Stay Free - Russel Brand - March 29, 2024


“No One Is Investigating THIS!” Alex Berenson On What Is Causing Excess Deaths- Stay Free #335

Topics
lab leak excess deaths investigation legacy media operations Iraq war reporting Ukraine-Russia conflict and NATO involvement FDA and Off-Label Prescribing Practices ivermectin lawsuits FDA sovereignty
Hosted by
Russel Brand
Mentioned
Donald Trump Alex Berenson Pfizer Joe Rogan Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Ivermectin Joe Biden Putin Russell Brand Moderna Obama Pierre Corey Julian Assange Ralph Baric Bill Hicks Farmer Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance Neil Oliver Join Weber Shandwick Vandana Shiva and 21 more
Baltimore Bridge Collapse – Cyber Attack, Black Swan Event? ALL The Theories- Stay Free #334 “This Is THE END!” Neil Oliver on Trump’s Takedown, Independent Politicians & More - Stay Free #336

Episode Stats


Length

1 hour and 7 minutes

Words per minute

175.05

Word count

11,892

Sentence count

764

Harmful content

Misogyny

2

sentences flagged

Toxicity

16

sentences flagged

Hate speech

14

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Alex Berenson joins me to talk about his new book, Pandemic Pandemic: A Global Pandemic Response to Pandemic Vaxx, and why most people don t want to hear about coxellium vaxx anymore. In this episode, we discuss: Why is it important to have a global pandemic response to pandemics? What is the best way to respond to a pandemic? What role does the government have in responding to pandemic risk? Why should we be worried about the potential impact of pandemic vaccines on public health? And how can we make sure that we don t repeat the mistakes that have been made in the past and avoid repeating them in the future? If you haven t yet, use the code GOD is Great for 25% off this week, and become an Awakened Wonder. You get 1 month free of all G&W for a month, or join us for the rest of the month for free for just $99.99. You get 20% off your first month, and you'll get access to all the best G+W dropshipping deals available on the App, too! Subscribe to the App and get 25% all month for a year! You'll get 15% off the first month for the month, plus an additional 5% off for the second month! You can post it now! Use the code AWakenedWonder for 1 month FREE, and get an additional discount code: GOD IS GREAT for the remainder of the year. Subscribe here! This week's ad-free version of the show is available on Audible! Subscribe to our new podcast, Subscribe, rate, review and subscribe for a chance to win a FREE 7 days of G&GOD is great! and receive a discount code! Become an awakened wonder! We'll be giving you access to the show called RUMBLE! to see the future of the future and more! Stay tuned for more episodes coming soon! To find out more about the future, check out our new episodes of Awakening Wonder, coming soon. Stay Free with Russell Brand. and more coming soon, stay free, stay tuned to the next episode of the Awakening Wonder! by becoming awakened wonder and stay tuned for the next full-length video on our newest episode of Stay Free With Russell Brand, coming up on this week's Stay Free!

