redacted, but we're not subject to redaction, so we could pressure on HHS that is bipartisan. My chairman supported me on this, and we're able to look under those redactions. So I think the court system is our best possibility in terms of state of emergency, getting more and more information. Again, I subpoenaed the FBI. I have no enforcement powers. The courts do have enforcement powers, which is why FOIA works better, and we get outside groups to FOIA, and there's a possibility we could FOIA too, but Congress is not subject to the redactions that the public is under FOIA. So you get somebody else to FOIA documents, then we get those same documents, and then we put pressure on the agencies to unredact them. But it takes time. It's piecemeal. This is why in the book I speak about the importance of West Virginia versus EPA.

The Supremes are on the threshold on a lot of different case law, and I'm not a lawyer, but I strongly concur that our only path forward at this point is through the courts, and in particular through the Supremes. I think that they are now willing to support, in part because of Mr. Trump's appointments, the revision of the established law, which is what enables the administrative state under the thesis that Congress has inappropriately delegated lawmaking to this permanent SES administrative state structure, which is acting under the executive branch to make law.

And that is where it's gotta stop, and as far as I'm concerned, it's a consequence not in any way fingering you, Ron, but it's a consequence of a chronic failure of both the House and the Senate to exercise their authority and willingness to delegate it to this permanent unelected body that we're referring to, the Leviathan.

Senator Johnson. I'd like to weigh in on that. I think that Dr. Malone is exactly right. We have an administrative state that has gone berserk. If you go back and you look at what the authorizing initial legislation is, you can see that's the boundary of administrative power, and any time they step outside that boundary, there is a possibility of a court case. I mean, one of those cases that took place this year was on the definition of vaccine, the Griner case, and not Brittany Griner, the other Griner case, so the COVID Griner case. In that case, I mean, they attempted, and they lost at this, but they're gonna appeal it, I believe. They lost in the fact that there is a definition of vaccine in legislation, and we are acting outside of that by calling this product a vaccine. So that goes to one of the core, that's one of those core issues, and it's one of the things people really ought to look at. That's what we are doing in much of our litigation is just trying to hold the administrative state within the bounds of the legislatures at state levels and at federal levels. The states also have an administrative state that has gone outside the bounds, and we are challenging that directly in a small case that's before the Ohio Supreme Court in January. So we're simply saying liquor control in Ohio cannot enforce healthcare mandates, which they were doing. And it's a very simple little case, but it deals directly with that berserk behavior by our administrative bodies. Thanks.

Well, a real quick chime in, and Congresses have been delegating their constitutional authority to the executive branch, mainly to evade accountability. They don't write prescriptive laws, it's kind of general frameworks and allow the executive branch to fill it in. The Supreme Court is starting to rein that back. I mean, the real precedent decision was the Chevron decision. Now that's being slowly eroded by additional court cases where Supreme Court is taking a look and saying, no, the legislator never gave you that authority, but understand how poorly written so many of these laws are. I mean, you've got to, lawyers just have to kind of look for the loopholes and things, take a look at what they can enforce through the course and what they can't. Eventually it's gonna have to come back to Congress to fix some of these things, but that's gonna create the, that's gonna require the public pressure. That's why I keep going back to the step-by-step, providing the public with the information, the truth, get them to the point of outrage and what's happened to them, happened to us, to demand action on a legislative basis, because that's what it's gonna take. What about attaching writers to some of these bills, like the spending bill and the appropriations bill and so on? Writers that strip indemnification from, and inoculate the pharmaceutical companies. Well, if you can get the two people that are writing the bills to attach those writers, that's great. But I mean, that's what's just happened here.

