Stay Free - Russel Brand - October 16, 2023


“THEY LIED TO YOU!” Matt Taibbi On Fauci, RFK Jr & New Censorship Laws - Stay Free #224


Episode Stats

Length

1 hour and 21 minutes

Words per Minute

150.11621

Word Count

12,272

Sentence Count

643

Misogynist Sentences

3

Hate Speech Sentences

3


Summary

In this episode, Matt Taibbi talks about the cover-up of the Wuhan lab leak, and his personal connection to Chrystia Freeland, the Canadian prime minister who is more akin to a modern-day neoliberal dictator. He also discusses the tragic events in the Middle East, including the Israeli attack on Gaza, and the potential role of the United States in providing arms to Hamas and other terrorist groups. And, of course, there's a special guest: Russell Brand, host of the excellent show Stay Free With Russell Brand. Stay Free with Russell Brand is hosted by Russell Brand and is produced by Matt Tiberi, who is also a regular contributor to the New York Times and The Daily Beast. This episode was edited by Annie-Rose Strasser and edited by Alex Blumberg. Our theme music is by my main amigo, Evan Handyside. The show was mixed and produced by Matthew Boll. Additional music was made by Mark Phillips and Matt Knost, and additional mixing and mastering by Matthew McConaughey. Thanks to our sponsor, Awakened WMM, for providing the sound design and mastering of the music used in this episode of Stay Free, and for the production of the theme song, "Awakened" by Suneaters, courtesy of Lotuspool, which you can stream on the Electric Light Orchestra on SoundCloud, and our ad music, which is produced and mixed by John Singleton, who also writes for the show, and is available on Soundcloud.org, and provides production assistance on Soundtrack, and also on the music on the website of the Electric Republic, and other services provided by SoundCloud. . , and we hope you enjoy the music you get a chance to listen to the music from the show "Stay Free" and "The White Noise Network." and "AstroFabulous" by the Electric City, and we thank you for all your support and support, and thank you, too, for all the support we get from our sponsorships and shout out to you, the amazing people who sent us out on social media and all the work we do it. , we really appreciate all the love and support we receive, we really really appreciate it. Thank you so much of you, you're amazing people, thank you! Thank you for being kind and support us, you really are amazing, we appreciate it, we're really appreciate the support, love you.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 So, I'm going to go ahead and start the video.
00:00:07.000 So, I'm going to start the video.
00:10:20.000 There you Awakening Wonders.
00:10:22.000 Thanks for joining me for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
00:10:24.000 We've got a fantastic show for you today because we're talking about some complex, difficult issues with people that genuinely understand them.
00:10:30.000 Matt Taibbi is our guest today.
00:10:33.000 He's talking about the degree to which Fauci participated in the cover-up of the Wuhan lab leak story, which we've got an in-depth article on.
00:10:42.000 Also, Matt will be talking to us about Tragic events in the Middle East and his personal connection to Chrystia Freeland, the woman who sounds like a Tolkien-esque elf queen, but actually through her legislation, regulation and imposition of power in Canada is more akin to a modern-day neoliberal
00:11:01.000 Dictator.
00:11:02.000 We're going to be talking about that.
00:11:03.000 Let me know in the chat where you stand, in particular on this new pose of liberalism that kind of amounts to, I don't know, is it tyranny with a nice haircut?
00:11:13.000 Describe it how you want to.
00:11:14.000 Listen, if you haven't downloaded the Rumble app yet, download the Rumble app now because then you'll get notifications whenever we make content.
00:11:22.000 It's not like on YouTube where you turn on the notification bell and then they tell you if they choose to.
00:11:26.000 And then suddenly shut you down off the platform and demonetize you.
00:11:30.000 Oh no, you will get the notifications.
00:11:32.000 And if you can support us, if it's within your means to support our community at this time, and I'm aware that there are extremely serious things happening in the world at the moment, but I believe that independent media movements such as this one can contribute positively at a time of, hmm, Epochal challenges, how do you want to define the omnicrisis that we are living through?
00:11:54.000 And I say that with all due respect to those of you that are directly affected by this situation and we plan to remain obviously respectful to the suffering that many, many people are experiencing right now.
00:12:07.000 How can we contribute?
00:12:08.000 How can we be part of a solution?
00:12:10.000 How can we, in any small way at all, make this situation better?
00:12:13.000 Become a member of our community.
00:12:14.000 Press that Awaken button if you're in a position to help.
00:12:17.000 And certainly, the very least that any of us can do is not exploit this situation.
00:12:22.000 Have you noticed how whatever crisis beset the world, there are people that will exploit it?
00:12:28.000 In coronavirus, we saw exploitation.
00:12:31.000 In any geopolitical conflict you see exploitation and in this current conflict which I believe has to be handled with extreme caution, awareness and almost surrender unless you are involved in the situation.
00:12:44.000 Again, that's not something I feel qualified to talk about.
00:12:47.000 The idea that people in positions of power have been exploiting it for literal personal gain is astonishing to me.
00:12:52.000 We reported on the sheer volume of people in Congress that had bought stocks and shares in weapons manufacturers And now, Rand Paul, subsequent to both Lindsey Graham and Nikki Haley calling for escalations, which I believe, well, have you looked for yourself, would make the bad situation that the people involved in that conflict are already experiencing a great deal worse.
00:13:18.000 Rand Paul has called for restraint citing potential lessons learned
00:13:24.000 from 9-11. I want you to let me know what you feel about Rand Paul's analysis. Have a look at him
00:13:31.000 saying that now. What would you do? You know I have nothing but sympathy for the Israeli people at
00:13:36.000 this point in time.
00:13:37.000 I think that the primary objective at this time has to be to get the people that attacked them.
00:13:42.000 They were in Gaza.
00:13:44.000 Before we think about spreading this to the rest of the world, maybe we ought to think about exactly what's going on on the ground there.
00:13:49.000 I do think that There is immediate reaction sometimes, so let's get everybody, let's get everybody who's responsible.
00:13:57.000 And without question, Iran had their hands in this.
00:13:59.000 But you remember after 9-11, there were people who wanted to attack Iraq.
00:14:02.000 They said Iraq caused 9-11, turned out Iraq didn't have anything to do with 9-11.
00:14:06.000 So let's see where the facts lie, let's investigate this, and let Israel need to do what they need to do, which is...
00:14:13.000 Tomorrow we'll be talking in depth about the military-industrial complex and how the United States brokers deals for the MIC across the world, including selling arms to at least 57% of the world's autocratic countries, leading to the possibility A claim that's already been made that Hamas used American-made weapons to conduct those attacks.
00:14:38.000 Certainly, it's clear that Taliban weapons have made their way into... Well, I mean, the Taliban aren't ideal people to be armed with.
00:14:47.000 Beyond the kind of ideological arguments here, one question that I think we could focus on together, and let me know if you agree with this, It's America's role in supplying arms to autocratic states and potential bad actors on a global stage and their economic model that requires the proliferation of weapons and how that is at odds with Joe Biden's claim that it's the role of the United States to bring about peace, a recent claim that he's made.
00:15:15.000 A person who you can rely on to certainly not use sophistry in their public speaking You know, Hezbollah's very smart.
00:15:30.000 They're all very smart.
00:15:31.000 The press doesn't like when they say I'm smart.
00:15:33.000 But Hezbollah, they're very smart.
00:15:35.000 And they said, gee, I hope Hezbollah doesn't attack from the north.
00:15:39.000 Because that's the most vulnerable spot.
00:15:42.000 I said, wait a minute.
00:15:43.000 You know, Hezbollah's very smart.
00:15:44.000 They're all very smart.
00:15:45.000 The press doesn't like when they say it.
00:15:47.000 You know, I said that President Xi of China, 1.4 billion people, he controls it with an iron fist.
00:15:53.000 I said he's a very smart man.
00:15:55.000 They killed me the next day.
00:15:56.000 I said he was smart.
00:15:57.000 What am I gonna say?
00:15:59.000 But Hezbollah, they're very smart.
00:16:02.000 I suppose what Donald Trump is saying is that the people that are being morally condemned, quite rightly, are using tactics and strategies that are effective.
00:16:17.000 And he appears to be commenting on how his remarks might be used to escalate tensions, even while saying them.
00:16:24.000 Now let me know what you think about Trump's remarks and certainly let me know what you think about them compared to Joe Biden's comments and you will be in a very good position to scrutinize those comments after you've seen our content on America's role in arming the world and in particular Arming potential opponents and terrorists.
00:16:43.000 It's already understood, isn't it?