Transcript

Transcripts from "Stay Free - Russel Brand" are sourced from the Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool. Explore them interactively here.
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
Topics generated with Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct.
Hosts, guests, and mentioned names generated with spaCy (en_core_web_sm), reconciled against Wikidata.
00:00:00.000 Brought to you by Pfizer.
00:00:08.000 In this video, you're going to see the future.
00:00:27.000 Hello there you awakening wonders.
00:00:28.000 Thanks for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
00:00:31.000 Oh, thanks for mentioning it.
00:00:32.000 25% off this week.
00:00:35.000 Send me a picture of yourself wearing it in, I would say, auspicious, legitimate, civilized circumstances.
00:00:42.000 No smut, no filth.
00:00:44.000 25% off this week.
00:00:45.000 And become an Awakened Wonder to get additional content.
00:00:47.000 We make an exclusive video every week, plus you get to join us with fantastic guests.
00:00:51.000 Why?
00:00:52.000 Coming up, we've got Vandana Shiva, we've got RFK, We've got Steve Bannon coming up, and today I'm talking to Alex Berenson.
00:00:58.000 If you don't know Alex Berenson, he used to be a legacy media commentator, but he broke away when the New York Times, well, I suppose during his time at the New York Times, while serving as an Iraq correspondent during the numerous wars, he discovered what the legacy media is really about.
00:01:14.000 If you were on Awakened Wonder on Locals, you could have joined us for that conversation, and it's really worth becoming one, because this week, if you use the code God is great.
00:01:23.000 You get one month free.
00:01:24.000 Post that in the link.
00:01:25.000 Post it now.
00:01:25.000 Post it.
00:01:26.000 So click on that link.
00:01:27.000 Become an awakened wonder.
00:01:29.000 You get one month free.
00:01:31.000 You could just listen for a month or join us for a month.
00:01:33.000 If you didn't like it, you could click off.
00:01:34.000 Now we'll be on YouTube for about another 10 minutes for our conversation with Alex Berenson.
00:01:38.000 Then we'll be exclusively available on that sweet stream of freedom that we call Rumble.
00:01:42.000 Here's Alex Berenson.
00:01:45.000 Alex, thank you for joining us.
00:01:48.000 Thank you so much for having me.
00:01:50.000 I'm glad to hear you sounding so well.
00:01:54.000 I know you live a life of dedicated research and inquiry and in 2024 it seems that finally long repressed, suppressed and censored truths are emerging, whether that's on adverse injuries, excess deaths, extraordinary profiteering, the manipulation and management of information, And today in the United Kingdom where I live, it's been announced that AstraZeneca are giving 650 million pounds to Britain as some kind of demonstration of largesse for building more factories.
00:02:31.000 Now 97% of the research that AstraZeneca did before establishing that vaccine was funded by By the taxpayer.
00:02:40.000 I wonder what this new story, along with I suppose Mandy Cummings announcement of the normalization of COVID vax shots, you know, that's just part of life now having with the flu shot, tells us about the next phase of the COVID and COVID medication process.
00:02:58.000 Do you think that most people in the U.S., certainly, and I assume in the U.K.
00:03:03.000 and everywhere else, are basically, they don't want to hear about COVID anymore.
00:03:06.000 We're at a very interesting moment because, you know, I think there's some people, this sort of small group of hardcore COVID fanatics, you know, the people who are still wearing masks, the people who are still complaining on Twitter that, you know, I'm immunocompromised and you, Which in most cases, they're not seriously immunocompromised in the way that you would be having chemotherapy or something like that.
00:03:27.000 They just call themselves immunocompromised.
00:03:30.000 You're putting me at risk.
00:03:31.000 You're killing me.
00:03:32.000 So there's 10 or 15% of people who are in that place.
00:03:35.000 And then I'd say there's 10 or 15% of people who are seriously concerned about what we might have done to ourselves with the mRNAs. 0.99
00:03:43.000 And COVID vaccines and who definitely want to make sure that going forward we don't lock down for another respiratory virus like this one, that we have accountability.
00:03:55.000 But unfortunately or fortunately, I think most of the world just doesn't want to hear about COVID anymore.
00:04:01.000 And so for those of us who want accountability and who want to ask questions about the long-term impacts of the COVID vaccines, And we want to make sure that we don't have, you know, 2020 and 2021 don't repeat.
00:04:14.000 It's an interesting place.
00:04:15.000 How do we continue to talk to people about this and keep them interested in it at least enough to get some accountability?
00:04:23.000 Yes, it is interesting.
00:04:24.000 And I suppose one of the ways that we continue the conversation is by making it plain that there's a plan, if not a plan, it seems a strategy that may include future pandemics.
00:04:35.000 Now, optimistically, that would be an indication of Perspicacity and responsibility in this world government seems to be forming around us and proposing treaties that bypass national sovereignty.
00:04:52.000 The WHO version of a global pandemic response certainly includes such measures and indeed the Continual establishment of new factories for Moderna and AstraZeneca and this country and I'm sure there are comparable stories in your country also suggest that this is something that is ongoing and what I feel that people
00:05:17.000 ...ought to remain vigilant about is the way that it seems to me two things are a significant reframing of what's happened.
00:05:27.000 The recent large COVID study that was to a degree funded by the CDC and Pfizer appears to be an attempt to mitigate The impact of the stories at least that surround adverse events and in the UK the way that excess deaths are being recorded has changed.
00:05:47.000 They've manipulated the way that they report excess deaths.
00:05:52.000 So those things indicate to me that this is something that is ongoing.
00:05:56.000 It's a strategy that's likely to be deployed and normalized in the future and it's clear that we were deceived at least at the beginning of the pandemic period.
00:06:07.000 That's certainly true.
00:06:08.000 Let me go to a point that I think might have the most traction, again, for the people who are outside, the people who are really engaged in this going forward, and might be the most important thing we can talk about, which is the lab leak, okay?
00:06:22.000 So I think at this point that anybody who's paid attention to the evidence would say with a near certainty that SARS-CoV-2 escaped from a lab in Wuhan.
00:06:34.000 And that there was gain-of-function research happening there on coronaviruses.
00:06:34.000 Okay?
00:06:38.000 The Chinese were performing this. 0.64
00:06:40.000 They had talked to certain American scientists about what they might do.
00:06:44.000 Peter Daszak, who, as you know, is British, was in the middle of all of this.
00:06:49.000 And that there was an accident.
00:06:52.000 And that's where SARS-CoV-2 came from.
00:06:54.000 Okay.
00:06:55.000 It is crucial for two reasons that we force governments, the US government, the UK government, the Chinese government will never admit it, but we need to get governments to admit this.
00:07:07.000 Why?
00:07:08.000 Why does it matter so much?
00:07:09.000 Well, first of all, we should try to have some accountability for these people who were involved in this, even, and you know, again, we'll never get to the Chinese scientists, but somebody like Ralph Baric, who clearly was very involved in coronavirus research, Who, you know, was talking to the scientists at the lab in China, where this most likely leaked from.
00:07:31.000 I'm not saying Ralph Baric knew what was happening exactly, but there's sufficient evidence that he had quite a bit of knowledge, you know, in the years leading up to 2020, that dangerous research might be being conducted.
00:07:45.000 And, you know, was he talking to the U.S.
00:07:47.000 government about this?
00:07:48.000 He certainly didn't sound any public alarm about this.
00:07:51.000 So that's one.
00:07:52.000 But the second issue, and this kind of goes to what you just said, is there are these efforts for pandemic preparedness.
00:07:58.000 And my joke about this, but it's not a joke, is the number one way we're going to get another pandemic is funding pandemic preparedness efforts, okay?
00:08:07.000 Whether that's going into caves, looking for dangerous viruses, whether that's trying to make viruses more dangerous with gain-of-function research in labs, we shouldn't be doing any of it.
00:08:18.000 And there should be a worldwide treaty that basically says we're not going to meddle with respiratory viruses to try to make them more dangerous.
00:08:25.000 That's a crime against humanity.
00:08:26.000 The only thing we should be doing for the pandemic preparedness, probably, is buying some masks, even though they don't really work, buying some gloves, sticking them in a warehouse somewhere.
00:08:36.000 The truth, Russell, is that before COVID, we hadn't had a major respiratory virus epidemic since 1918, more than a century.
00:08:36.000 OK?
00:08:46.000 And it is almost certain that COVID was essentially a lab leak.
00:08:51.000 And so what are we doing?
00:08:53.000 We are very likely, and this is where you and I might disagree, you might think this is more of an intentional plan. 0.99
00:09:00.000 I think this is just, you know, people with a financial interest being stupid and not admitting the risks. 0.94
00:09:05.000 But I think you and I could both agree, we need not to fund pandemic preparedness efforts that are likely to cause another pandemic. 0.98
00:09:14.000 Yes and also I've not gotten into any ideas that are difficult to corroborate.
00:09:20.000 I'm quite happy to settle with dual purpose research seems pretty established.
00:09:27.000 Lab leak seems pretty established.
00:09:28.000 American financial involvement seems quite clear and what's plain to all of us and requires no further research is that if that is true the people that Collectively are responsible for this happening, were charged with our global response, are unwilling to admit their culpability and are now firstly moving on to preparing us for the next one without having learned any of the lessons of the previous one.
00:10:00.000 If they've learned, they're certainly not telling us publicly.
00:10:03.000 They're certainly, whatever they may know, whatever they may think, they are just charging merrily along.