I mean, you had, you got four people powering Washington, you see the president, the minority and majority leader of the Senate, and the speaker, that's it. Those are only four people that have power. They may delegate to the staff of the Chairman of the Appropriation Committee the ability to negotiate this, but there was no member of Congress other than those people that saw this 4,155 page bill until today. And we voted to proceed to it, and it's a done deal. We'll get some amendment votes, they'll all fail. It's all been pre-planned, it's all been precooked. This is not a deliberate process. I mean, set aside whatever you learned in seventh grade physics. It's not the way, this place is so broken, so dysfunctional, again, all the power resides in those four people watching us speak across the courts. Then why should the American people bother? Why should they support- Well, that's, unfortunately, people dropping out, which just plays in the hands of a deep state. I mean, because what you're, well, it doesn't just play into the hands of the deep state. I mean, you can't avoid that, but it also, it's a double-edged sword. So while it plays into their state,

I mean, the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result. So if you keep electing your leaders and expecting them to do something, and they're not able to because the system is so broken, it doesn't really matter what the reason is. The effect is the same, nothing. No one is held accountable. The law is obliterated, and people just get more and more frustrated, or they continue about their daily business. So where are the leaders thinking outside the box? What are the things that we can do outside the box? Larry, you got one of them on this call. One of them that was so frustrated was just gonna walk away from this, and the only reason I didn't is because nobody else was advocating for the vaccine injured. That's the only reason I ran for re-election. I was just gonna say that, Senator Johnson. I think you, I know it was a close election, but I think you won because of your principled stance and the recognition of it. And so we cannot sit back and just let stuff happen. We have to participate. I can't thank Senator Johnson enough for inviting myself and Brooke Jackson to his offices a couple of weeks ago. I mean, it's just critical. I mean, an individual senator has incredible power to get information out there. It's just, you have provided an example for any other congressman or senator who wants to stand up and do something. So I can't thank you enough. And I don't want people to feel like they can't do anything. They have to get out there and we have to fight. I mean, it is about eternal vigilance and we're all starting to learn it.

And the only good thing coming out of this crisis is we understand the depth of the crisis that we're in and we better get busy or we're gonna lose it all. Well, I will tell you what the head of the Free Burma Rangers, an extraordinary man, told me once when he was targeted by the U.S. government many years ago for the missionary work he was doing in Burma and he was, as a former Green Beret, the sense of betrayal was profound for him. And one of the French doctors looked at him when he was devastated by the reality of what his government was doing to him, which is pretty much where we are now. Where we reached that point 20, 30 years later. And this French doctor said to him, David, it's good that you're disillusioned, right? Because it means that everything you believed in was an illusion. And that's the point where we're at. We'd rather have the truth. I have yet to encounter the ordinary person out there who doesn't just want the truth. If you're dying of cancer, you may not like the truth. You may not want to deal with it, but you don't want the doctor to lie to you, right? You don't. And even though people have, there is this innate human condition and they're very good in information warfare at exploiting naturally existing conditions like the human condition to, I don't want to accept that I may be responsible, or I may have a ticking time bomb, or I may have been deceived. At the same time, they're not being given an opportunity to make that decision because they're not getting the whole truth. So is Dr. Thorpe on there? Dr. Thorpe? Yes, thank you, Senator Johnson. Thank you, Lerner. And I had a question, comment and a question. First, to Dr. Aaron's point, courage is courageous.

There's no doubt about it. My whistleblower from California, Michelle Gershman, came out from the central California community exploiting, demonstrating, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt the massive increase in fetal death rates, stillbirth.

She came out, put herself at risk, tremendous risk. But as she's come out, now subsequently there's been two other whistleblowers other than myself from Florida, the only three OBGYN doctors in the country that are practicing, that are attacking what's going on to our patients, women of reproductive age, pregnant women, pre-borns and newborn babies. This is the most egregious disaster in the history of humanity. This has never been done before. So courage is courageous. And what you're doing today is part of, as Dr. Malone pointed out, an antidote to information warfare, fifth-generation warfare. And the more we do it, I'm getting more and more calls from my Trojan horses all over the world giving me the horrible adverse outcomes in pregnancy. And Dr. Malone, Robert, you had mentioned about a half an hour ago about the NIAID giving out bribe monies. Now, I wanna clarify this. Is this different than the $13 billion that the Department of Health and Human Services directed to 274 different agencies, including all the medical boards, to bribe them last year through the COVID-19 Coalition Corps? Is that the same monies you're talking about, or is that a separate stockpile of bribe monies? So I would be cautious. I counsel caution in using words like bribes. We are in a legal landscape.