00:16:45.000 You know this guys, that Mexican drug cartels gained access to missiles that were intended for Ukraine.
00:16:53.000 You know that the Pentagon keep failing audits.
00:16:56.000 You know that the way that arms are being proliferated throughout the world is likely contributing to increased military activity.
00:17:04.000 I mean, it's kind of Obvious, actually.
00:17:06.000 And Trump's ability to say what other politicians won't say, I think, elicits more trust, certainly from people who are inclined to support him.
00:17:16.000 Let me know what you think about that in the chat.
00:17:18.000 Be interested to hear your take.
00:17:20.000 For example, just look at what Trump says here about electronic tanks.
00:17:23.000 And compare that to the causistry, the sophistry, the doublespeak that we've become accustomed to from ordinary, centralist, neocon politicians.
00:17:32.000 And that means, of course, politicians from both sides of the near-invisible aisle.
00:17:37.000 Have a look at this.
00:17:41.000 They want all electric army tanks now.
00:17:43.000 Think of this.
00:17:47.000 So they want to have an army tank that's electric.
00:17:49.000 You can't get it recharged.
00:17:51.000 It doesn't go far enough.
00:17:52.000 It doesn't go strong enough.
00:17:53.000 But they want to have electric.
00:17:56.000 So that we go into enemy territory, we will blast the shit out of everybody, but at least we will go in with environmentally nice equipment.
00:18:07.000 God, can you believe this?
00:18:09.000 Doesn't that seem like the kind of skewering rhetoric designed to point out the hypocrisy in legacy media-supported politicians who claim they have an agenda of creating safety and peace, while participating in the arms industry, while propagating ideas around climate change that are punitive to ordinary people, while not even addressing the problems that they claim are true, and even if these problems are true, Why is it that the measures undertaken always penalise ordinary people?
00:18:38.000 And are we beginning to see now that the rise of populism is precisely the result of the ability of politicians like Trump to say what's unsayable by other political figures?
00:18:49.000 Cast your mind back to the period when he was in office and he was, you know, at that point speaking, I think somewhat favorably and affectionately about vaccines while also talking about hydroxychloroquine.
00:19:04.000 Are you confident saying that word even yet?
00:19:06.000 I can just about say ivermectin if it's permissible on this WHO governed channel.
00:19:11.000 But hydroxychloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, let me know in the chat, let me know in the chat.
00:19:17.000 But do you remember in particular the moment Where Fauci rolled his eyes.
00:19:21.000 In those days, Fauci was being presented as a kind of medical Willy Wonka.
00:19:28.000 A kind of, sort of, scientist Jesus who we could rely on.
00:19:32.000 A counterpoint to the corruption and hyperbole of Trump.
00:19:37.000 Well, as a result of the investigations of genuine, legitimate, while persecuted journalists like Matt Taibbi and our friend Michael Schellenberger, they're both our friends, we don't mean to separate them in that way, we now have a greater understanding of Fauci's role in censoring the cause of the last pandemic.
00:19:55.000 Also, and with everything that's going on in the world, the Omnicrisis that we are all experiencing, none so much as those directly involved, of course, but a sense that the world is in real crisis, in real trouble, that we can't trust any of our institutions anymore, that legacy media exists solely to normalize and amplify the intentions of the powerful.
00:20:15.000 Just think about it that way.
00:20:16.000 That we can't trust government?
00:20:18.000 That our institutions are falling?
00:20:19.000 That crisis is being induced everywhere we go at an almost insufferable, unendurable, unconscionable rate?
00:20:28.000 Is it possible that they are still conducting experiments that are even more dangerous than those that took place in Wuhan that were alleged to have started this pandemic?
00:20:40.000 Or it could have been a wet market.
00:20:42.000 Here's the news.
00:20:43.000 No.
00:20:44.000 Here's the effing news.
00:20:49.000 No, here's the fucking news!
00:20:52.000 I wish I could tell you in the midst of the current Omni crisis that at least scientists connected to the Wuhan lab leak aren't doing more dangerous experiments that could lead to another pandemic and that Anthony Fauci wasn't potentially involved in a massive cover-up in the last one.
00:21:06.000 But I can't!
00:21:09.000 Now you'll be astonished to learn, will you?
00:21:11.000 Are you astonished to learn?
00:21:12.000 Let me know in the chat that the scientists involved potentially in the Wuhan lab leak are still doing dangerous, contagious, unnecessary experiments that could lead to another pandemic.
00:21:23.000 And if the idea of another pandemic seems familiar to you and potentially real, that's because some significant global figures keep talking about the next pandemic, the next pandemic, like almost it's going to be war, pandemic, war, pandemic, war, pandemic.
00:21:40.000 It's not up to you.
00:21:42.000 We've already decided that you are staying in the house and shutting up.
00:21:45.000 What did we tell you?
00:21:47.000 We need to be prepared for the next pandemic.
00:21:52.000 When the next pandemic comes knocking and it will, if it knocks, just don't answer the door.
00:22:00.000 We must be ready to answer decisively.
00:22:03.000 We do need more money.
00:22:06.000 We don't just need more money for vaccines for children eventually.
00:22:10.000 We need more money to plan for the second pandemic.
00:22:12.000 There's going to be another pandemic.
00:22:14.000 Another pandemic?
00:22:14.000 You've only just stopped playing with the last one.
00:22:16.000 That's why we need the money.
00:22:18.000 We will be much better off.
00:22:19.000 Yeah, you will be.
00:22:21.000 The next pandemic.
00:22:22.000 I know, it's in the checks.
00:22:24.000 When it occurs.
00:22:25.000 Okay, so they all seem pretty confident there's going to be another pandemic, but also the scientists involved in the Wuhan lab leak are doing more experiments that are a bit like that, even though really the last time they did it, it probably caused this pandemic.
00:22:41.000 More and more of us accept that as the reality.
00:22:42.000 Now let me know on the chat if you're still entertaining the idea that it came from a wet market.
00:22:46.000 Disgusting though they may sound.
00:22:47.000 So let's get into this story with a little more detail.
00:22:50.000 Later, and you'll love this, we're talking about how Anthony Fauci, unbelievably, The fellow that was meant to be coordinating to a degree the global response to the pandemic was involved in covering up some pretty important facts.
00:23:02.000 Scientists linked to Wuhan bat researchers have been accused of performing dangerous experiments on a MERS-like virus that could spark a pandemic.
00:23:10.000 Well, they should certainly interrogate and investigate that Possibility to see if there's any truth in that.
00:23:15.000 A team from the University of North Carolina published a paper in Science Advances detailing how they'd synthesized a MERS-like bat virus and used it to infect human cells and humanized mice.
00:23:26.000 I never feel that good, do you, when I hear the phrase humanized mice?
00:23:29.000 I never think this research is in the right hands.
00:23:31.000 I'm gonna just start routinely now, outside laboratories, going, have you got mice in there?
00:23:35.000 We certainly do, what business is it of yours?
00:23:38.000 Are they humanized?
00:23:40.000 No, they're not humanized.
00:23:41.000 Could I get some cheese?
00:23:43.000 What was that?
00:23:44.000 Nothing, I sneezed.
00:23:46.000 I sneezed, I bet!
00:23:47.000 Let us out of here!
00:23:48.000 There's only eight of us!
00:23:49.000 How can this be a thorough clinical trial?
00:23:51.000 Listen, I've gotta go.
00:23:52.000 I've got normal mice to go and deal with in there.
00:23:55.000 They're not humanized!
00:23:56.000 MERS is one of the deadliest viruses, killing around 35% of people it infects.
00:24:01.000 That seems like a lot.
00:24:01.000 35%?
00:24:02.000 That's like, you really don't want to get that one.
00:24:04.000 I'll wear a mask for that one.
00:24:06.000 The team includes Professor Ralph Baric and Trevor Scobie, who worked with Professor Shi Zhengli of the Wuhan Institute of Virology before the pandemic, creating chimeric viruses by inserting spike proteins from bat viruses Into the original SARS virus.
00:24:19.000 I don't sound like a Luddite and I know that so many important things have been achieved as a result of biochemical endeavour, biological ingenuity, chemistry, science more broadly.
00:24:30.000 What a wonderful discipline it is and you will know from my conversation with Dr. Jay Bhattacharya from Stanford University that I admire, adore and revere A subset of at least genuine scientists.
00:24:40.000 And one of the conditions I would say for being considered a genuine scientist is related to funding.
00:24:45.000 When science becomes a subset of at least an endeavour to accrue profit rather than heal and help people, problems emerge.
00:24:54.000 And when there's an agenda that goes even beyond that, I think we're at even greater risk.
00:24:58.000 Let me know in the chat if you agree.
00:24:59.000 The new experiment used a reverse genetics technique to create a MERS-like bat virus called BtCoV422, which was collected by Shi Zhengli's team in China in 2019.
00:25:10.000 The scientists said they'd perform the latest study to test whether antivirals would work against the infection.
00:25:15.000 But experts warned the experiments were needlessly risky for little gain.