00:10:12.000 Our audience, like in the stream, the rumble stream and the locals awakened wonder stream, are certainly free to speculate but what I tend to do is remain within what is demonstrable and I do enjoy a little conjecture and in the same way that you've said it's clear that certain financial interests have benefited and are there for perhaps Viewing this myopically, it appears that what's particularly dangerous is where the financial interests and the ability of states to regulate and impose authority and a general trend towards authoritarianism in a more desperate, diffuse and oppositional public sphere increasingly charged by
00:11:00.000 Social media appear to align and are leading to, whether it's through censorship laws or the militarization of police forces or the normalization of lockdowns or conversations around 15-minute cities, authoritarianism appears to be on the rise, most notably, in my view, not in the hands of resurgent nativist populism, but under the peculiar auspices of liberalism, in fact.
00:11:32.000 I mean, I would basically agree with that.
00:11:34.000 One thing I've written a lot about on my Substack on Unreported Truths recently, and you know, Substack, Twitter, Rumble, these are some of the few places left where you can really say what you think, you know, for better or worse, where the First Amendment in the U.S.
00:11:49.000 really holds, is that I think the First Amendment in the United States is under threat.
00:11:52.000 And, you know, it's under threat from mostly from the left in a variety of ways, including defamation lawsuits, including, you know, campus speech codes, including cancel culture.
00:12:05.000 You know, there's there's there's efforts to sort of ring fence what you can and can't say.
00:12:11.000 And including in my case, you know, direct efforts from the White House to force Twitter, and ultimately these efforts were successful by the White House and by Pfizer, to force Twitter to ban me.
00:12:23.000 So, you know, I have my cup that I like to, you know, Fauci and Gottlieb and Slavin and Borla.
00:12:29.000 You know, I am suing the federal government in the U.S.
00:12:32.000 I am suing, you know, senior Pfizer officials.
00:12:36.000 And I'm hoping that, you know, I'm hoping that lawsuit will continue to move forward and we're waiting on to hear about the motion to dismiss.
00:12:42.000 But, you know, beyond me, beyond you, beyond any single person, I think I'm really sad that younger people in the United States don't really seem, especially on the left, they don't really seem to believe in the First Amendment or understand its value.
00:12:58.000 And to me, that's just crazy.
00:13:01.000 We can't bring you this content without our sponsors.
00:13:04.000 Here's a message from one now.
00:13:08.000 We love our partners on this show because our partners keep us going, they support us, they stand firm and strong against a lot of powerful voices, corrupt voices, trying to bring down independence in these spaces and we couldn't have a better sponsor than our friends Black Forest and this product NMN.
00:13:26.000 This is a potential therapy for age-related diseases, cardiovascular disease, neurodegenerative degenerative disorders, diabetes. Big Pharma of course
00:13:36.000 wants to monopolize this incredible and powerful product charging dollar dollar dollar dollar
00:13:39.000 dollar dollar dollars dollars taking away your right to non-pharmaceutical alternatives like this one.
00:13:44.000 Transitioning NMN to a drug of course would inflate costs and prescription fees and it could be
00:13:50.000 as much as thirty thousand dollars which is unattainable without insurance and of course that's what
00:13:55.000 Now Black Forest partnered with the Natural Product Association to fight against the FDA and their stance on NMN.
00:13:55.000 they want.
00:14:02.000 This amazing Black Forest supplement could become the first anti-aging FDA approved drug where you'd need a prescription to buy it costing big bucks!
00:14:11.000 Fight against Big Pharma and FDA corruption and old father time himself by using this incredible product.
00:14:19.000 I use it.
00:14:20.000 I love it.
00:14:21.000 Buy NMN with this 25% off deal.
00:14:24.000 Go to blackforestsupplements.com forward slash Russell.
00:14:26.000 You'll get 25% off.
00:14:28.000 Plus our friends at Black Forest will know that their adverts on our space is working.
00:14:32.000 This will mean we'll get more adverts from them and we'll become more powerful.
00:14:39.000 So, shake up your system and shake up their system with these glorious NMNs. 0.67
00:14:44.000 Okay, let's get back to our content.
00:14:46.000 Thank you, partners.
00:14:48.000 We are going to have to start the countdown now.
00:14:50.000 We're going to be exclusively available on Rumble now.
00:14:53.000 So become an Awakened Wonder to join us for these conversations live.
00:14:57.000 Remember, you can get one month free by clicking the link in the description and using the code GODISGREAT.
00:15:05.000 I suppose that, well, you know, what we've learned about The way that the culture appears to be dividing is that values that seem to be somewhat permanent and connected to the ideology are mobile and are easily yielded when authoritarianism appears to be acting in their favor.
00:15:28.000 And that's, I suppose, the opposite of a value or a principle in so much as it's not able to withstand vicissitudes.
00:15:37.000 That's right.
00:15:38.000 I mean, it's all well and good to say you believe in free speech when you control, you know, most newspapers or most of academia or Hollywood, but you have to, if you truly believe in the value that it's a universal value, you have to be willing to listen or at least permit the speaking of stuff that you don't like.
00:15:57.000 And I, you know, I just, Again, look, people say, you know it too, when you're on Twitter, people say terrible things to you all the time, and that's the price you pay for having open dialogue, open discussion, and I truly believe that's how we get to answers, by letting people say whatever they want.
00:16:19.000 And this idea that, I mean, somebody went on MSNBC, this disinformation specialist went on MSNBC and said the First Amendment is a risk to the United States.
00:16:32.000 The First Amendment, it's the First Amendment!
00:16:37.000 It's at the core of who we are, and I think it's made the United States a great place, and we've exported that value of freedom of speech worldwide.
00:16:45.000 And the idea that somebody who claims to be an expert on information and speech would say that openly is just crazy to me.
00:16:53.000 I suppose it's become an important message.
00:16:55.000 I was astonished to find out how much money and how many resources Moderna, for example, had deployed to silence voices, I assume, including... Silence both of us!
00:17:06.000 I mean, that doesn't seem like it would be in the ordinary remit of a pharmacological organization anyway.
00:17:06.000 Yeah.
00:17:13.000 Aren't they supposed to be manufacturing and distributing medicines?
00:17:19.000 You know, I think they correctly viewed people who were talking about vaccine side effects, who were saying, how long does this really work?
00:17:29.000 You know, is, does it make any sense to, if you were previously infected to get vaccinated again, what about, you know, what about if you're 20 years old and in good health, why would you take this vaccine?
00:17:39.000 They viewed it as a problem for their sales, as a problem for their profits, and they wanted to get us out of the way.
00:17:44.000 Yeah.
00:17:46.000 It's plainly the case.
00:17:47.000 Now, one of the stories that's going to be difficult to repress, though you can see the machinery maneuvering around it, is the increase in excess deaths across the world.
00:17:59.000 In this country, the Office for Statistics has altered the way that they measure excess deaths In order to, it seems at least to me, to lower the number of excess deaths which they have done successfully from 30,000 to 10,000.
00:18:11.000 Yet in your country it seems that in a period of around 10 months there were 150,000 excess deaths in an entirely unanticipated demographic.
00:18:22.000 Among other things this caused the insurance companies to re-evaluate the premiums and that's one of the ways that it becomes most empirical and demonstrable and the conversation unavoidable.
00:18:32.000 How do you think something as Difficult to dilute and ignore as excess deaths is going to be managed.
00:18:39.000 And why are we not getting the necessary research into this?
00:18:45.000 So that is a great question.
00:18:46.000 You know, it does seem to me that both in both the US and the UK, where I've seen the numbers, yeah, we have excess deaths at a rate of maybe 8 to 10 percent above pre-COVID time, right?
00:18:58.000 Which is Which is maybe worse than it looks like because if you recall, early in COVID, there was this idea that the people who COVID attacked and killed were mostly so old and so sick that there was what was called the pull forward effect.
00:19:14.000 In other words, that people who were dying, who were very, very likely to have died a year or two later.
00:19:19.000 And so the belief was we would have a period after COVID where deaths were actually below normal for a year or two before they went back to trend.
00:19:27.000 So we never had that.
00:19:30.000 What we had in 2021, 2022, 2023 was continued excess deaths basically at the 2020 level, a little below.
00:19:38.000 But so in other words, we never got back to normal.
00:19:41.000 We seem to be at this new, in the US and the UK, which is the numbers I'm most familiar with, permanently high plateau of deaths.
00:19:48.000 And no one knows why, is the short answer, right?
00:19:50.000 You know, I know a lot of people blame the vaccines.
00:19:54.000 On the other side, a lot of people say, oh, well, you know, it was after effects from COVID.
00:20:00.000 You know, is there something else going on?
00:20:02.000 Is it that people didn't exercise in 2020 and they didn't go to the doctor?
00:20:06.000 Well, I mean, that's harder and harder to believe as we get more and more years out.
00:20:10.000 But the one thing that is clear is, as you said, no one's investigating this.
00:20:14.000 The CDC is not investigating it.
00:20:17.000 The National Health Service doesn't seem to be investigating it.
00:20:20.000 There's just, oh, well, you know, a few hundred thousand people a year more are dying in the U.S.
00:20:26.000 and the U.K.
00:20:26.000 and Europe than were dying in 2019.
00:20:30.000 Well, you know, maybe it's COVID.
00:20:32.000 We won't worry about it.
00:20:35.000 And whether or not it's the vaccines, I don't know.
00:20:37.000 I think, you know, I think I think it's very, very hard to determine what's causing it.
00:20:44.000 And I think it should be a scientific project that governments are looking into.
00:20:48.000 And I think you're right to ask why that isn't happening.
00:20:51.000 No, it's interesting.
00:20:52.000 They're not investigating it.
00:20:53.000 They're investigating people that are investigating it.
00:20:56.000 Is it what they're investigating?
00:20:59.000 And they're altering the way that they measure excess deaths.