There's no question that over $10 billion were invested by our government through both Homeland and Health and Human Services to advance a false narrative. Dr. Fauci controls two or until recently controlled two major initiatives that crossed different cabinet level organizations, that being Department of Defense, as well as HHS, NIH, and particularly NIAID.

Within his portfolio in both, he has significant control over the allocation of funds, and he has long operated using essentially a business model akin to that, which is often practiced on Wall Street by the biotechnology industry. We use the term pump-and-dump, but in the case of Dr. Fauci, his target, as opposed to being individual investors, for instance, is the legislature.

And his vehicle for controlling consensus and information is through controlling awards, if you, under his management, choosing my words, if you acted in opposition to his interests, you would lose funding. You would no longer be able to sustain an academic career. So, when we talk about Fauci and control, we need to understand he has become a master at managing the nuance of federal budgeting and the loop that exists between NIH and Congress in which, functionally, the NIH is relatively autonomous, even from the executive branch. It's important to remember that Tony was not SES. Tony fell into a special category that was functionally consultants, yet what he did was he actively worked with the executive branch to make sure that the executive branch was within a certain category that was functionally consultants. Yet what he did was he actively cultivated relationships with the legislature, with important legislators, and did so through a loop of receiving allocations and then feeding those allocations back by congressional district. So, that was the years of excellence strategy that was deployed. So, when you speak of Tony and his empire, it's separate, yes, it is separate from the north of $10 billion that were invested in New York dancing productions and the buy-off of virtually every influencer that the government could identify. That is the tendrils that controls academe and also controls much of the biodefense industrial complex domestically and then vertically up through the World Health Organization. I mean, again, what I'm struck in these conversations is the community here participating keeps looping back as if this is a domestic US problem. It is a domestic problem, but it is global.

The actions that have been deployed, the strategies, the language, the tactics have been global and globally harmonized. It's not just the United States. And that's the key data point to recognize that what we're dealing with here is far, far deeper and broader than just what we're speaking of in terms of the American legislature. And many of these actors have deep structural ties, I'm sorry to say it, with the CCP.

Yes, that's absolutely correct. And not only that, but they have put in place the institutions, the global institutions that they need, that it's the global bureaucracy. So what we're already doing is living under globalist policies. And we're doing that with the border. For example, people talk about the open border. Someone mentioned Mayorkas. But what they don't talk about is the fact that in 2018 at the United Nations, they introduced the Global Compact on Migration, which made it a human right. Precisely. Agenda 2030. That's it. So the reason the Biden administration never talks about a crisis at the border, the reason they don't say that they won't allow anyone in their agencies, they got rid of the word illegal, and their stooges in the media followed suit by erasing that word from the lexicon, even though they are illegal immigrants, as a point of fact, not just under... It's because of the thesis that it is a fundamental human right to migrate wherever you want to go in the world. Correct, because borders are constructs that should not interfere, they believe, and they say it, with the execution of your human right. And human rights, to them, supersede what? The God-given constitutional rights that people in the United States of America enjoy. And so what you are doing is you're living under a globalist policy already. The Biden administration talks about regular and irregular waves of legal migration, and they've already warned us, you know, Bill Gates and many others, about the climate refugees, the 1.2 billion climate refugees that we can expect to be on the move. What they don't tell you about is the meetings behind closed doors, you know, at the UN level, where they are talking about depopulation.