00:25:21.000 Needlessly risky.
00:25:22.000 My God, these risks!
00:25:24.000 You don't even need to take them!
00:25:25.000 What's the potential gain, though?
00:25:27.000 Very little.
00:25:28.000 So, what the hell are you doing?
00:25:30.000 Can I get my cheese now?
00:25:32.000 Listen, just would you get out of my lab?
00:25:34.000 Open some windows on the way out.
00:25:36.000 Anton van der Meer, Professor of Molecular Immunology at Oxford University, told The Telegraph, because coronaviruses evolve rapidly, these experiments carry the risk of generating variants which are better able to infect human cells, and therefore... Humans!
00:25:50.000 Oh, there's no precedent of that happening.
00:25:52.000 Oh, wait, yeah, no.
00:25:54.000 All of our lives, everyone in the world, regardless of where you were, as a result of this stuff.
00:25:59.000 You know what, though?
00:26:00.000 What if it was more dangerous, killing a third of everyone?
00:26:04.000 Depopulation!
00:26:05.000 Human and equipment error means that infection of those performing the experiment is a risk and the infected individual could then spread the infection outside the laboratory and initiate a pandemic.
00:26:16.000 Conspiracy theorists!
00:26:17.000 Conspiracy theorists!
00:26:18.000 How do you know there's no wet markets or damp coffee shops?
00:26:21.000 Or stinky fruit and veg stores around there?
00:26:24.000 Before you jump to racist conspiracy theories, like doing this type of research definitely causes pandemics, why don't you just look around and see how much moisture there is in all of the facilities nearby you?
00:26:36.000 Bloody conspiracy theorists.
00:26:38.000 The consequences would be potentially devastating and it's not clear to me what the benefits are.
00:26:42.000 Oh no, they're doing all this stuff for no real reason.
00:26:46.000 It's so mad.
00:26:47.000 It's gone out of control hasn't it?
00:26:49.000 We need radical re-evaluation of the very pillars of society.
00:26:53.000 The media tells lies.
00:26:55.000 The government represents against the interests of the people.
00:26:58.000 Science that's telling you that they're looking for cures for stuff are actually curing things that they're creating themselves that are worse than anything that's out there already.
00:27:05.000 It's gone mad and I don't really know, other than forming separate systems and advocating for radical change pretty fast, what else we're supposed to do.
00:27:13.000 There's no prospect of using such work to develop a vaccine or antiviral drugs since these can only be tested in humans during an actual pandemic.
00:27:21.000 It seems to me this experiment is simply not justified.
00:27:24.000 What's going on?
00:27:25.000 Professor Barrick developed the reverse genetics technique, which not only enables a virus to be brought to life from its genetic code, but allows scientists to mix and match parts from other viruses.
00:27:34.000 It's like they're, like, just trying to have fun, isn't it?
00:27:36.000 Like, okay, a little bit of this, a little bit of that.
00:27:38.000 Mix and match and bringing genetic code to life.
00:27:41.000 It's not Mr. Potato Head, it's a deadly virus.
00:27:44.000 I know, but we've given this one a big nose!
00:27:47.000 No, that's pretty funny.
00:27:48.000 However, experts said that the same experiments could have been carried out by inserting the spike protein of BtCoV422 into a harmless pseudovirus.
00:27:56.000 Well, where's the fun in that?
00:27:58.000 Pseudovirus experiments should have been the first thing they did before making this live virus, said one scientist who chose to remain anonymous so that he could keep his job and keep his funding and not be called a heretic and flung out of the lucrative science world.
00:28:11.000 They went straight to testing a live virus in human cell culture.
00:28:14.000 And they performed experiments in everybody's favorite, humanized mice, which presents a higher risk of escape than just cell culture.
00:28:22.000 Man, I can't live here anymore.
00:28:23.000 Look, we're just mice.
00:28:24.000 What are we going to do?
00:28:25.000 Well, you see that cage?
00:28:27.000 I've been thinking about it.
00:28:28.000 If we could hang the water bottle up there and weigh it down with this grain and those weird little pellety things, we could be out of here in no time.
00:28:34.000 I mean, I'll try it.
00:28:35.000 You seem confident.
00:28:36.000 I am confident.
00:28:37.000 I'm humanized, baby.
00:28:38.000 You should probably stop smoking.
00:28:40.000 Ah, man, if the virus is going to kill me.
00:28:42.000 If I'd seen these sorts of results for a pseudovirus, I would have said that it should stop there.
00:28:46.000 The virus is a potential threat.
00:28:47.000 Don't proceed to using a live virus.
00:28:50.000 So this guy would have stopped it, nipped it in the bud.
00:28:53.000 They've already gone straight to the bit where they're clacking around, mixing and matching, living it up, having a great time there.
00:29:00.000 Experts also warned that the experiments were performed at a biosafety level, BSL-3 level, rather than the highest BSL-4 safety level.
00:29:07.000 There's mad, evil Knievel, radical Gadabout, nitwit scientists performing these experiments not even at the highest level of safety.
00:29:14.000 It's not like there's been a massive pandemic probably caused by lacklustre standards at a laboratory and it's leaked out because they were doing it at bio level 3 or 4.
00:29:22.000 Do it at a high level!
00:29:23.000 Hey man, I don't do my experiments according to your rules.
00:29:26.000 I'm out there, I've got one eye shut.
00:29:28.000 I'm smoking, I'm high, I'm mixing and matching.
00:29:30.000 I see my experiments like jazz.
00:29:32.000 That's not how this should be conducted.
00:29:33.000 Accidental releases from BSL-3 labs are unfortunately quite common, added Professor Vanderbilt.
00:29:38.000 Why don't we rename these safety levels?
00:29:41.000 Instead of BSL-3, which is meant to be the second most safe one, that should be called accidents are actually quite common level.
00:29:47.000 That's like, if you want a high likelihood of an accident, just do this.
00:29:50.000 That shouldn't be one of the levels unfortunately quite common, should it?
00:29:54.000 Scrap that level, innit?
00:29:55.000 Except for unless you're doing things like, you know, new colors of schedules we're working on here.
00:29:59.000 All right, we'll do that at BS3.
00:30:00.000 Worst thing that's going to happen, you get some dye on your hands or one of your humanized mice might get a bit of a sugar rush and run out and get run over by an electric scooter.
00:30:08.000 Anything that could kill anyone.
00:30:09.000 New levels of safety, shall we?
00:30:11.000 And here's a sentence that seems plainly obvious to anybody.
00:30:14.000 Experiments on potentially pandemic organisms should only be performed if there are clear benefits to humanity and should be performed at the very highest level of containment.
00:30:22.000 Alright, so that's still happening on the planet you live on.
00:30:22.000 Yes!
00:30:25.000 All those things that are so complicated and awful you don't even know how to talk about them.
00:30:28.000 You know, this we do know how to talk about, don't we?
00:30:30.000 Just stop bloody doing it, you absolute mad lunatics.
00:30:33.000 Now, let's have a look at whether or not Anthony Fauci actively repressed information that could have helped us to have understood the nature of the last pandemic a bit earlier, or he had some reason for keep saying it must have come out of a wet market, it must have come out of a wet market.
00:30:46.000 What's that reason?
00:30:47.000 Oh yeah, right.
00:30:47.000 If it was caused by poor standards in a lab that had connections to United States funding, then the very person who's in charge of the response is at least tangentially responsible for the whole fiasco.
00:30:57.000 Seems ridiculous that you'd even have to consider that.
00:30:59.000 More ridiculous yet that it's possibly true.
00:31:01.000 Starting in February of 2020, from the very beginning, Anthony Fauci knew he was involved with funding this lab, and he did everything possible.
00:31:08.000 It's throughout our government.
00:31:10.000 Eight different agencies in our government are covering up their support for this lab in Wuhan.
00:31:14.000 It's ongoing as we speak.
00:31:16.000 That is not a positive news broadcast right there is it?
00:31:19.000 I mean the Dow is going up but Gaza is on fire and Anthony Fauci appears to have been deceiving us throughout the pandemic and right from the offset of the pandemic possibly because he had a vested interest and of course Anthony Fauci doesn't do that job anymore.
00:31:35.000 Even though we've had Unanimous Congress declassified information.
00:31:39.000 I have unclassified information that's being withheld from me to this day.
00:31:44.000 But we have evidence, yes, that they were dishonest, that Anthony Fauci lied in hearings to me, which is a felony, punishable up to five years.
00:31:51.000 We now have emails that show him saying that he knew it was gain-of-function, that the virus looked manipulated, and that he was worried that this came from the Wuhan lab.
00:32:00.000 February 1st of 2020.
00:32:02.000 Then he spent the last three years saying, nothing to see here.
00:32:06.000 Just note that your first instinctive response is closer to the truth than what they were telling you.
00:32:12.000 Wuhan?
00:32:13.000 Have they got labs there where they're doing experiments?
00:32:15.000 How are they getting the funding for those labs?
00:32:15.000 Yeah.
00:32:16.000 Is America involved anyway?
00:32:17.000 Yeah.
00:32:18.000 Do you think that they're possibly covering that up so that they don't look culpable for this whole damn global disaster?