00:21:03.000 So it's astonishing.
00:21:04.000 Of course, Pfizer shares are... Well, let me have a look.
00:21:09.000 I've got some data here, but I don't think it's going too well for them.
00:21:11.000 It's collapsed to its lowest point in 10 years, Mandy Cohen has announced that there's a new COVID vaccine coming out this fall as if it was like a Kanye album.
00:21:22.000 Why does it seem now that COVID is being treated like flu after it was treated initially more like Ebola or HIV?
00:21:33.000 People are tired of it and everyone's gotten it and everybody knows just that it's not Ebola, that it is more like the flu.
00:21:41.000 And so at some point, if you're the CDC and you're telling people to isolate for five days and wear masks all the time, people are just laughing at you.
00:21:50.000 And I think, you know, they've recognized that in the last couple of months.
00:21:55.000 They've lost so much credibility.
00:21:56.000 I mean, I don't know if it's the same in the UK, but in the US, the public health establishment has lost tremendous credibility.
00:22:05.000 And I would say that is not just verbal.
00:22:07.000 Again, for the sort of hardcore people who are really concerned.
00:22:10.000 I would say that average people are just don't, they've tuned out the CDC and they even trust their own doctors less.
00:22:18.000 And I will say, it seems to me that doctors in the U.S.
00:22:22.000 are not pushing the COVID vaccines at all at this point.
00:22:27.000 And they have essentially realized that they don't want to sacrifice their credibility, you know, to help the CDC when ultimately There's no gain for their patience.
00:22:40.000 No, I think trust in institutions is at an all-time low.
00:22:44.000 Of course, in the ascendancy of Trump, we saw the power of social media, and indeed, let's say, one man as the voice of a movement's ability to destabilize, diminish, and maybe even decimate the power of legacy media, perhaps just with the simple phrase, fake news.
00:23:06.000 Even now, as Trump's various forms of lawfare continue, it seems that the left are equally willing to trash institutions if those institutions don't behave in accordance with their agenda.
00:23:20.000 I have seen MSNBC and CNN query the validity of the Supreme Court's decision to defer any January 6th related trials to post-November, and therefore the election.
00:23:34.000 So this, while institutions and trusted institutions, be they medical, judicial or electoral, seems to be collapsing, do you think that this is a point of potential crisis for America?
00:23:49.000 You know, I hate to think that, but it, I mean, it sort of feels that whoever wins in November, and obviously it's going to be Biden and Trump again, A lot of the country is not going to, I mean, obviously
00:24:02.000 they wouldn't like the result.
00:24:03.000 Will they accept the result?
00:24:04.000 I mean, it's hard to know.
00:24:08.000 And Biden obviously is, he's 81.
00:24:13.000 It's hard to imagine him being president in two years, much less in 2028.
00:24:19.000 Trump, if he wins, is going to be very angry and understandably so, frankly, at the way he's been
00:24:25.000 treated the last couple of years and you know.
00:24:28.000 The four criminal trials, the civil suits, the crazy New York case where he's been fined $450 million with interest for taking out some loans that he paid back In full?
00:24:42.000 I mean, that to me is a true miscarriage of justice, and he's right to be angry about it.
00:24:48.000 So I am worried.
00:24:49.000 I mean, I think like a lot of Americans, I feel I don't know what to do, you know?
00:24:54.000 It's worrisome.
00:24:59.000 Well, it seems to me that what's happening in macro is trust in institutions is collapsing because of the impossibility of concealing their malfeasance in an open communication world before the censorship industrial complex can catch up to the capacities of independent media and social media communication.
00:25:21.000 Means that there's a need for a re-evaluation of all of our institutions.
00:25:27.000 And instead of recognising that need, there's an attempt to cling on to centralised authoritarian models in a landscape that cannot and will not accommodate them.
00:25:36.000 And that's going to lead to the rise of authoritarianism.
00:25:39.000 And it seems to me that the Democrat Party are unable to meaningfully introduce any policies that are going to appeal To ordinary Americans, blue-collar, what they call them, grey-collar, ordinary Americans of many distinctions, and are leaning into only two areas really, the traditional areas of guns and abortion, the tropes that have emerged out of wokeism, and the ongoing and increasingly hysterical vilification of Trump.
00:26:08.000 When their own government and their own candidate is becoming increasingly popular as wars across the world cost the American taxpayer an unmanageable amount and seem increasingly either futile or, worse than futile, nihilistic, self-destructive.
00:26:28.000 It really is stunning, the repudiation of Biden and the embrace of Trump.
00:26:36.000 In 2020, I don't believe there was ever a poll that showed Trump ahead of Biden.
00:26:41.000 And at this point, in 2024, Trump is clearly ahead of Biden.
00:26:47.000 Whether it's two points or five points, if the election were held today, it seems almost certain that Donald Trump would win.
00:26:53.000 Um, and considering, you know, January 6th and considering, um, uh, you know, that, that made that upset a lot of people, including me.
00:27:02.000 I did not like to see the Capitol, the riot outside the Capitol.
00:27:05.000 I'm not going to call it an insurrection.
00:27:07.000 It clearly was not an insurrection, but it was a bad day.
00:27:09.000 And, and, and, and it was a riot to see that, that the, the Donald Trump, that the Democrats have overreached so badly.
00:27:18.000 in the last three years. That Donald Trump is now leading, that he's managed to become
00:27:24.000 a sympathetic figure to a lot of Americans is really amazing and says, you're right, the Democrats
00:27:30.000 they seem to have staked their whole future on demonizing Trump and at least for now it is not
00:27:36.000 working. No, it doesn't appear to be.
00:27:39.000 And it's difficult to imagine what further strategies remain, especially when there's an unwillingness to accommodate other candidates, an unwillingness to debate.
00:27:51.000 When RFK, who I... well, increasingly, if you think of the views that RfK espoused that were regarded as extreme mostly centered around his book about Fauci, his concerns around vaccines and their potential side effects, dual-purpose research, the weaponization of health and
00:28:18.000 It seems odd that RFK was demonized and ultimately annexed by a party that he's plainly historically affiliated with in order to once again ensure that the Democrat Party remains a sort of a hierarchical institution with preferred candidates given easy access to candidacy.
00:28:41.000 Well, you see it, I think, on both sides, that no one can tell Biden he shouldn't run again.
00:28:47.000 The Democratic Party does not have the power to do that.
00:28:49.000 And Donald Trump, all the people in the Republican Party who didn't like Donald Trump, all those rhinos, you know, he's destroyed them. 0.96
00:28:57.000 The Republican Party is Donald Trump's party, and the Democratic Party, you know, there may be people in the Democratic Party who don't want Joe Biden to run, but they're not in charge.
00:29:06.000 So we are, it is, You can argue that parties as institutions, you talk about a lot of institutions that have lost power, that that's another institution that's lost power.
00:29:18.000 you know, that Donald Trump or Elon or you or Tucker, you know, that power has sort of shifted to individuals
00:29:27.000 who are able to reach large groups of people via social media.
00:29:32.000 And you're right, I think there's these, like in academia, these institutions don't know
00:29:37.000 how to deal with it.
00:29:38.000 And this idea that they're going to respond by censoring.
00:29:40.000 To go back to the lab leak, it's very interesting, right?
00:29:43.000 The lab leak, the first and most crucial research showing that this probably came out of a lab
00:29:50.000 was literally done on Twitter, open source.
00:29:54.000 You know, some scientists, some non-scientists kind of, you know, playing hopscotch with each other,
00:29:59.000 finding, you know, an obscure database here, a paper there, and really putting together something that, you know,
00:30:06.000 that Fauci wanted to hide, that the US government.
00:30:10.000 government wanted to hide, that the media wanted to hide, because You know, whether you want to say, well, they did that for the right reasons.
00:30:15.000 They thought, you know, maybe there would be real anger at China.
00:30:18.000 I mean, I don't think that's most of what it was.
00:30:21.000 I think it was mostly an effort to protect their own interests.
00:30:24.000 The power devolved.
00:30:25.000 And you're right.
00:30:26.000 Institutions don't like that.
00:30:29.000 And they're trying to suppress it.
00:30:31.000 And so far they've failed.
00:30:33.000 And so we are at a time of tension.
00:30:37.000 When you were working at the New York Times, as well as reporting on financial crime, am I right in saying that you served as a foreign correspondent in Iraq and reported presumably on the conditions of the Iraq conflicts and the subsequent period in that region?
00:30:52.000 You left the New York Times in 2010 and it seems now that the New York Times is essentially, or at least functionally, a limb of the establishment. If you take, for example, their
00:31:04.000 involvement in the Jack Tashera case, where it was New York Times investigators that contributed
00:31:11.000 to his eventual arrest, at least their reporting and their research led to his arrest.
00:31:16.000 They were sort of almost a law enforcement agency in that instance. And the recent
00:31:20.000 story about CIA having bases in Ukraine and having had them for the last 10 years, while
00:31:25.000 contrarily reporting that Putin's attack on Ukraine was entirely unprovoked, whilst it's
00:31:32.000 clear that the CIA have been acting as provocateurs in that region prior even to 2014 and
00:31:39.000 significantly since.
00:31:41.000 Since then, what do you think has changed in the way that legacy media operates?
00:31:46.000 Is the age where journalists can become heroic, win Pulitzer Prizes, be like men or women of the people, adored, voices of truth and reason, and still operate at institutions like the New York Times truly over?
00:32:00.000 What is the role of the New York Times now?
00:32:03.000 How have those institutions changed since, you know, during the time that you've worked for them and since you've left them?
00:32:11.000 I'll say a couple things.
00:32:12.000 First of all, I think there's nothing more dangerous than a journalist who wants to be a hero.