I know someone who was in those meetings, it took two security clearances, separate ones, to go in there. It took years of training underground to be able to infiltrate what he calls the global cult at the UN level, where they talk about phasing in regional government as the beginning of a global government. But what they don't tell you about is that they have already put the structures of that global government and those global policies in place, and we know that, because look at what Biden just signed up for at the G20. I mean, and look at what they have said, that the World Health Organization, a global body of unelected bureaucrats, can run the next, you know, pandemic. So we've never, in our living history, you know, we've not experienced a pandemic before, but we already have a global infrastructure in place to deal with the next one, which we're told is imminent. It's just around the corner, right? And if not that, then climate. And what you see when you start to connect these dots is the patterns of information warfare, because just like the science with COVID, we're not allowed to question the science of so-called, you know, climate change. The climate changes every three seconds in the day, right? It's always changing. You can't prove something wrong. That is absolutely true. But what you can prove wrong is every single model that the UN has ever come up with for what we were going to be living at in 2000 and 2020 and so on and so on. There's not a single thing they have ever put forward about climate change that has been accurate or that has held up scientifically. It's all been wrong.

And yet we're told, again, you can't question that science. You can't question this science. But there are practical things that we can do, like stripping the social media companies of Section 230 protection, because they have violated the terms. And it's the same thing with the pharmaceutical companies. They were given Reagan-granted immunity from liability and prosecution to the pharmaceutical companies back in the 80s, and vaccines went through the roof. Well, they have now... This is not a vaccine. It's not even legally. It doesn't meet the legal definition of a vaccine. We know that, and Warner is right about that. And so they have violated the terms of that agreement by pushing a medical bioweapon on the entire globe, the costs of which are still being counted. And we can't get up and do something about that. We can only keep doing the same thing over and over again and hope for a different result. No, no, no. Lara, we can do something about it. So everything that's been described is true about the breadth and the depth of this global regime, about the level of institutional capture and compromise and corruption. And now that all of our listeners are ready to, I don't know, slash their veins in despair... Or rise up. Or rise up and be counted.

It's important to have a historical perspective because you only rise up if you believe in the possibility of victory. So yes, we need to rise up. Yes, if you have hope. So the possibility of victory is clear if you take a historical perspective, because there's many examples in history of a third act reversal when all hope seemed lost. And suddenly something unexpected happens. We were at the edge of a tipping point and we didn't even realize it. And the next courageous act or the next legal tweak of the system was enough to collapse one element of the regime. And then that started the chain reaction and the rest of the regime collapsed. So as I said before, regimes built on lies always eventually collapse under the weight of their own contradictions. What can we do to speed up that process so that it happens faster rather than slower? Nobody, none of the observers in 1987, 1988, believed that the Berlin Wall and the entire Soviet system would collapse in 1989. Certainly nobody believed it would collapse basically without a shot fired, that it would collapse without the Cold War turning into a hot war, that it would collapse again under the weight of its own contradictions. In retrospect, we can go back and reconstruct, yeah, there was a solidarity movement in Poland, and yeah, there was this, and yeah, there were the economic issues and so on and so forth. But the fact is at the time nobody could see it coming. But it happened. Right. So, Aaron, to that point, I think the question on the table right now is, for whatever reason, Mr. Musk has decided to tear off the veil off of one of the social media companies that has been most instrumental in enabling this swarm consensus.

And the question I think we all face right now, and here we are operating on Twitter unexpectedly, you know, again, a month and a half ago, there's no way I could have imagined we had this conversation today. We do seem to have an ally for whatever reason that is willing to share that documentation. And I think that we have an opportunity through alternative media, which is increasingly powerful, which is taking down CNN. I mean, it's profound. My little substack put out by my wife and I daily reaches a half a million to a million people, equivalent to the prime time market share viewership of CNN. We are taking down corporate media. We're doing it through alternative media and through these types of interactions such as we're having right now. And for whatever reason, Mr. Musk has given us the ammunition that we need. It's up to us right now to load and fire, as far as I'm concerned. It appears there's more in the Twitter files. And I would ask you, Senator Johnson, in your response yet, can you also address whether or not you see anything that could be prosecuted that's come out already? Yeah, I think, you know, the constitutional violations of the members of the FBI, I think is, you know, I'm not a lawyer, but I think that's certainly wrong. I'd like to see some prosecutions there. I'm going to leave the call here, but, you know, my parting thought is pretty much to confirm the hope on this. And what COVID has done is as horrific as it has been, as it has led to such a loss of freedom, it's opened people's eyes. It might be that event that, you know, Dr. Aaron's talking about in terms of being the catalyst for bringing this fifth-generation warfare to a close or, you know, helping to defeat it. So, you know, I think it was Dr. Malone, in one of his subsets, said that truth has its own power. And so this whole effort here is to convey truth relentlessly, fearlessly, as Dr. Thorpe said, I think courage is contagious. We see one whistleblower come forward, and then you see additional whistleblowers come forward. I think it was Julian Assange who first said that. Dr. Malone has a following of a million people because of COVID. So COVID has exposed things, has given us an opportunity to push back on the larger problem. And I guess my only point has been, I think you've got to focus, I think you have to focus on the issue at hand. You have to focus on the catalyst, which is COVID, which is the violation of our rights because of the vaccine, the vaccine injuries, because that will awaken more people and actually allow this to blossom into something that can defeat these people.