00:32:24.000 Yeah, right.
00:32:24.000 We're getting, finally, to what people were just saying in the first place.
00:32:28.000 Okay, good, right?
00:32:29.000 If you're still with me.
00:32:30.000 Now, just look at everything else that's going on.
00:32:32.000 What else can't you say?
00:32:33.000 What else can't you talk about?
00:32:34.000 What other voices that are dissenting are being shut down?
00:32:36.000 What other motivations do you think there are behind mainstream media narratives?
00:32:40.000 You're probably right.
00:32:41.000 Have a little guess.
00:32:42.000 You're probably right.
00:32:43.000 We also know that there was a safety committee that should have reviewed this, and we know that Anthony Fauci went around the safety committee.
00:32:50.000 The safety committee set up in place to make sure this wouldn't happen never saw the Wuhan funding because Anthony Fauci allowed the funding to go around the safety committee.
00:32:58.000 Oh man, that's not good, is it?
00:33:00.000 So it's not just...
00:33:01.000 I've accidentally been funding that!
00:33:01.000 Oh no!
00:33:03.000 He's like, oh that's dangerous, well we better fund it in a off-the-books type way.
00:33:07.000 Oh man!
00:33:08.000 Like, just pause for a moment to think about what the legacy media do with their resources.
00:33:13.000 Are they investigating this?
00:33:14.000 It's Rand Paul who's uncovering this.
00:33:16.000 You get Journalists like Michael Schellenberger and Matt Taibbi and Barry White, you get like actual journalists, they all try and go, well, should we try and work out the truth here?
00:33:23.000 But people that work for the legacy media, they won't do that because they can't, because the function of the legacy media is to amplify the message of the powerful and normalise the agenda of the power.
00:33:31.000 They just normalise, OK, we're all in this together.
00:33:34.000 Yeah, Andy Fauci's a hero.
00:33:36.000 Let's all lock ourselves in our houses.
00:33:36.000 Woo!
00:33:38.000 Yeah, wear a mask.
00:33:39.000 It works.
00:33:40.000 And remember what you're saying then.
00:33:41.000 Hey, who are the biggest advertisers?
00:33:43.000 Where do they get their revenue from?
00:33:44.000 Hey, all of that stuff.
00:33:46.000 Totally true!
00:33:47.000 This is a bombshell revelation and this will eventually bring down Anthony Fauci.
00:33:52.000 Oh well, some good news.
00:33:54.000 Let's have a look at that in more detail.
00:33:55.000 The former director of the U.S.
00:33:56.000 National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIAID, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who led the U.S.
00:34:02.000 government response to the coronavirus pandemic, visited CIA headquarters to influence its review of COVID-19 origins, the House Oversight Committee reported in September.
00:34:13.000 Last month, committee chair Brad Wenstrup made headlines when he revealed that seven CIA analysts with significant scientific expertise on the agency's COVID-19 discovery team, CDT, received performance bonuses after changing a report to downplay concerns about a possible lab origin of the virus.
00:34:30.000 It looks like maybe it came from a lab.
00:34:32.000 What if you were to say that it didn't come from a lab?
00:34:34.000 Oh, well, but maybe it does.
00:34:36.000 I know, but what if it didn't?
00:34:38.000 Okay, it didn't.
00:34:40.000 What's that?
00:34:40.000 Have a bonus.
00:34:41.000 That's right!
00:34:42.000 I mean, that's not good, is it?
00:34:43.000 It's not follow the science.
00:34:44.000 It's not I am science.
00:34:45.000 If you argue with me, you're arguing with science.
00:34:47.000 Have a look at my conversation with Jay Bhattacharya, who went through a month of absolute hell. Lied about, humiliated,
00:34:53.000 attacked from all angles.
00:34:54.000 We're choosing wrong people, we're vilifying people we should be listening to. We're maligning
00:34:58.000 and de-platforming people that are telling us the truth. We've got to make some changes, baby.
00:35:02.000 Now, a months-long investigation by Racket and Public, which included interviews with the CIA
00:35:07.000 whistleblower behind last month's revelations and others in a position to know, reveals that Fauci
00:35:11.000 not only visited the CIA but also pushed the...
00:35:14.000 They're right!
00:35:15.000 They were right!
00:35:15.000 Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2 paper published by Nature Medicine in meetings at the State
00:35:20.000 Department and the White House.
00:35:21.000 Those people that said this is like a massive cover-up, this is going to be one of those
00:35:25.000 stories that defines an age, it's worse than Watergate, it's worse than some of the other
00:35:29.000 conspiracy theories that increasingly look like they're bloody true.
00:35:32.000 They're right.
00:35:33.000 They were right.
00:35:34.000 You were right.
00:35:35.000 Previous reporting already showed that Fauci prompted the Proximal Origin paper according
00:35:39.000 Lead author Christian Anderson expressed grave doubts about the natural origin theory even months after Nature Medicine published a paper, and they described themselves as pressured by higher-ups referring to individuals in the White House and other government agencies.
00:35:52.000 The media normalized that idea.
00:35:54.000 They just bombarded you with wet market, wet market, natural origin, natural origin, to the point where something was plain and obvious.
00:36:02.000 Like, that Institute of Virology became sort of, eventually, it was just too obvious to be ignored, but it was ignored.
00:36:09.000 It was denied for a very long, even now, it's not like people are going, you know, of course, of course, is it?
00:36:13.000 You still sort of can't even say that.
00:36:15.000 That's because we don't live in reality.
00:36:17.000 We live in a curated psychological space, created by very powerful interests, amplified and normalized by the legacy media.
00:36:24.000 Only way to bypass that is through independent media channels like this one, which is why independent media channels like this one are demonetised.
00:36:31.000 And that's why we need your help.
00:36:32.000 Press the red button.
00:36:33.000 Join us.
00:36:33.000 Now, the new information from multiple sources, including a CIA whistleblower, senior government investigator and a senior official, suggests a broad effort by Fauci to go agency by agency from the White House to the State Department to the CIA in an effort to Steer government officials away from looking into the possibility that COVID-19 escaped from a lab.
00:36:51.000 Follow the science.
00:36:52.000 Follow the science around every one of those agencies.
00:36:55.000 Follow the science around the talk shows that held sort of celebratory parties where Anthony Fauci was portrayed as a figurehead for that time of crisis.
00:37:05.000 Oh, Trump, that crackpot!
00:37:07.000 Thank God for Anthony Fauci rolling his eyes!
00:37:11.000 If it proves to be true that he went agency by agency suppressing the truth, if it proves to be true that he deliberately created a funnel for funding and masked that, that's where the mask was necessary, ironically, then what are you left with there?
00:37:25.000 You are left with a public space that is built on deception.
00:37:28.000 It's beyond propaganda.
00:37:30.000 It's worse than anything I think we've seen taken collectively.
00:37:34.000 Because now the power for these atrocities is amplified to saturation point.
00:37:39.000 And the only opposition that's likely is this type of opposition.
00:37:43.000 The great work of Matt Taibbi and Michael Schellenberger and genuine legitimate journalists.
00:37:46.000 The great work of Jay Bhattacharya and other legitimate scientists.
00:37:49.000 Robert Malone.
00:37:50.000 People that from the beginning were like, whoa, whoa, whoa.
00:37:52.000 These people have paid a very, very high price.
00:37:54.000 I tell you now, the stakes are getting high.
00:37:56.000 We're in a really significant position.
00:37:57.000 Fauci's expert opinions were a significant consideration and were part of our classified
00:38:02.000 assessment said the CIA whistleblower, a decorated and long-serving CIA officer with expertise
00:38:07.000 in Asia. His opinions substantially altered the conclusions that were subsequently drawn.
00:38:12.000 Manipulate the data. Fauci had reasons to push scientists and intelligence analysts
00:38:16.000 to believe the virus had a zoonotic origin since his agency had issued a grant to fund
00:38:21.000 research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, WIV, in China.
00:38:24.000 Oh no, this is what people were saying all along and you were called conspiracy theorists weren't you?
00:38:29.000 That's what they said.
00:38:30.000 So, yeah, we've already discussed, yeah, where it is a badge of honour.
00:38:33.000 If they don't want you speaking, you must be doing something right.
00:38:36.000 If they're trying to shut you down, you must be doing something right.
00:38:39.000 You absolutely cannot trust them.
00:38:40.000 The Wenstrup press release noted that the whistleblower's information suggested Fauci was escorted in without record of entry.
00:38:47.000 Oh, that's always good.
00:38:48.000 Follow the science.
00:38:49.000 Can't follow the science.
00:38:50.000 Never admits he's been anywhere.
00:38:51.000 According to the CIA whistleblower, the CIA purposely did not badge Fauci in and out of the building so as to hide any record that he'd been there.
00:38:58.000 Fauci came to our building to promote the natural origin of the virus, the CIA whistleblower said.
00:39:02.000 He knew what was going on.
00:39:04.000 I mean, you see all the redacted documents that are coming out.
00:39:06.000 He was covering his ass, and he was trying to do it with the intel community.