00:32:16.000 The biggest mistakes, and I'm not even joking right now, the biggest mistakes I saw and the most glaring problems I saw at the Times came when their I'm thinking of one in particular, but there were journalists who thought, I'm the center of the story.
00:32:30.000 I want to be the center of attention.
00:32:33.000 And that causes overreach.
00:32:34.000 Okay.
00:32:35.000 Secondly, when I worked at the Times, okay, well, I wrote a lot of stories that, you know, when I was in Iraq, that the coalition provisional authority, which was the US government, did not like.
00:32:45.000 And so I certainly didn't view myself as a tool of the U.S.
00:32:52.000 government.
00:32:52.000 Maybe I was in some broader way that I didn't see, but I didn't view myself that way, and I was never encouraged to view myself that way.
00:33:00.000 Third, I couldn't work at the New York Times anymore.
00:33:02.000 I mean, first of all, they would never have me back.
00:33:05.000 And sometimes I think it's funny, when I write something that people on Twitter don't like, they say, oh, he wants to get back to the New York Times.
00:33:10.000 That will never, ever, ever happen.
00:33:13.000 And I know it.
00:33:15.000 I have a great, great audience on Substack.
00:33:15.000 And that's fine with me.
00:33:18.000 And I do quite well.
00:33:19.000 And I'm very happy about that.
00:33:21.000 But I couldn't work there, because politically, I'm too independent.
00:33:25.000 And, you know, the stories that I wrote were, they were really investigative stories about companies and, you know, that was fine with me.
00:33:34.000 I loved doing that.
00:33:35.000 I loved investigating companies.
00:33:36.000 But I don't even think I'd be able to do that these days because if I had an opinion about, you know, the 1619 project or whatever, I would have to either keep my mouth shut or risk, you know, censure and being fired.
00:33:50.000 And so the Times has lost It's not just me.
00:33:53.000 They've lost a fair number of people like me.
00:33:56.000 They've shifted further and further left.
00:33:58.000 I wouldn't even say they're necessarily a tool of the establishment.
00:34:01.000 They're just a tool of the sort of progressive wing of the Democratic Party at this point.
00:34:06.000 And look, if Donald Trump is re-elected or is elected in 2024, They're going to be at open war with the government.
00:34:15.000 You won't see them as a tool of the establishment.
00:34:18.000 They will go to war with the government.
00:34:20.000 It's all political.
00:34:22.000 It's not sort of like we want to work for the U.S.
00:34:25.000 government.
00:34:27.000 We stand with the woke wing of the Democratic Party.
00:34:30.000 I wonder then where, in your mind at least, the location of the establishment is at this point.
00:34:38.000 I feel that potentially in this kind of spaces that we report in and communicate in, the establishment is regarded as the nexus of interest, a transcendent of partisan ...politics and that currently the the democrat party are more representative of those interests indeed using the sort of cultural issues as a veil or smoke screen for the broad compliance with the economic interests with the industries that tacitly or otherwise control those institutions.
00:35:13.000 I've heard the phrase the blob used a lot to To describe those interests, the CIA and state departments and so I suppose what I mean by that, yes it's pretty plain that the New York Times wouldn't pivot in favor of Trump were he to be re-elected but isn't it, whether this is true or not in terms of policy or his record in office, certainly the emotion that he engenders in his supporters is a kind of anti-establishment
00:35:44.000 Further, drain the swamp, lock her up.
00:35:49.000 This is like, this kind of nativist populism is, I suppose, fundamentally derived from a sense that's probably been a lot worse since 2008, and I don't mean the presidency of Obama, I mean Obama's decision primarily to bail out the banks, that's kind of fostered a sense that these institutions are no longer, let alone in the service of American people, even particularly connected to them.
00:36:15.000 I would certainly agree with that.
00:36:16.000 And I would also agree, you know, you really started in 2003, right, with the Iraq war, which, you know, proved to be basically a strategic disaster, you know, that the Republican foreign policy establishment never admitted.
00:36:31.000 And, you know, Trump came on.
00:36:33.000 I mean, if you really think about what Trump, the first truth that he told that people didn't want to hear was about Iraq being a disaster.
00:36:45.000 And that was almost his first engine.
00:36:50.000 And the second truth I would say he told that people didn't want to hear was about immigration, and that too much immigration is destabilizing, whether it's in the U.S.
00:36:57.000 or Europe.
00:36:58.000 And the U.S., look, we can tolerate immigration. 0.92
00:37:03.000 We're an immigrant society, but that does not mean that having One or two percent of the country come in every year from really poor countries is good for the United States.
00:37:13.000 It's not.
00:37:14.000 And so Trump, you know, when he said build the wall, you know, people on the left, that was very much something people in the establishment didn't want to hear.
00:37:24.000 It was too raw.
00:37:25.000 It was too true. 0.76
00:37:27.000 And frankly, as much as anything, I think that's why he won.
00:37:32.000 Yeah, apparently so.
00:37:33.000 Back in 2016.
00:37:34.000 With regard to the Iraq war, what was the nature of your reporting on it at that time?
00:37:39.000 What were the kind of, because I suppose then you were sort of, although Obama would have been in office, I guess it would have been critiques of Cheney, Wolfowitz, etc.
00:37:48.000 No, I mean, listen, I was not a political reporter.
00:37:52.000 I went there in 2003, I went there in 2004, and just tried to report from Baghdad and the rest of Iraq what I was seeing.
00:37:59.000 And it was very clear that the occupation was not going well,
00:38:03.000 that decisions that had been made inside the Green Zone were not playing out on the ground as the US claimed
00:38:12.000 or wanted.
00:38:14.000 And so the tension was building, and there was going to be an insurrection.
00:38:19.000 And I think the only people who really knew that in Iraq in 2003 were some of the front line officers,
00:38:27.000 military officers, and some of the reporters.
00:38:29.000 And the Green Zone, they just, la, la, la, la, la.
00:38:32.000 We're just, you know, everything is great.
00:38:34.000 And this country is going to be Lebanon in a couple of years. 1.00
00:38:38.000 And all we need to worry about is how to distribute the reconstruction contracts.
00:38:43.000 And that, you know, that blew up in their faces in a matter of months and became a very expensive nightmare that in some ways is, you know, we're still dealing with the consequences of.
00:38:55.000 But that's what I was writing about.
00:38:57.000 It was the ultimate example of propaganda meeting reality, right?
00:39:01.000 It was sort of, in the same way that Vietnam was for a generation of reporters before, right?
00:39:06.000 Where for all these years, the United States insisted that Vietnam was under control, and if we just had a few more troops, everything would be fine, and the South Vietnamese really wanted us there, and it was all lies, right?
00:39:17.000 And it blew up.
00:39:20.000 And so, you know, war is the ultimate place where you can lie all you want, but the enemy ultimately gets a vote.
00:39:29.000 And so that's the kind of reporter I was.
00:39:32.000 I always liked being outside.
00:39:33.000 I didn't like being in talking to sort of the people in charge.
00:39:37.000 I like seeing it for myself.
00:39:40.000 I see, and I wonder if ultimately we will come to regard subsequent conflicts in the same light, that the propaganda simply cannot withstand reality as more and more people are exposed to that reality.
00:39:52.000 Certainly Afghanistan could be described in those terms, although it was never a particularly popular conflict, neither was it much publicized, even though it cost, I think, two trillion dollars.
00:40:01.000 It seems to me that what's happening now between Ukraine and Russia and the degree to which NATO countries and certainly Western interests are involved in that conflict is an available comparison as well as the legitimacy of the endeavour and what is actually at play when it comes to the motivation of nations like yours and mine.
00:40:23.000 So, you know, Ukraine is probably a place where I differ in my views from you, but I will say this.
00:40:29.000 I would say we're probably not getting the full story, right?
00:40:33.000 There's not a lot of reporting from the front lines on either side, on either the Russian or the Ukrainian side.
00:40:41.000 You know, front lines.
00:40:42.000 And it does seem clear that, you know, this idea that some of us had that, you know, the Ukrainians are really going to counterattack and deal a blow to the Russians in 2023. 0.60
00:40:52.000 Well, that didn't happen.
00:40:54.000 And so, you know, I don't have to agree with you, you know, completely about Ukraine to understand that you're probably right that we're not getting the full story.
00:41:05.000 Also, I wonder where we disagree.
00:41:11.000 Do you consider then that Putin has expansionist plans that go beyond Ukraine?
00:41:17.000 Do you think that the CIA involvement in the 2014 coup is significant?
00:41:22.000 Do you think that the NATO impingement on former Soviet territories as Putin himself states is one of the reasons
00:41:29.000 this conflict started and were the US to use their considerable might to push for diplomacy rather
00:41:35.000 than an escalation of hostilities that that wouldn't be a better way to proceed given that they're in
00:41:42.000 all likelihood this could if this war were to escalate we're dealing with a pretty serious
00:41:48.000 opponent. Yes I look I think I think it's hard to think of a war where that where the sort of the two
00:41:56.000 sides have such a completely different view of the of the sort of.
00:42:01.000 Motivations, right?
00:42:02.000 So it's pretty clear that at least in the Kremlin, they view Ukraine, you know, if not as a completely as completely, you know, Russian territory, certainly, it should be a vassal state, right?
00:42:15.000 That it's that it's part of the buffer between Russia and Europe, that that's what it's been.
00:42:20.000 And that, you know, NATO really, and the EU should really lay off Ukraine.
00:42:25.000 And then from the, you know, from the European point of view, well, Ukraine's in Europe, and We should, you know, we should be encouraging Ukraine to become this Western democratic society.
00:42:36.000 And ultimately, I mean, I guess what I believed, you know, in 2022 and would like to believe today is that the Ukrainians mostly agree with the European point of view.