Because again, this is, there's a much bigger story. There's something much larger occurring here than just COVID. But anyway, I appreciate being part of this. I appreciate what Elon Musk has done here, opening up to it. I've never never kissed me in something like this. It's interesting and hope to kiss me in the future as well. We appreciate your being here and also being so generous with your time. I know it's late there and you've been on the call for a long time. And I think, you know, I speak to people every day. I think they would want you to know, Senator, that there are more people behind you perhaps than you realize. And, you know, it's the weight of history is on your side, not theirs. Well, I just wish everybody's Godspeed and Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays. Take care. Thank you, Senator Johnson. Thank you.

So since Senator Johnson said Merry Christmas, let me throw something out here to the group, is that, you know, we're talking about this as if it has, you know, since we're talking about the broader war, it is important to also address, you know, that there is a spiritual component to what is happening right now. And it's a, you know, it's a subject that sometimes people really don't want to take on at all. But I know that there will be people, listeners among here who will be screaming, you know, at their Twitter page asking why we're not addressing this, because one of the major significant events that happened because of COVID, and I had this conversation with Muslim people and I had it with Jewish people and I had it with Christian people, is this was an opportunity. And it really exposed the war on faith and the fact that people were not able to go to the mosque to pray. I have a friend from Afghanistan who said to me, you and I have known each other more than 20 years. We met in the war, most of our time together has been in war. And yet, in all of that time, I was never prevented from going to the mosque to pray. And, you know, that was a sentiment that was echoed to me by people of every faith. So who wants to address this spiritual dimension to what we're dealing with here and what COVID, how it exposed that there is very much a war against people. It manifests primarily as war against Christians right now, but it is a war against all faith. Let me step in as a generally non-religious person. It was really shocking to me how I felt as this developed. And, you know, I never have seen such a manifestation of what I would term evil, which gives this a very spiritual perspective. So it's really somebody who does not go to church, is not, you know, religious. I am praying right now. I pray to God for everybody in this country and everybody in this world and that we can save ourselves because it's up to us. Can I add another note to that? In traveling all over the world, both myself and my physician colleagues, one of the things that we've found consistent is the communities of faith have been the most resistant to the propaganda. I can't tell to the extent that it is that they have remained communities and haven't been fragmented by all the efforts to split us against ourselves, or it's their faith-based orientation, but absolutely, globally, across all religions, it's been the communities of faith that have been able to resist this information warfare that we've all been subjected to. I think that's really important. Over.