00:39:10.000 I know he came multiple times and he was treated like a rock star by the Weapons and Counter-Proliferation Mission Centre.
00:39:15.000 And he pushed the Christian Anderson paper.
00:39:17.000 I don't like that he was treated like a rock star on any level at all, do you?
00:39:19.000 It sort of irritates me.
00:39:21.000 Grant records show that Anderson had a multi-million dollar NIH grant proposal pending while he wrote Proximal Origin.
00:39:28.000 Fouch's oversight of the power and the fact that he had an author's grant on his desk put him in a clear position of power over scientists' conclusions.
00:39:35.000 Oh no, he was able to influence it by suggestion, by holding grants and the offer of grants.
00:39:40.000 People tell you this is how it works all the time.
00:39:43.000 The amount of funding available to them means that that's That's not science, is it?
00:39:46.000 Because science would be, well, let's take funding out of it, let's just look at the available data.
00:39:51.000 This is the reality of it.
00:39:52.000 Science is a subset of a set of vested interests.
00:39:56.000 That's why only these clinical trials take place.
00:39:58.000 Only that information is released.
00:40:00.000 This information is bypassed.
00:40:01.000 That theory is promoted.
00:40:02.000 That theory is shut down.
00:40:03.000 That's no longer science.
00:40:04.000 That's just science as a tool of the agenda of the powerful, reported as objective science by a complicit legacy media who received their funding via advertising from pharmaceutical companies.
00:40:14.000 There you have it.
00:40:14.000 A convergence of interests.
00:40:16.000 But how could it be?
00:40:17.000 How could it not be true?
00:40:17.000 It's just crazy to think that the one person who was presented as the voice of reason, the reliable weather vane and bulwark of our sensible response to this terrible condition, could be actually part of the cause, part of the problem, concealing the truth.
00:40:31.000 Anti-science?
00:40:32.000 I mean, it's almost biblical.
00:40:33.000 In 2022, the CIA revisited its origins investigation, according to the whistleblower.
00:40:38.000 In one meeting that year, Fauci berated a CIA analyst who expressed the view that Covid came from a lab, according to a whistleblower.
00:40:45.000 Six out of seven analysts concluded that a lab leak was most likely.
00:40:48.000 It's only six-sevenths, and the seventh one had been berated.
00:40:51.000 But then, after the intervention of senior agency personnel, the CIA changed its assessment of COVID's origin from lab leak to unknown.
00:40:59.000 Said to us, we don't know where it came from.
00:41:02.000 Why don't we just guess or say that it's a wet market?
00:41:05.000 I read that somewhere.
00:41:06.000 Yeah, I wrote that.
00:41:06.000 It's astonishing that something that significant, influential, and impactful could have been conducted in this way.
00:41:11.000 And as I've said, and as we've discussed many, many times, the COVID pandemic was unique to some degree, but I would offer you this.
00:41:18.000 Regard it not as a unique and anomalous occasion, but as a lens, a window.
00:41:23.000 How do these institutions behave?
00:41:24.000 How do the agencies that are supposed to regulate pharmaceutical research actually behave?
00:41:28.000 Do they have financial ties?
00:41:30.000 How do figures that are meant to represent the health interests of an entire nation, and on an occasion such as that, the world, actually behave?
00:41:36.000 How does the media Actually behave.
00:41:39.000 How does the government actually behave?
00:41:40.000 The WHO?
00:41:41.000 The WF?
00:41:41.000 What it did is it revealed to us.
00:41:43.000 That's why it was such an extraordinary event.
00:41:44.000 That's why it was utilized to create authoritative measures and to shut down dissent and increase surveillance and surveillance measures like passports and different forms of ID and to increase censorship and shut down dissenting voices because Something happened that was literally global and so much was revealed as a result.
00:42:00.000 The first thing they have to do is have the ability to control the narrative.
00:42:04.000 If they can't control the narrative, they're in trouble because none of us are going to tolerate that if we understand it.
00:42:10.000 I used to say this before the age of the internet.
00:42:12.000 What do you think in classified documents?
00:42:14.000 What do you think in top secret info?
00:42:16.000 What do you think's in there?
00:42:17.000 Oh, this is just information.
00:42:18.000 If our enemies got our hands on it, No, it's information.
00:42:20.000 If we had it, if you just said, right, this is how we run the country.
00:42:23.000 This is what's really been going on.
00:42:24.000 That's what happened to JFK.
00:42:25.000 That's how all these things went down.
00:42:26.000 Obviously, what's in that documentation, in fact, the raison d'etre of those documents and of classification itself and of those agencies is to prevent you from ever understanding how you are truly governed and controlled.
00:42:38.000 Because if you knew what was in those documents, you would not cooperate.
00:42:42.000 You would not obey.
00:42:43.000 It would shock you to the very core of your being.
00:42:46.000 We are beginning to understand this now, that our most treasured and cherished institutions require radical reform and that it will not come from within the system itself.
00:42:55.000 We know that now.
00:42:56.000 So, just let me offer you this.
00:42:57.000 If you had access to this information, you would know that the only route is radical change, disobedience, revolution.
00:43:04.000 How should we be behaving now then?
00:43:06.000 Now that we're beginning to understand the truth, the reality, the reality they keep from us.
00:43:11.000 Let me know in the chat.
00:43:12.000 The CIA gave the analysts exceptional performance awards that came with cash bonuses.
00:43:17.000 Total bribery.
00:43:18.000 Total observable, traceable corruption.
00:43:21.000 Is there going to be a test for that?
00:43:22.000 There was a clear lack of interest in a robust analysis of Chinese military connections to WIV research and connections that could be drawn between US research and WIV activity, the whistleblower said.
00:43:33.000 In letting Fauci secretly influence analysts behind closed doors, the CIA may have allowed Fauci to promote his own personal interests, undermining the scientific integrity of the agency's investigation.
00:43:44.000 Despite his claim that he did not try to exert influence over investigations into Covid's origin, Fauci had a clear motive to divert attention from the Wuhan lab.
00:43:52.000 So there you are.
00:43:53.000 Perhaps when the next pandemic comes, and evidently it is, not just because some of the world's most powerful vested interests are telling you that it's coming, but But because simultaneously, none of the lessons of the last lab leak, if indeed it was one, have been learned.
00:44:08.000 The same scientists are conducting yet more dangerous research.
00:44:13.000 I don't want it, you don't want it I assume, and yet it's still happening.
00:44:16.000 We know that Anthony Fauci, who was presented to us as the figurehead, a paragon of truth and authenticity, is now seeming to be its direct inverse.
00:44:25.000 All of our values are being flipped.
00:44:28.000 The truth is being replaced by fiction.
00:44:30.000 Villains are being presented as heroes, and vice versa.
00:44:33.000 The whole reason for this cover-up is because it reveals the true nature of power.
00:44:38.000 That power has become corrupted, out of control, and requires radical intervention.
00:44:42.000 And guess what?
00:44:43.000 It's not going to come from within the system.
00:44:45.000 Even though, whatever hope you have, for whatever figurehead you're backing, what would happen if they were placed, dropped, into that cesspool?
00:44:53.000 Let me know if you think any individual can really make a difference.
00:44:56.000 No, we have to all change.
00:44:58.000 We all have to participate in change.
00:45:00.000 We have to radically change as individuals and we have to be willing to sacrifice and make the necessary changes in our own lives and in our communities and to demand democracy by any means necessary except, of course, violence.
00:45:11.000 Should they be carrying out those experiments now?
00:45:13.000 Should Andy Fauci be taken to task for his conduct if indeed this stuff is true?
00:45:17.000 And I'd also, let me add this, stop making humanised mice.
00:45:20.000 But that's just what I think.
00:45:21.000 Why don't you let me know what you think in the chat?
00:45:23.000 See you in a second.
00:45:24.000 Thanks for refusing Fox News.
00:45:26.000 We're just kidding.
00:45:27.000 No, here's the fucking news.
00:45:30.000 It may seem astonishing to acknowledge, even to countenance the idea that such dangerous
00:45:35.000 research continues to take place after what appear to be stark, beyond warnings, realisations
00:45:42.000 of the dangers of that research.
00:45:44.000 And it's preposterous to imagine that someone that was lauded as a figurehead, as a kind of prophet of the pandemic era, a self-proclaimed voice of science and manifestation of science could potentially be so corrupt.
00:45:57.000 And yet, That's what the journalism that we just used to make that content suggests, and maybe even in places appears to, according to that CIA whistleblower, demonstrate.
00:46:07.000 I am now honoured to introduce so-called journalist, that's the words of Congress, writer of Racket News and America This Week on Substack, and author of Griftopia.
00:46:18.000 It's Matt Taibbi.
00:46:19.000 Matt, thanks for coming on, mate.
00:46:21.000 How are you doing, Russell?