00:42:47.000 If that's wrong, if it turns out that there's a significant number of people in Ukraine who really want to be aligned with Russia, you know, that would be That would be something that I would say I haven't heard in the media.
00:43:01.000 And is it true?
00:43:02.000 I don't think it's true, but you raise a fair question.
00:43:08.000 Yeah it seems like it's somewhat regionalized even within the reporting that I have had access to and simply I suppose what I would return to is what is the function of the United States in bringing about a resolution in this conflict and what are the motivations in the continual arming of Ukraine?
00:43:28.000 Indeed your Earlier remark that Russia perhaps regards Ukraine as a vassal and a border, I think, could equally be applied to NATO and the US's perspective on Ukraine.
00:43:38.000 Fair point, fair point.
00:43:43.000 Look, you know, a good question.
00:43:48.000 Here's the one thing I think that people on the right need to acknowledge, which is that Putin tends to be a bad actor.
00:43:56.000 Okay, and I do think that the unwillingness, you know, the willingness to sort of make excuses for him in terms of the internal repression in Russia, that's not a society I would want to live in, and I assume it's not a society you would want to live in.
00:44:11.000 And look, I have real problems with the way the left treats the First Amendment in the United States, I have real problems with the way I've been treated, the way you've been treated by people, but we're not being Poisoned, you know for our political views and and you know, the Russia is a Russia's a rough place And I do think we you know, the right needs to admit that absolutely I certainly have no problems admitting that Russia is a rough place and these points about our nations being preferable is certainly one that conservatives were willing to use when the left were advocating for different forms of socialism in an earlier incarnation of that movement, but
00:44:43.000 When it comes to the matter of liberty, these are questions that, you know, gosh, I'd love the opportunity to put before Julian Assange, for example, and certainly the way his case has been handled.
00:44:55.000 Fair point.
00:44:58.000 It's funny, this has turned into, you know, a much, in some ways, this is what, look, even you and I can't talk about COVID for an hour anymore.
00:45:10.000 That's it.
00:45:11.000 We've had to go in there and start talking about Julian Assange.
00:45:14.000 Alex, thank you so much for coming on and thank you for sharing your perspectives.
00:45:18.000 I only want to speak to people that I agree with on everything.
00:45:22.000 If that was my perspective, I wouldn't be able to remain married.
00:45:25.000 So it's lovely to speak with you.
00:45:28.000 There's nothing you've said that I feel the same.
00:45:30.000 me remotely. Indeed, my belief in free speech precisely means I want to hear a variety of
00:45:35.000 perspectives that I may learn and become more sophisticated in my own understanding of a
00:45:39.000 complex world.
00:45:40.000 I feel the same. And I feel that the left likes to, you know, brand for lack of a better
00:45:45.000 word, people like you, you know, they want to take, they want to say, you know, oh, he, 0.93
00:45:51.000 you know, he's crazy or he, you know, he's a conspiracy.
00:45:53.000 There's it's, you know, when you actually have a conversation and get into it, you can hear the places of agreement and disagreement.
00:45:59.000 And that we should we should all be doing this.
00:46:02.000 Yes.
00:46:03.000 Yes, we must.
00:46:04.000 We must, Alex.
00:46:05.000 Alex, thank you so much for your time today.
00:46:07.000 It's lovely speaking with you.
00:46:10.000 I hope you enjoyed that conversation with Alex Berenson.
00:46:11.000 You can find him on Substack at hisname.substank.
00:46:15.000 There's a, excuse me, Substack. 1.00
00:46:16.000 There's a link in the description for that.
00:46:17.000 Remember, 25% off this all week.
00:46:20.000 Remember, too, to join us on Locals to get additional content.
00:46:24.000 Now, you cannot trust the Legacy Media to report on complex subjects in a nuanced way.
00:46:29.000 You know what they do.
00:46:30.000 They amplify the intentions of the powerful in the establishment.
00:46:34.000 But we don't do that.
00:46:35.000 Here's the news.
00:46:36.000 No, here's the FN news.
00:46:38.000 Thank you for choosing Fox News.
00:46:40.000 You're welcome.
00:46:40.000 No, here's the FN news.
00:46:43.000 Ivermectin is a type of horse paste that should only be used on horses to make them better.
00:46:49.000 I can say that but the FDA you mustn't say it anymore because you've over said it and now you've had to be banned.
00:46:57.000 See how you like it?
00:47:00.000 Today we're talking about ivermectin and how now the FDA, the Food and Drug Administration, can no longer call it a horse paste.
00:47:07.000 But it's a bit late now, isn't it?
00:47:08.000 They've really horse pasted it off to within an inch of its life.
00:47:11.000 I mean, do you remember that moment when all you could really hear on the news?
00:47:15.000 Hello, welcome to the news.
00:47:16.000 Ivermectin?
00:47:17.000 Yeah, don't really think about it.
00:47:18.000 Well, it's a thing.
00:47:19.000 It's horse paste, OK?
00:47:20.000 And don't go using it like that Joe Rogan to make yourself better if you get an illness, which is definitely a political thing now and not a private medical matter.
00:47:28.000 One of those drugs he mentioned, ivermectin, is something more often used to deworm horses.
00:47:32.000 is.
00:47:52.000 So now let's have a look at why the FDA are not allowed to call ivermectin a horse paste anymore and why we couldn't refer to it as a Nobel Prize winning anti-parasitic drug in the first place when that's what it was. 0.62
00:48:03.000 The FDA has agreed to remove and stop reposting several social media messages suggesting ivermectin, a drug some doctors use to treat COVID, is intended for animals and not humans.
00:48:15.000 I like that, because it sort of sounds like a harassment claim, doesn't it?
00:48:18.000 You've got to stop and stop repeating, OK, sorry, we won't.
00:48:21.000 Can we just occasionally on a Saturday say it's a little bit of a pace for animals?
00:48:25.000 No, not at all.
00:48:26.000 Under no circumstances.
00:48:27.000 Stop saying it's a pace for animals.
00:48:29.000 What did you just say?
00:48:30.000 I said it's a waste for kajikals. 1.00
00:48:32.000 The move settles a lawsuit filed by three doctors who accused the agency of hurting their medical practices.
00:48:38.000 The lawsuit targeted not only the FDA, but the Department of Health and Human Services.
00:48:43.000 The case was initially dismissed, citing the FDA's sovereign immunity.
00:48:47.000 However, the U.S.
00:48:48.000 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit overturned the ruling.
00:48:52.000 The court said the FDA's role is not to provide personalized medical advice.
00:48:56.000 Wow, that's amazing, isn't it?
00:48:58.000 That's not the FDA's role, even, to provide personal, medicalised advice.
00:49:02.000 They're meant to actually oversee clinical trials, regulate pharmaceutical companies, from whom they also receive their funding, in significant part.
00:49:09.000 That's not even their job.
00:49:11.000 In fact, when you start thinking about all these groups, N-I-A-H, C-D-C, what are they really? 1.00
00:49:15.000 They're not meant to be in charge of you, are they?
00:49:16.000 They're meant to be your advisors.
00:49:17.000 It's odd how tyranny works now.
00:49:20.000 It's colorful, it's lurid, there's songs, there's dances, but at the end of it, you are getting told what to do.
00:49:24.000 And if you try doing what you want to do, even if it's not outside of the law in normal ways,
00:49:29.000 you'll be annihilated. 0.75
00:49:31.000 I mean, all Joe Rogan actually did was when I got COVID actually, and what I did was these things.
00:49:35.000 Pffft.
00:49:36.000 What have you ever done ever?
00:49:39.000 That's a horse paste!
00:49:40.000 Let's look at what you've done online! 1.00
00:49:41.000 We will find a way to destroy you!
00:49:44.000 And now the FDA mustn't call it a horse paste anymore.
00:49:46.000 It's simply not true.
00:49:47.000 It's misleading.
00:49:48.000 It's misinformation.
00:49:49.000 Ironically, disinformation.
00:49:51.000 As a result, the FDA will now stop publishing a consumer update titled, Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Prevent COVID-19.
00:49:59.000 And we'd prefer that you use drugs that are patented, even if there are all sorts of adverse events and possibly even excess deaths that we're frantically trying to conceal right now.
00:50:08.000 And remove all related social media posts within 21 days.
00:50:12.000 Ivermectin is approved for both animal and human use.
00:50:15.000 There are loads of things, though, like antibiotics and headache tablets.
00:50:17.000 You don't have to get all hysterical about it.
00:50:18.000 It's just, like, an animal's not that different from a human.
00:50:21.000 We're 98% identical to a chimpanzee.
00:50:24.000 We're 60% identical to an earthworm.
00:50:26.000 Why are we all getting so excited?
00:50:28.000 Trying to get that last bit in. 0.98
00:50:36.000 But I will say, even though it's not a horse paste, you could take too much of it and then your butt would clog up and no one would like you. 0.97
00:50:45.000 I can't stop being childish about Ivermectin. 0.97
00:50:47.000 Ivermectin advocates celebrated the ruling and independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
00:50:53.000 claimed the FDA stance is bias against low-cost therapies.
00:50:58.000 Oh, well there you go. That's the root of it, isn't it?
00:51:00.000 Ivermectin's been out of patent for years and years and years and we'd much rather you took this stuff.
00:51:04.000 Is this stuff profitable? Is this stuff effective? Can you show me the data?
00:51:07.000 Can I have access to completely unredacted information when it comes to this subject?
00:51:11.000 Can you tell me about the profits? Can you tell me about the funding?
00:51:14.000 Can you tell me about the adverse events, the excess deaths, the origin of the virus in the first place,
00:51:17.000 and whether there's any US involvement?
00:51:18.000 I can't answer any of those questions and neither can I say what I'd really like to say, which Ivan Mekvin is a... The FDA declined to comment on Kennedy's claims.
00:51:30.000 Kennedy's claims.
00:51:31.000 Claims!
00:51:32.000 That the pharmaceutical industry exists to make profit.
00:51:34.000 That's what he's claiming. 0.96
00:51:36.000 You maniac conspiracy theorist! 0.97
00:51:39.000 You're lucky your surname's Kennedy or you've been in a lot of trouble. 0.51
00:51:42.000 But again said clinical trial data does not support ivermectin's use to treat COVID.
00:51:47.000 This is the classic moment now in Conspiracy World because this was when Joe Rogan was much mocked and maligned at an international level because he took his own course of action when it comes to his private business and then had the audacity to have a successful podcast.