It's very significant and interesting that you say that because if you go back to the founding of this country, you know, way back to 1776, what you learn is that the leaders of the Illuminati, who were somewhat surprised that this revolution on the other side of the world actually happened, what they studied in order to understand it was the letters from the colonies, which very much highlighted the fact that faith had kept those colonies alive and kept them together and kept them united, that it was their faith that had been the beacon of light that led them all to this place. And so what the Illuminati did at that time was to then try to infiltrate the churches and the faithful. But because that proved to be difficult, they then shifted their focus to the seminaries. And what you will see today is evidence of that, because the churches themselves are not standing up for faith and not standing up for Christians and not standing up for God. And revolutionary theology became prolific in the early 1970s, starting with the Catholics and spreading throughout, you know, through the Lutheran Church. And I have been with a priest who's actually a liturgic specialist, spoke 11 languages and was documenting and illustrated to me how they've changed the words and then the meanings of the prayers. And I've spoken to priests who talked about witnessing pagan ceremonies inside the seminaries. Pagan rituals and ceremonies inside the religious schools that are training the next generation of priests. I mean, you can't make it up. I spoke to one priest who said that he had been secular for this first 13 years as a pastor before he was saved. The depth to which this has been. We talked about this being fifth-generation warfare and being fought on many different fronts.

And it is interesting that you observed that about communities of faith because that has always been the case. It has always been the case that when people have sought to influence others, that communities of faith have been the most resistant to propaganda. History shows us that. I want to add. Lara, I think Jim wants to say something here. Yeah, Lara, thank you for your comments. And I would just like to expand on your request for sharing some spiritual comments. And I'm coming from I'm a Judeo-Christian. I'm a follower of Christ. I relate very well with my Muslim brothers and sisters, my Jewish brothers and sisters. And you're absolutely right. What this horrible disaster that was brought upon humanity almost three years ago, it has destroyed the it has divided us. I've lost because I have chosen to interpret the data the way that I've always interpreted data my entire career, especially that in reproductive medicine as an OBGYN, maternal fetal medicine specialist. It has divided us. And because I choose to interpret the data, I have lost so many family and so many friends and so many colleagues who will not even engage in a discussion with me. But the good side of that is that in these meetings for the last two years that I've been engaged in and around the world, people of faith, people of nationality, completely different faith, completely different language, nationality, cultures. We've all come together, regardless of the color of our skin and our faith, like brothers and sisters, taking on the vacuum of those that I've lost of my closest friends. So it is the people of faith of all traditions that have seen the truth and are brought together by the truth, also part of the fifth generation, fifth generation of warfare. So what I've seen is horrible disasters in terms of spiritual carnage.

I alluded with Dr. Malone and Senator Johnson about the $13 billion. And Robert, I hear you. I will be a little bit more less calling it what it really is and calling it loans or whatever you want to call it. But it is what it is. It was $13 billion. It was given to 274 sectors. I used to have very little respect for attorneys, as Senator Johnson said. I ended up marrying one, and I love her very much. But I didn't have much regard for attorneys. Now I have no regard. I have no respect for physicians or pastors, because the vast majority of pastors, the vast majority of churches, they are totally lost. They are not following our tradition of faith. And they have been bought off by whatever you want to call them, Dr. Malone. And they are pushing these vaccines to their congregation. The people that I used to respect the most in my life were priests and pastors and rabbis and imams, people of faith. I won't speak for anybody except the Christian pastors now. I have no respect for them. 99% of them are pushing the vaccine, and they've lost their semblance of truth, and they pushed it on their congregations. And it was all done globally in a harmonized, coordinated fashion. That's right. It was preplanned. Yeah. And the speed with which it happened. So here's a couple of tools for people. You know, if you're listening to this and you think, well, how do you know whether something is natural or manipulated?

The speed with which it happened is an absolute dead giveaway. Whenever you have a majority like that, it just doesn't happen in the natural world that you can get almost every country to agree to extreme, extreme measures. That doesn't happen overnight. If it was the first time people were hearing about it, they would have been arguing it. It wouldn't have happened that way. Also, viruses, you know, they don't replicate in cold countries and hot countries the same way. So how come we had this virus spreading in cold and hot climates at exactly the same time? That tells you it didn't happen naturally. And, you know, when you see, for example, 3 million people on the streets of Brazil, there's no way that even the CIA can pay enough people to make that happen. That is a natural organic protest. When you see the Summer of Love and you see these groups like Antifa on the streets and you look at the police reports and you see all the drives that are being picked up, you know, and everything else, you realize, OK, this is manipulated and this is fueled. And these are the tools that help us understand the truth. But, you know, somebody wanted to jump in there and I cut them off. So please weigh in. Lara, I wanted to just chime in real quick because I have to sign off here. Yeah.