00:46:21.000 Of course.
00:46:22.000 You know, just very good and just very positive about life, enjoying life.
00:46:27.000 A lot of trust in our institutions, legacy media, got a lot of trust in that.
00:46:30.000 Government, a lot of trust in that.
00:46:32.000 Trust at a record high, I would say.
00:46:34.000 Yeah, faultless.
00:46:37.000 Not a fully immersive omnicrisis, geopolitical nightmares everywhere you look, corruption, censorship everywhere.
00:46:44.000 I mean, there's so much for us to discuss, but given that we've just done an item using your journalism, can we talk a little more, Matt, about Fauci's role in censoring the potential origins of the last pandemic?
00:46:59.000 And I suppose significantly that CIA whistleblower and like Fauci's agency tour to shut down investigation.
00:47:08.000 Yeah, so this is a story that grew out of the Twitter files a little bit.
00:47:16.000 Because a lot of the focus of the Twitter files was about suppression of COVID-related topics, a number of people came forward.
00:47:25.000 Michael Schellenberger and I, about six months ago, we started To hear about a whistleblower in the CIA who was coming forward with a story that Anthony Fauci had, at least on a couple of occasions, come to the CIA's Weapons and Counterproliferation Center.
00:47:45.000 I forget exactly what the acronym is, but it was what they were using to study the origins of of COVID and gave a presentation pushing the idea of zoonotic origin on the CIA analysts.
00:48:01.000 Later on, some six of the seven analysts at the CIA who were leaning towards lab origin changed their minds before the issuance of a final report.
00:48:14.000 They were given financial incentives by the agency to do that.
00:48:19.000 There are a number of other stories that came out as a result of all this, but he also went to the State Department and the White House, was pushing this proximal origins of SARS-CoV-2 paper that we also had reported on that he was heavily involved with drafting, probably never disclosed it to any of those agencies.
00:48:38.000 So it looks like a pretty sophisticated, energetic campaign to go through the intelligence agencies and executive branch agencies and try to convince them to not look at the lab origin theory.
00:48:53.000 If this is true, it seems to be the kind of corruption and hypocrisy that people that were judged to be conspiracy theorists very early in this process were offering.
00:49:07.000 I feel like pretty early on people were saying, how is the Wuhan Institute of Virology funded?
00:49:12.000 It was not even possible, as obviously you know, to even talk about lab leak theory at the beginning.
00:49:17.000 Does this, are you able, I sort of feel like I know that you are from when we spoke particularly at that censorship industrial complex event that we did, like able to look at this somewhat objectively?
00:49:27.000 Or do you find yourself sort of recoiling in disgust?
00:49:30.000 Or are you excited as an investigative journalist?
00:49:32.000 Like, oh my God, this is actual information.
00:49:34.000 Oh my God, it makes sense.
00:49:36.000 What, what does this do to you emotionally?
00:49:38.000 I ask because This would seem to be the type of story that an investigative journalist would be excited by, that this is something that you can show an unravelling of, almost a complete reversal of someone that's been presented as a hero, celebrated to an almost galling degree, an uncustomary degree, a degree that's actually bloody obvious that something was going on when you look at it now, that he was on the talk shows and the dancing syringes and all those kind of things.
00:50:02.000 Makes you think this isn't a normal thing to happen.
00:50:06.000 When the media does something that extreme, whether it's pro someone or against someone, possibly there's another agenda at play.
00:50:13.000 So there's a few questions I want to ask you.
00:50:15.000 Does it excite you as an investigative journalist?
00:50:17.000 Why don't we see that kind of investigative journalism taking place within the legacy media?
00:50:22.000 And what was your emotional reaction to it?
00:50:23.000 And finally, within this little bunch of questions, can you envisage that this will lead to any kind of criminal judicial consequences for Fauci?
00:50:32.000 That's a good question.
00:50:34.000 Well, just quickly, to go in order, I should admit that I was very taken in initially by a lot of the propaganda about COVID.
00:50:45.000 And I was reluctant to go anywhere near the topic because I didn't, I was a little bit afraid of aligning myself with sort of anti-vaccine activists.
00:50:55.000 Even if I was saying something true, I didn't want that impression out there.
00:51:00.000 And when we started doing the Twitter files, Barry Weiss and Michael Schellenberger were much, much more interested in the COVID aspect than I was.
00:51:08.000 I was trying to focus on the FBI intelligence aspect of it, mainly because I You know, I wasn't sure what was true about the COVID question, but we came to realize by the end of the project that the COVID messaging thing was central to the worst corruption that we were looking at in the documents, mainly because what they were doing wasn't taking things that were false and eliminating them.
00:51:36.000 They were taking things that were true and intentionally removing them and actually coming up with a reason to remove True content.
00:51:46.000 And that I think was terrible.
00:51:49.000 And this led to this series of stories, which I was excited about because, you know, I didn't have any particular feelings about Anthony Fauci.
00:51:59.000 I was a little annoyed by his imperious demeanor and his lecturing.
00:52:05.000 You know, just as an outside observer, he seemed obnoxious to me.
00:52:09.000 But when we got the documents showing his emails back and forth with the scientists who did the original paper concluding that the virus had a natural origin and saw how aggressively he was suppressing their natural reaction that this probably came from a lab or at least that they couldn't rule that out.
00:52:36.000 Seeing that in paper was very exciting because we're not asserting it, we're just saying here, Look at what he said.
00:52:44.000 Look at what they were doing.
00:52:46.000 They lied to you about what they thought.
00:52:49.000 And that's always exciting as an investigative reporter is when you get proof of something as opposed to having to rely on an anonymous source or something like that.
00:53:00.000 This latest thing with the whistleblower suggests something a little bit more sinister, which is an active cover-up of investigations into this question and then, you know, as to the question
00:53:18.000 of whether this will lead to criminal probes, I think it's possible because there is
00:53:23.000 more to come out about America's relationship to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the
00:53:32.000 sharing of scientific research, the possibility that some American scientists may have actually provided
00:53:40.000 the technology to help create this virus.
00:53:45.000 None of that is proven, but I think it's out there and there's, you know, from what we hear, there's more stuff that's kind of come out.
00:53:51.000 If it does, I think, yes, I think there will be probes.
00:53:55.000 That's pretty, that's interesting and somewhat exciting.
00:53:58.000 So then if there's a legitimate story and there's somewhat reliable evidence and sources available, part of my question there was why does the legacy media not spend any money, time, resources, investigative endeavour on stories like this?
00:54:16.000 What does that tell us?
00:54:20.000 I mean, it continues to astonish me that they're uninterested or disinterested.
00:54:26.000 I forget what the right word is in this situation.
00:54:28.000 But, you know, from the very beginning, COVID was a story that was reported in a very particular way.
00:54:37.000 I think a lot of reporters decided what they felt or what they believed about certain topics based on what Donald Trump's reaction was.
00:54:44.000 If Donald Trump suspected that there might've been lab origin, Or if you blame China, then the response was to go all the way in the other direction.
00:54:54.000 If Donald Trump said he took hydroxychloroquine, then hydroxychloroquine absolutely had to be snake oil.
00:54:59.000 There was no other way of reporting this because Anthony Fauci was presented as the kind of human counterpart to Donald Trump at the time.
00:55:09.000 as the alternative authority figure.
00:55:11.000 He's been embraced and I think there's an unwillingness to go near that topic
00:55:15.000 because they feel that that's implicitly encouraging people towards Trumpism.
00:55:20.000 But it's not. The two things are totally unrelated.
00:55:23.000 The question, we still have an unresolved question of where this virus came from.
00:55:28.000 They haven't answered that question.
00:55:30.000 So until they do, don't we have to keep looking for it?
00:55:33.000 I think we do, don't we?
00:55:34.000 Seems that it's being maneuvered out of the agenda.
00:55:38.000 And I feel that there's, and I'm obviously not the first to make the remark, that there's an emergent template where crises enter, a very strong narrative accompanies the origin of the crisis.
00:55:51.000 Anyone that dissents is maligned and it becomes very difficult.
00:55:56.000 And the thing you described about, you know, to be sort of inquisitive or to oppose the narrative is become aligned with Trumpism.
00:56:04.000 It's almost, I feel that they are creating that dynamic.
00:56:09.000 Myself, over the last few years, I've gone from a position of thinking, like, oh, Donald Trump, man, seriously?