00:52:00.000 What I didn't know until just now is that Dr. Pierre Khoury, guest on our show and vital voice when it comes to ivermectin, COVID treatment and medicine and ethics more broadly, He's the one that told Joe Rogan to take ivermectin, which is rather like telling JFK to get a convertible.
00:52:15.000 Bro, do I have to sue CNN?
00:52:16.000 I don't know, do you? 1.00
00:52:17.000 They're making shit up. 0.99
00:52:19.000 They keep saying I'm taking horse dewormer. 1.00
00:52:20.000 I literally got it from a doctor.
00:52:22.000 It's an American company.
00:52:26.000 They won the Nobel Prize in 2015 for use in human beings.
00:52:29.000 Yeah.
00:52:32.000 CNN is saying I'm taking horse dewormer.
00:52:34.000 Yeah, so... They must know that that's a lie.
00:52:36.000 Well, there's a lot of people saying it.
00:52:38.000 Right, but a lot of people can say it.
00:52:40.000 Okay.
00:52:40.000 Like, the internet says it, who cares?
00:52:41.000 Sure.
00:52:42.000 But CNN is saying it.
00:52:44.000 This is already, like, a sort of beautiful, nostalgic piece.
00:52:46.000 I mean, probably a couple of years ago, that, isn't it?
00:52:48.000 But I feel like I'm almost watching the moon landings.
00:52:50.000 Let's not get into that.
00:52:51.000 Okay, let's have a look at Dr. Pierre-Corey's writing on this subject.
00:52:54.000 He seems to be a voice that we can trust because he's not a stooge of the establishment or a corporate...
00:53:01.000 I don't know, what word do you want to use? 0.98
00:53:01.000 Slut? 0.98
00:53:03.000 Dr Pierre Corey, the horse dewormer PR campaign involved coordinated and sequentially timed actions between the FDA, CDC, AMA, APHA and corporate controlled media, i.e.
00:53:12.000 late night hosts, news broadcasts, newspapers, etc.
00:53:15.000 It really was that extensive wasn't it?
00:53:16.000 I saw sort of people dressed up as Joe Rogan, probably there was a dance or something, Don Lemon, I mean it was just so mad and it's like you're sort of told to forget about it but It's not because you want to go on about it for its own sake, even.
00:53:28.000 It's actually, it was revealing.
00:53:30.000 And then you can track what's happening now based on that.
00:53:33.000 Clearly, the goal of the campaign was to convince the public that ivermectin was a dangerous and ineffective horse dewormer.
00:53:39.000 No!
00:53:39.000 There's horse dewormer!
00:53:41.000 No, FDA?
00:53:42.000 I can say it.
00:53:43.000 You can't.
00:53:43.000 In the wake of that campaign, pharmacies stopped filling valid legal prescriptions and hospitals removed ivermectin from their formularies.
00:53:50.000 They really went to town on it, like it was Satanic Verses or my videos on Netflix.
00:53:55.000 Get that stuff out of there!
00:53:58.000 Never had an FDA-approved drug, one of the, if not the safest prescribed medications in history, ever been vilified or restricted to this extent.
00:54:06.000 Just like hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin had to be stopped.
00:54:09.000 The FDA's role in that campaign started with the posting of the below tweet on August 21st, 2021, a week after the report on the below left came out showing a massive rise in ivermectin prescriptions in the US during the deadly Delta wave.
00:54:21.000 So let's have a look at that graphic.
00:54:22.000 So what they said is, you are not a horse, you are not a cow, seriously y'all, stop it.
00:54:27.000 That's what it is.
00:54:28.000 Like, hold on, this drug's been used for many years for a variety of purposes.
00:54:31.000 But were some of those purposes horse dewormer?
00:54:34.000 Yeah, I suppose so.
00:54:35.000 So what if we just say that it's only a horse dewormer and tell people that if they take it, it means that they're a horse also.
00:54:42.000 Of course, a horse.
00:54:43.000 Of course, of course, a horse.
00:54:45.000 Let's make it a policy.
00:54:45.000 It rhymes.
00:54:47.000 The rise in prescribing terrified the COVID cartel because it threatened the global vaccine market north of $100 billion.
00:54:52.000 It's as simple as that!
00:54:53.000 It also threatened the markets for all the competing pricey patented pipeline pharmaceuticals like Remdesivir and Paxlovid, Molnupiravir and the monoclonal antibodies.
00:55:03.000 Also massive global markets in the many billions.
00:55:05.000 It's like when like some piece of IP becomes available.
00:55:08.000 Hey, wait a minute!
00:55:09.000 All the Beatles music's available for everyone now!
00:55:11.000 Yesterday.
00:55:12.000 Cut it! 1.00
00:55:13.000 Farmer's greatest weapon to attack ivermectin is the FDA.
00:55:16.000 Farmer, and especially Pfizer, has near complete control of the FDA, and the CDC, and the NIH.
00:55:21.000 Not that you'd ever know it, from the tough time they're given by those bureaucrats over at the FDA.
00:55:26.000 Pfizer, how and when would you like this drug released?
00:55:29.000 Now?
00:55:30.000 And expensively?
00:55:31.000 And what would you like us to do with this information about your product?
00:55:34.000 Oh, well, get that black pen, see?
00:55:36.000 And cross out, oh, heart attack, that's gotta go.
00:55:39.000 Turbo, that's out. 1.00
00:55:42.000 Increased risk, that could go.
00:55:43.000 There it is!
00:55:44.000 A black piece of paper.
00:55:46.000 Oh, that's beautiful!
00:55:47.000 I can put this on my lunch pack!
00:55:49.000 But the FDA couldn't do it all by themselves, so they called in the CDC to do some dirty work.
00:55:53.000 Five days after the FDA tweet, the CDC sent out a warning advisory to all the state medical boards, which was then forwarded to every licensed physician in the country.
00:56:01.000 This is an official CDC health advisory.
00:56:01.000 Here it is.
00:56:03.000 Rapid increase in ivermectin prescription and reports of severe illness associated with use of products containing ivermectin to prevent or treat...
00:56:10.000 Three days after the CDC memo, they then trotted Fauci out on national TV, and he says this.
00:56:17.000 What I think would be a fun game is to apply those exact words to another popular product around that time.
00:56:29.000 Don't do it.
00:56:30.000 There's no evidence whatsoever that it works.
00:56:32.000 For example, on preventing transmission.
00:56:34.000 It could potentially have toxicity.
00:56:36.000 That protein spike is It's gotta stay there, right?
00:56:38.000 There's no clinical evidence that indicates that this works because we redacted all of the evidence.
00:56:44.000 148 pages.
00:56:45.000 The entire thing is redacted.
00:56:47.000 Curious business, isn't it?
00:56:48.000 Then two days after that, they got three major professional societies to call for an end to using ivermectin.
00:56:53.000 So here that is.
00:56:54.000 AMA, APHA, ASHP call for immediate end to prescribing, dispensing and use of ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19 outside clinical trials.
00:57:03.000 And then they called in for mass media firepower.
00:57:06.000 This is brilliant, isn't it?
00:57:07.000 Looking at it this way shows sort of how it actually went down and how it works.
00:57:12.000 In the middle of it, it was just like, what?
00:57:13.000 Why is this happening?
00:57:14.000 So why is this important?
00:57:15.000 I don't understand.
00:57:16.000 And now you can see how that's replicated.
00:57:18.000 We've done previous stories on the Trusted News Initiative, which shows how various broadcast media have relationships and a shared agenda.
00:57:26.000 This is a brilliant example of how that works, but it's not the only one because whenever there's an agenda, whether it's don't report on this war, take out this dissenting voice, whatever it is, they will operate in this way.
00:57:34.000 You'll see this pattern.
00:57:36.000 I believe, without evidence, that the tweet and the entire PR campaign was devised and executed by Weber Shandwick, the massive PR firm that simultaneously works for the CDC, Moderna and Pfizer.
00:57:46.000 At the risk of foreshadowing, I also believe, without evidence, that the entire reason the FDA settled this case is because discovery would be severely damaging to many people involved.
00:57:54.000 Wow!
00:57:55.000 They settled so that it didn't come out.
00:57:57.000 If there was a massive trial, you'd have to start looking at What?
00:58:00.000 This was all coordinated.
00:58:01.000 And now because we're like, oh, I don't want to talk about COVID anymore, like Bill Hicks' joke, quit talking about Kennedy, man.
00:58:06.000 It's a long time ago.
00:58:07.000 Forget about it.
00:58:08.000 Don't bring up Jesus to me, as he used to say, the great Bill Hicks.
00:58:08.000 Okay.
00:58:12.000 So what he's saying is, is that if this thing's settled out of court, people will just forget it.
00:58:18.000 And people are just tired and exhausted and energy prices and shrinkflation and all those problems that we suffer every day.
00:58:23.000 We don't have time to remember that we were all lied to and manipulated on a massive scale in a variety of ways during that extraordinary period.
00:58:29.000 That tweet went absolutely viral and became the FDA's most popular tweet in history.
00:58:33.000 I believe that tweet was the opening shot that completely turned from what had been isolated battles against ivermectin into an all-out war.
00:58:40.000 Like, why aren't they bothered about us eating processed food?
00:58:42.000 They'd let us eat, like, processed food and corn syrup and sugars and seed oils and stuff that are causing cancer and heart disease.
00:58:49.000 Like, why are they not going, stop eating it!
00:58:51.000 Stop it! 0.99
00:58:52.000 Is the difference possibly that they'll let us do things that are bad for us that are profitable and not let us do things that may or may not be bad for us that are not profitable?
00:59:00.000 What's the line?
00:59:01.000 Where's the line here?
00:59:02.000 It doesn't seem to be looking after you and loving you.
00:59:04.000 As we all know, the FDA's opinion was misleading and deceptive.
00:59:08.000 Once a drug receives FDA approval for a disease, it can legally be used to treat Any other disease, a practice called off-label prescribing.
00:59:15.000 The FDA knows this full well.
00:59:16.000 They knew that no physician needed a COVID-specific approval or authorization.
00:59:20.000 So this was a time where extraordinary legislation, regulations and practices became normalized.
00:59:25.000 Know that 20% of outpatient prescriptions and 30% of inpatient prescriptions are written in this off-label manner.
00:59:25.000 Why?
00:59:31.000 So it's just a normal regular practice, happens all the time.
00:59:33.000 And the FDA literally champions the practice for very sound reasons.
00:59:37.000 And here is them doing just that.
00:59:38.000 I think it's important to note this page above was last edited in 2018.
00:59:42.000 I suspect they will disappear that page soon.
00:59:44.000 Yeah, because, right, their agenda's changed.