On the question of both what the churches did globally, I'm Roman Catholic. I was in Rome earlier this year speaking to a group of Catholic politicians from around the world, north and global south. And there were several high ranking Catholic prelates there. And I agree with the previous remark that many, many of our clergy religious leaders did abandon their post. And in fact, I said very clearly in that closed door setting that many of our chaplain, many of our bishops became willing chaplains to the new technocracy. It's not something I'm happy about admitting as a Catholic. There was there were very high ranking, you know, not not the pope, but the next next echelon down of influential cardinals at the global level who were there. And it didn't didn't much like hearing that, as you might imagine. At the same time, many in the resistance, myself included, are rooted in a spiritual tradition that convinces us of the primacy of truth. I mean, you can ask the question, why should truth prevail over lies? Why should we even care about the truth? And if you drill down deeply enough, that's a that's a metaphysical question. And the world's religions have some very profound answers to that question. You know, why not just advance my own personal aim through lies and manipulation? So I think it's important for us to call our religious leaders to greater responsibility and greater awareness. At the same time, we need to reach for the spiritual resources at hand in our own traditions and in our own in our prayer, in our friendship with those who share our convictions.

Because standing up against a regime like this is not easy. And our courage has to be grounded in something. It has to it has to find roots so that when when the winds come and when the opposition blows storms in our direction, we can stand firm and stay rooted. So your question, I think, is very important for all of us to consider, all of us to ponder and really think about. And my last my last remark, just before I sign off, kind of going back to my theme that history is full of surprises. I wrote in my book, The New Abnormal, that nature and human nature always bats in the bottom of the ninth inning. And you can cheat these things for only so long before nature and human nature begin to push back. And so I do have hope that the regime of lies will collapse. I do firmly believe that all of us, whether we have a microphone, whether we're in a position of political power or not, all of us have a role to play in this drama. And we can begin by simple acts, for example, stop self-censoring, right? Start, you know, stepping out in that small group setting, that family setting over the holidays. If you have an idea that seems to seems to contradict with the flow of the group is is saying you have every right to express it. And maybe there's one or two other people there that are staying silent and not speaking up on an issue. But when they see you do it, it sort of empowers them. And then suddenly, you know, the people that thought I'm the only one who thinks this way. Am I crazy? Because everyone else seems to be running in the opposite direction. Suddenly, people are recognizing, first of all, that these, you know, issues related to COVID policy or whatever are very much open to dispute at the very least. And there's other people here that share my concerns and my convictions and maybe aren't drinking the Kool-Aid or maybe are coming out of that. That sleepwalking trance that we've been in for the last few years.

So check yourself when you notice self-censorship, start speaking the truth, find some way to be grounded in the conviction that the truth still matters in spite of everything. And it's a very powerful act to be willing to speak the truth in whatever small or large circle of influence you happen to find yourself. Thank you all for being here. I'm sorry I got to run. Let's do another one of these spaces sometime. Hey, Lara, I'm going to jump in. It's John Nasta. How are you? I'm good. Thank you. So thank you to everybody for being here. And John, I'm going to let you close out. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. A pleasure listening to this wonderful discussion. I'm traveling back from Vietnam and I'm in Tokyo today. So one of the groups, when we look at disappointment around certain religious communities, there's another group that is emerging that I think has a very powerful and rational voice. And that's the homeschooling community. While they're not faith based, this has been a powerful and growing group. And not only does it does it impact kids, but it impacts parents making hard decisions. So I just want to throw those those two points in real quickly. Well, and you know, we've had a lot of good points in in rooting this in history as well. And in the bigger picture, which is is I don't think I agree with with Bobby and everybody else. It's you can't even begin to understand this if you don't see it in the broader perspective and how that fits into a bigger strategy. And and you know, you just what we just heard about truth that comes right back to the Twitter files and comes right back to what the FBI and the CIA, the religious community have been doing right in front of us. And and it comes back, you know, if the system is so broken that our leaders can't do anything about it.