00:56:14.000 And, like, then recognizing that there's a lot of people who see him as a sort of a real solution because of the berserker component, because he is an anomaly in the political space.
00:56:23.000 Then, like, for me, as it becomes slightly more sophisticated, I think, hang on a minute, if they don't like him as much as they don't like him, that at least is something, whatever's going on with this guy, the establishment don't want him in there.
00:56:36.000 Up to all the way where I start thinking he's alright!
00:56:40.000 Because in a sense you're maligned and marginalised and excluded from space.
00:56:45.000 The thing that you said about how they defaulted to Fauci as a counterpoint because of some rolling eyes and because they had a sort of a neocon stooge as he's starting to appear sort of up there on the podium.
00:56:57.000 It's now, we've now reached the point where you have the kind of, the space is becoming so fissured and fractured that new alliances were going to happen.
00:57:06.000 And I get, in that moment I felt, oh well that's the fault of the people that are reporting in this manner and refusing to investigate as a result of those assumptions, the ones that you just outlined.
00:57:15.000 But perhaps it's a, perhaps it's broader than that.
00:57:17.000 Perhaps this is just the, what these alliances are just going to occur because it is authoritarianism versus the periphery and anti-authoritarianism Well, I very much think it's the latter.
00:57:28.000 yourself in new alliances. What do you think it is? Which one of those?
00:57:30.000 Well, I very much think it's it's the latter. I mean, I'm working on a book now and looking into the origins of, you
00:57:40.000 know, this anti disinformation censorship complex. And part of it comes
00:57:46.000 from this political theory that was, you know, is derived by a German jury, he
00:57:54.000 was a Nazi jurist actually named Carl Schmitt, who one of his core political theories is that all politics, liberal
00:58:02.000 democracy is just window dressing.
00:58:04.000 All politics is really about Sorting friends from foes.
00:58:09.000 And it's all about the binary.
00:58:13.000 It's who's on our side and who's on the other side.
00:58:15.000 This came very much into play after 9-11.
00:58:20.000 Are you with the terrorists or against them?
00:58:22.000 And now it's sort of reflexively how we do everything.
00:58:26.000 It's are you on our side or are you on Putin's side?
00:58:29.000 Are you on our side or are you on the side of the anti-vaxxers?
00:58:33.000 Are you on our side or the side of the insurrectionists?
00:58:38.000 They're trying to eliminate those middle spaces, those shades of gray.
00:58:41.000 And that's been very effective.
00:58:45.000 And it's also convinced people to turn the blinders on when it comes to looking at somebody like Anthony Fauci.
00:58:52.000 In retrospect, we should have wondered right away about a guy who tells us that he lied to us about something like masks for our own good.
00:59:04.000 That's something that no journalist or scientist should ever be caught doing, saying, yeah, I told you a wrong fact, but I had to, like, we shouldn't let people off the hook for that.
00:59:16.000 But we did because he coded as somebody who was a friend and not a foe.
00:59:21.000 And that's how the media treated him.
00:59:24.000 I think that's the core authoritarian distinction is between his authority and everybody else.
00:59:31.000 Yes, you're right.
00:59:31.000 And you can see how authoritarianism is advanced by this false oppositional perspective.
00:59:40.000 You're either with the terrorists or you're against the terrorists.
00:59:43.000 In a way, what that creates is a conversational framing that is in its nature opposed to something that I think might be quite fundamental The decentralization of power, the demonopolization of powerful big tech entities, the prohibition of the overreach of the state, the foreclosure of the state's right to intervene in matters like how you raise your children or how you earn your money.
01:00:11.000 By creating that sort of polarity, in the end a sort of a relatively balanced polarity Would, almost on a mathematical level, lead to two spaces?
01:00:21.000 For or against?
01:00:22.000 Yes?
01:00:23.000 No?
01:00:24.000 Isn't it, by its nature, binary?
01:00:26.000 So I can see why that has prevailed, and how it serves authority, and also how we've experienced, even in this time that I've been, you know, intellectually, shall we say, engaged in these spaces, We've witnessed the inversion of meaning, like free speech is bad, free speech is hate speech, that talking about peace or advocating for peace is bad and disloyal, and how we've seen liberal...
01:00:57.000 Parties that were typically associated with advocacy for civil rights and liberal attitudes becoming authoritarian.
01:01:05.000 I suppose it's precisely because of this, the phenomenon you're describing.
01:01:08.000 So yeah, that book's going to be good, I reckon, because you can see how that would dynamically create that kind of fissure.
01:01:15.000 Yeah, I'm sure it'll work.
01:01:17.000 Yeah, thanks.
01:01:19.000 I get that.
01:01:20.000 Yeah.
01:01:23.000 And that's how the algorithms work in this censorship space.
01:01:27.000 They're all designed to kind of reduce everybody to which side of the line are you on, you know?
01:01:36.000 What they're analyzing is how do you respond to stimuli if somebody comes out with a crazy opinion about X?
01:01:43.000 Are you on this side of that opinion or that side of the opinion?
01:01:46.000 They're always analyzing.
01:01:49.000 The machine learning version of content moderation, that's what it does.
01:01:55.000 It's designed to score you on a spectrum of opinions.
01:02:00.000 And, you know, that's why things like this Digital Services Act that you've got in Europe now are so scary, because it's just creating an intellectual dragnet over vast territories and separating people according to their opinions.
01:02:17.000 Um, you know, and telling us that some opinions are just illegal, you know, and others are, you know, everything else is okay.
01:02:27.000 And that's a terrible, dangerous way of looking at things.
01:02:31.000 It's totally contrary to From a free market perspective it seems that what was and has been emerging in online spaces is the potential for global audiences to accrue
01:02:48.000 Topically, or via subject, i.e., Substack is an example, Rumble, the phenomenon of Joe Rogan, to take the most evident figure, that you can create new markets bypassing institutions.
01:03:03.000 And I would say that that trend Unchecked would continue and have connotations and could be extrapolated beyond media space and I would say into the administering of power, ultimately.
01:03:17.000 Why wouldn't it?
01:03:18.000 Why would you not if you recognise, oh I'm part of a community, we can intercommunicate, we can establish democracies.
01:03:23.000 Oh, I wonder how that would work if it was geographically localised.
01:03:25.000 I wonder.
01:03:26.000 There was a tendency and a trend that had to be arrested and has been arrested and is being arrested.
01:03:31.000 I wanted to ask you about the EU's Digital Services Act, the recent labelling of Ex Biteri Breton as a hub of disinformation, and the numerous comparable pieces of legislature, whether it's Canada's podcast bill, whatever they're calling that, The UK's online safety bill that sort of coincided with events that affected me personally, of course.
01:03:57.000 And I wonder what you feel this is in effect.
01:04:03.000 And of course, I wonder in particular, how you feel about the fact that they're often mobilized by things that almost anyone would agree with hate speech, child pornography.
01:04:11.000 Nobody wants that.
01:04:13.000 Yes.
01:04:13.000 But often there are matters for which there are already laws that don't require additional legislation or the foreclosure of free speech.
01:04:22.000 Right, and that's always how they propagandize repressive or authoritarian measures.
01:04:29.000 They start with something that everybody agrees with for whatever reason.
01:04:34.000 That's why in America, I think the first figure to be removed from the internet in a coordinated way.
01:04:43.000 Alex Jones was somebody who was really unpopular in many quarters.
01:04:47.000 So people didn't protest the underlying issue, which is, you know, switching out one way of regulating speech, which was always litigation based and doing it by this other means, which was corporate behind closed doors, didn't involve courts or juries or anything like that.
01:05:03.000 Um, that's scary, but all the laws that you're talking about, um, I have tremendous implications for the ability of ordinary people to conduct democracy.
01:05:16.000 I mean, these sort of top down measures, they imply that speech is dangerous.
01:05:26.000 And we found out, I mean, I think COVID is the primary example of of why these kinds of laws can be abused, right?
01:05:38.000 So, with COVID, one of the things that happened was you saw early on there were scientists like Jay Bhattacharya from Stanford and Martin Calder from Harvard.
01:05:49.000 Sinetra Guptra from Oxford, who were suppressing the Internet, not because they got anything wrong, not because they were inciting people or committing libel or doing anything that you would traditionally consider a crime, right, or a speech offense, but because they were opposing a government policy.
01:06:12.000 They were saying that they thought lockdowns were ineffective.
01:06:15.000 They thought that there were lockdowns were not scientifically indicated.
01:06:18.000 And the people who run the trust and safety departments or the censorship departments in these companies classified that as disinformation because it was information that produced the wrong behavior in people.