00:59:46.000 Basically, many medicines have multiple pharmacologic mechanisms of action and so can be useful in different diseases.
00:59:52.000 Ivermectin probably has the broadest applicability of any medicine that I'm aware of.
00:59:56.000 Antiparasitic, antiviral, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory and and anti-tumour. As Professor Satoshi Omura, the Nobel
01:00:02.000 Prize winning discoverer of the drug said in his Nobel acceptance speech, it truly is a
01:00:07.000 wonder drug.
01:00:07.000 Well, we think it might be a bit of a...
01:00:17.000 Now beyond the tweet, the FDA also went on the warpath across all other major social
01:00:21.000 Although the initial salvo started on social media, it didn't end there.
01:00:24.000 Four months later, in another attempt to influence the practice of medicine, they sent letters to the Federation of State Medical Boards and the American Board of Pharmacy.
01:00:31.000 Now, when the lawsuit was first filed, obviously the FDA moved immediately to dismiss, and they did so by arguing that they cannot be sued because they have sovereign immunity.
01:00:39.000 That lets you know a great deal about how the FDA sues itself, like a type of king.
01:00:43.000 We've got sovereign immunity!
01:00:45.000 Can't just claim sovereign immunity, can you?
01:00:46.000 Can you?
01:00:47.000 Diplomatic immunity!
01:00:47.000 Well, they did.
01:00:50.000 It's just been revoked.
01:00:53.000 You can't make this stuff up.
01:00:54.000 What you also can't make up is that the district court judge agreed with them and dismissed the case.
01:00:59.000 Amazing nexus of interests all intertwining here.
01:01:03.000 But lawyer Clayland Boyden Gray immediately appealed the case because he knew that although federal law actually does give the government immunity against legal actions, there are some exceptions, such as ultraviars, a term describing when an official acts outside their authority.
01:01:17.000 Plaintiffs challenging the acts must show that the official was acting without any authority whatever or without any tolerable basis for the exercise of authority.
01:01:25.000 Boyden's decision to appeal was spot on because the appeals court judge was truly miffed at the FDA and immediately ruled that the plaintiffs had standing and that the lawsuit could proceed.
01:01:34.000 This was a huge win back then in our court of public opinion largely because the FDA lawyer had to admit in open court that physicians did indeed have every right to prescribe ivermectin off-label for COVID.
01:01:45.000 It gets even better because in the appeals court opinion, the judge went off on the FDA with the following statement.
01:01:50.000 FDA can inform, but it has identified no authority allowing it to recommend consumers to stop taking medicine.
01:01:56.000 That's not part of its job.
01:01:58.000 It's just decided it was gonna start doing that.
01:02:00.000 FDA is not a physician.
01:02:01.000 It has authority to inform, announce, and apprise, but not to endorse, denounce, or advise.
01:02:07.000 So that's amazing, isn't it?
01:02:08.000 They can tell you, we think this.
01:02:10.000 They can announce, hello!
01:02:11.000 And they can apprise, hmm.
01:02:13.000 But they can't go, that's good, or that isn't good, or...
01:02:16.000 Well, you should do this.
01:02:17.000 That's beyond their authority.
01:02:18.000 My God.
01:02:18.000 It shows you that we sort of, almost like naive, adorable children, don't even really know what agencies are supposed to be doing.
01:02:25.000 Like, democracy can start doing stuff that it's not meant to do, or the government can start doing stuff that it's not allowed to do, or its regulatory bodies can start saying and doing things that are well beyond its remit, and we're just like, oh, OK, well, we don't want to be like a bunch of horses, so I guess we'll just do what you told us, huh?
01:02:40.000 But actually, we should have gone, well, see, Scott, do you get out of here?
01:02:43.000 Oh, OK, but do you realize it might be Even tweet-sized doses of personalized medical advice are beyond FDA statutory authority.
01:02:53.000 That is good, isn't it?
01:02:55.000 They're not supposed to tweet you advice.
01:02:57.000 Now that the FDA has to take down every single one of their posted and or published advice against using ivermectin in COVID.
01:03:04.000 Wow, we've got to just take all of that back.
01:03:07.000 We've got to pretend that whole thing didn't happen.
01:03:08.000 All of the sketches, all of the skits, all of the bombast, all of the attacks, we've got to sort of unravel it from our mind.
01:03:13.000 And remember, Joe Rogan's bafflement there, like, should I sue CNN?
01:03:16.000 Are they supposed to be saying that?
01:03:18.000 And well, we know why they said it, because the FDA approved it, Big Pharma are their biggest advertisers, there was a government edict to regulate and centralise authority at that time, and that's why this has been such a confusing event for us all.
01:03:30.000 However, it's my opinion that because the case ended in settlement, we cannot claim total victory because it allows the FDA to continue to lie with statements like this one today, claiming they are not guilty of wrongdoing.
01:03:39.000 FDA has not admitted any violation of law or any wrongdoing, disagreeing with the plaintiff's allegation that the agency exceeded its authority in issuing the statements challenged in the lawsuit, and it stands by its authority to communicate with the public regarding the products it regulates, the spokesperson said.
01:03:53.000 And look how they had to sort of tiptoe through that.
01:03:55.000 And that's how the law works.
01:04:08.000 How can anyone have any trust in the judiciary?
01:04:11.000 How can anyone have any trust in the media?
01:04:12.000 How can anyone have any trust in the state when we see how they work together?
01:04:16.000 I bet even now, depending on where you're watching this, if you're watching it on Instagram, there'll be something under there.
01:04:21.000 If you're watching it on YouTube, there'll be something under there.
01:04:23.000 If you're watching and looking at it at X, there won't be something under there.
01:04:26.000 And if you're watching it on our home rumble, there might be some crazy ads and some crazy comments, but there'll be nothing else under there.
01:04:31.000 Because this mentality is prevailing.
01:04:33.000 Still now, when you report on this subject, they're still trying to control it.
01:04:37.000 They're introducing different regulations to control comparable things.
01:04:40.000 And you can hear in the FDA they're not sorry about that.
01:04:42.000 We went totally mad and said something was a horse paste even though it's something we ourselves had approved of and indeed the off-label prescribing is a practice that we ourselves endorsed.
01:04:51.000 We went all mad for some reason and I can't remember what it was.
01:04:54.000 Oh yeah it's money isn't it?
01:04:55.000 It's money and corruption and the opportunity to regulate and maybe even we don't know for sure because we don't say things that we can't corroborate.
01:05:02.000 More insidious things than that we'll have to keep looking.
01:05:04.000 It reveals So much to us.
01:05:06.000 That's why we're still reporting on this story.
01:05:08.000 It shows us who we are and who we're not and how we're governed.
01:05:12.000 But I trust the wider public, says Pierre Corrie, can see right through such a statement.
01:05:15.000 I mean, who will believe that they can claim innocence when they were forced to settle?
01:05:19.000 You only settle when you know you're going to lose in court or you cannot risk going through the discovery process.
01:05:24.000 Either way, the plaintiffs, Boyden Gray and Associates, and the FLCCC, Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, landed a big victory against one of our most captured federal health agencies.
01:05:33.000 A win against tyranny, really.
01:05:35.000 Here's a post from RFK.
01:05:37.000 Ivermectin is not an exceptional case.
01:05:38.000 The FDA is biased against many low-cost generic and or natural therapies with low profit potential.
01:05:43.000 Could it be because half its funding comes from Big Pharma?
01:05:46.000 That's RFK responding to the below post announcing the FDA's requirement to get rid of all those posts.
01:05:54.000 And perhaps we'll think about medication more broadly in your country and how it is prescribed and if it's expensive or not and whether or not competitive practices are encouraged or perhaps even more broadly than that.
01:06:05.000 Is the industry, odd word, of health focused on patient health care and wellness of individuals or is it focused on profit?
01:06:11.000 And once you've answered that question you can answer some more questions about the way that a legacy media Report.
01:06:16.000 Are they on your side, or are they on the side of a kind of nexus of interests that include the state and corporations?
01:06:22.000 Then you can talk about the judiciary.
01:06:24.000 Is it corruptible?
01:06:25.000 You can ask yourself those questions, but not for long, because even now, while we're speaking, there are sets of forces enclosing all around us.
01:06:32.000 On me, in particular, and on you, specifically, to ensure, just even take a simple example like Instagram, go, political speech?
01:06:40.000 No, thank you.
01:06:40.000 You think that doesn't include this?
01:06:42.000 Think that that doesn't Essentially mean information that would encourage you to become discerning, agitated and angry about the way that you are treated by the powerful.
01:06:51.000 That's essentially what that means and it will be masked in bureaucracy.
01:06:54.000 It will be hidden from your view and instead what will be put in front of you is all an old twaddle.
01:06:58.000 But hopefully you and I and us together can continue to create relationships and participate in a movement that opposes this madness.
01:07:06.000 But that's just what I think.
01:07:07.000 Remember become an Awake and Wonder one month free right now by clicking the link in the description and I'll see
01:07:12.000 you in a second in the chat On the show tomorrow we have Neil Oliver
01:07:21.000 Join us for that.
01:07:22.000 Remember, you could have been there live for our conversation if you were an awakened wonder on Locals.
01:07:26.000 You could also join us for our conversations where we discuss where to purchase real estate to set up a glorious, revolutionary new movement.
01:07:34.000 I want to welcome some of the new people that have joined us.
01:07:37.000 Lou555, Completely Loved, Counter Blow, Hungry Josh and Liza9.
01:07:40.000 Join us tomorrow, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.
01:07:43.000 Until then, if you can, stay free.
01:07:47.000 Switch on.
01:07:48.000 Many switching.
01:07:49.000 Switch on.
01:07:50.000 Switch on.
01:07:50.000 Many switching.
01:07:51.000 Switch on.
01:07:53.000 Switch on.
01:07:54.000 Many switching.
01:07:55.000 Switch on.