The message that that I keep hearing is that it's it's on us. It's on each and every one of us. And if you are afraid to speak out, the thing that we see in front of us is that your window to speak out isn't necessarily going to be there forever. If these people prevail, what they are intent on doing, what they have been doing is making sure that that taking that right away, it's not going to stop here. It's like I always make the joke that, you know, you get older and you think, OK, I can come to terms of 40. And then you hit 50 and you're like, oh, boy, it didn't stop. Right. You know, you put on you put on six pounds, you think, OK, I don't mind being a little fatter. And then six more pounds later, you realize, oh, I got to do something. And that's kind of where we are as a nation and as humanity. It's kind of where we are in the world is that if we don't do something about this, our ability, our options may not seem really good right now. But failure to act every single day that we fail to act, our options are worse and worse. They they're narrow, you know, and and so I prefer to act now before, you know, it's all lost. But that's that's my DNA. And I'm just very grateful to every to the whistleblowers out there, to the doctors out there who stood up not just now, but when it counted in the beginning. I mean, I mean, when it was even harder, it still counts. It counts now. It's it's never too late.

And what I saw happen with Defeat the Mandates, I want to say thank you to Defeat the Mandates for hosting this conversation. What I saw when I was speaking at an event for them in Los Angeles is and what you see when you look at their videos. I would urge anyone to look at their videos. You see that this actually, while it has done while it has divided people, it's also exposed much of the lies because people understand people of all faiths and people of all classes, all nationalities, all races. They have seen what has been done in the name of science. They see the lie and they know they're not they're not going to go quietly into the dark night. They are standing up. People all across the world are standing up and we're just being denied access to that information. It's not right in front of us. But if you look for it, you can find it. So with that, Lara, do we close out? Yes. If anyone does anyone have a last word, anything they want to say? Thank you very much, Lara and everybody that has participated. My last word is the quote from St. Augustine, of course, that the truth is like a lion. You don't have to defend it. Let it loose. It will defend itself. Right. That's right. Exactly. I have a comment. I have a quick, quick, quick comment. This happened to me just recently. A lot of people that are likely vaccine injured don't recognize it as such. And the doctors they're going to don't recognize it as such. And it's very hard for them to diagnose. So one of the things that we can do is just sort of if we see things, you can you can look on, for example, the FLCCC site and so forth.

There's places where you can sort of have a general idea if this is something people might want to look at. I think that might help sort of increase awareness about the issue, because as we know, this is sort of for a lot of people, it's just kind of unimaginable. They're still in this trance. Right. Yes. So I would like to leave a parting word as well. What God spoke of through the prophet Hosea, chapter four, verse five. He announced that my people die for lack of knowledge and no other time up to this point in the history of humanity has that prophecy ever been more. Completely fulfilled than now. I have one last thing to say. This is Warner Mendenhall. I just want to thank all of the people who have suffered from this crisis. We have just dealt with thousands of people who've lost their jobs, you know, lost their education careers, lost their medical careers. And every last one of them who stood up and did what was right is really important to us. So I just want to thank all of you and all of you listening. You know who you are. It's all about the truth. It's all about the identity you have with your family and your faith. And it's all about love for one another.

So thank you very much. Lara? I would echo that. I think we owe a debt of gratitude to every doctor, every health care worker, every scientist, Dr. Malone, you know, Dr. Aaron, I mean, all of you who have stood up. We're not there yet, but there's only one truth, only one. And it doesn't matter what they say, they can't change it. And so thank you all of you for being here and for being so patient and generous with your time. Thank you to everyone for listening. Thank you to defeat the mandates for never, never giving up and staying the course. And thank you, everybody. God bless and good night. Good night, everyone. And just so everyone knows, we did record this. So we'll be posting it on our Twitter page as well. So thank you to all the speakers and everybody that was here tonight. It was an awesome space. So honored to be a part of it. Thank you, Lindsay. Thank you, everybody. Take care. Bye bye.