01:06:33.000 It aroused the wrong political response.
01:06:37.000 So even though it's factually true, it's narratively incorrect.
01:06:42.000 And that's what's so dangerous is that you have people with that kind of power Deciding what is and is not appropriate content and they will lie, you know, they'll abuse those powers.
01:06:53.000 It's already been proven.
01:06:54.000 That's what's so scary I think.
01:06:56.000 In a way, it's already happening, isn't it?
01:06:59.000 Because sometimes when I'm talking about what I believe to be an attempt to create systems of authority that are able to, because true authority I suppose by its nature, would bypass democracy and some of the stories that we track and obviously that you track and investigate, ...appear to be targeted and motivated towards the creation of systems that mean that regardless of what country you're in or regardless of whether or not what you're saying is true, there are new methods and modes of control being introduced, often under the auspices of safety, because the alternative would just be to announce that it's about control.
01:07:43.000 Talking about what's been happening with banking in Canada and appears to be being legislated for and certainly is increasing.
01:07:50.000 And I wondered actually, because you know Chrystia Freeland, the sarcastically named Deputy PM of Canada.
01:08:00.000 What's your personal experience of her, if that's not a rude question?
01:08:09.000 So, Chrystia Freeland was a reporter.
01:08:12.000 She wrote for the New Statesman, I believe the Financial Times, a few other papers.
01:08:22.000 She's obviously Canadian, but she was reporting from Russia at the same time I was.
01:08:27.000 There was a very small community of expats in Moscow in the 90s, and so we all knew one another.
01:08:36.000 We were all familiar with one another.
01:08:38.000 And Christia was somebody with whom I disagreed a lot during the Yeltsin period.
01:08:46.000 She had very positive views, for instance, about the figures that we now call oligarchs.
01:08:53.000 Sometimes she did.
01:08:56.000 And, you know, there were some columns that she wrote that even at the time I remember raising an eyebrow about.
01:09:03.000 When Putin first came to power, you can go back and look at this, there was a column that she wrote talking about how the West is falling in love with Russia again.
01:09:12.000 You know, the implication being that Putin was, you know, he was a more respectable face.
01:09:21.000 He was someone with whom we could do business.
01:09:25.000 And, you know, she had a reputation as somebody who kind of Toe to the establishment line, the American foreign policy line on Russia, which we didn't always agree with because there were pretty dramatic consequences for people in Russia at the time.
01:09:46.000 There was a gutting of the freedom of the press, there were elimination of all kinds of public services, and a lot of the Americans were cool with that.
01:09:58.000 You know, when she reappeared in this role in Canada, all of my old friends from Russia, we've been all texting each other about this.
01:10:08.000 It's unbelievable.
01:10:09.000 This stuff is, you know, the use of denying banking services, this invitation of Yaroslav Honka to The Canadian Parliament, it's hard for me to believe that Krystia, who has a Ukrainian background and started her career out writing for Ukrainian papers, didn't know what was going on there.
01:10:36.000 So the excuse that this all caught them unawares, I'm just not sure about that.
01:10:42.000 But yeah, no, and she seems very aggressive.
01:10:45.000 In promoting this very aggressive use of denial of services to people who are on the wrong side of the informational landscape and That's very concerning.
01:10:59.000 And it's totally contrary, again, to what traditional Western liberal democratic values.
01:11:06.000 You said earlier that it was using the ideas of Carl Schmitt that democracy itself could be regarded as a kind of liberal window dressing for binary systems, for dividing friends.
01:11:21.000 from foes and one of the things I've been most struck by is how the aesthetic of
01:11:26.000 liberalism, the rhetoric of liberalism is so closely allied to authoritarianism
01:11:32.000 and Chrystia Freeland and Justin Trudeau and figures that I feel like you know
01:11:37.000 10 years ago or 15 years ago I would have I would have just thought, they seem nice, like the kind of
01:11:41.000 people that you'd want run in a country, sort of modern looking and sounding.
01:11:47.000 And before long, they're like literally applauding Nazis.
01:11:50.000 Now I'd, when we'd spoken about that, I mean, on our channel, assumed that that was just
01:11:56.000 an innocent mistake.
01:11:57.000 And the idea that it, potentially, but I do know that her own grandfather was part of
01:12:01.000 a, also a sort of, I guess, an amateur Nazi battalion out there.
01:12:06.000 And that her grandfather's, part of her grandfather's role was seizing printing presses from like
01:12:12.000 Jewish organizations and stuff.
01:12:15.000 So, what, you think it's... I mean, that's just speculative, is it?
01:12:18.000 I mean, it does seem like a pretty mad accident.
01:12:20.000 I assumed it was like a Jungian kind of deep, unconscious accident brought forth from the collective psyche that Canada, in all its liberal posing, somehow, like a fart, just revealed, oh no, we're applauding a Nazi!
01:12:39.000 But you think it's sort of, like, almost potentially deliberate?
01:12:46.000 Well, yeah, if it was a fart, that's one of the all-time loud ones, I would say.
01:12:57.000 First of all, it's impossible to believe that they were not aware that this guy fought on the other side of a war where 42,000 Canadians died.
01:13:09.000 Most people are pretty, you know, I understand it was a long time ago and not everybody's read their World War II history, but if your country fought in a war you have, you tend to know.
01:13:18.000 Who was on the other side of that conflict?
01:13:22.000 Yes, there are some legitimate reasons.
01:13:24.000 There, of course, were legitimate reasons to fight against the Soviets, among other things, because they had previously done a non-aggression pact with the Nazis.
01:13:33.000 They're not exactly great actors.
01:13:36.000 But in World War II, by 1941, they were on our side.
01:13:41.000 And this figure, Yaroslav Honka, was in the Waffen-SS.
01:13:48.000 I mean, it, it, it, it.
01:13:50.000 They had to have done some research on this, and it's impossible for me to imagine that they weren't.
01:13:57.000 They weren't at least aware that they were asking Parliament to cheer somebody who was fighting on the other side of their war.
01:14:06.000 So, the Nazi element aside, but you add the Nazi element to that, and that scene, it looks like what my podcast partner Walter Curran and I called a soft opening for asking people to accept certain fascistic values.
01:14:24.000 I don't know how else to interpret that scene.
01:14:27.000 It's a difficult phenomenon, or at least event, to interpret at all.
01:14:33.000 A few things I'd love to run through with you.
01:14:34.000 Firstly, the emergence, or at least announcement, that RFK is going to run independently and the fact that a significant number of Americans say they would consider voting for an independent candidate.
01:14:44.000 Do you think that this is possible?
01:14:46.000 Do you think it will alter the trajectory of the election?
01:14:48.000 Do you think it could even alter the candidate that runs for either the Democrat or Republican party?
01:14:53.000 Do you think it will change the This course during this election, do you think that he's going to get like super attacked from both sides now?
01:15:01.000 What do you think will be the broad impact of RFK's candidacy, Matt?
01:15:07.000 I think the candidacies of both RFK and Cornel West are going to have a significant impact on Uh, the election, at least I think that's very possible.
01:15:20.000 Um, Cornel West doesn't have to get that much support before he becomes a major factor in the race, uh, for a variety of reasons.
01:15:31.000 And it's the same thing with our RFK with, he starts getting even pulling the same numbers that he has been, you know, between 10 and 20%.
01:15:40.000 Uh, of even the Democratic electorate.
01:15:43.000 If you start adding the people who are among Independents and Republicans who would consider voting for him, then we're getting into serious numbers.
01:15:50.000 Now, the question is, will his candidacy hurt Trump, who's the presumptive nominee more than Joe Biden, who's the presumptive Democratic nominee?
01:16:00.000 I don't know, but, um, You know, there's a reason why the Democratic Party, actually both of the two established parties, hate these kinds of candidates because, especially at a moment like this one, when, you know, the incumbent is so totally unappealing.
01:16:18.000 I mean, he's clinically dead, basically, right?
01:16:19.000 So, if given the option of voting for somebody who's still alive and breathing and able to, you know, speak in his own language, People will do that, you know?
01:16:33.000 And I think both RFK and West are going to become real factors.
01:16:42.000 That I suppose at least is cause for some optimism.
01:16:45.000 Another subject I wanted to of course touch upon is the escalating violence in the Middle East.
01:16:50.000 I've noticed already that it's entering into an already difficult, divided, communicative space and this is almost the ultimate divisive issue.
01:17:03.000 Even prior to cancel culture, even prior to the kind of online tribalism That we see these days and the kind of self-censure and the censure of others.
01:17:12.000 This was an issue that was almost, I don't know, it appears to divide people like nothing else I can really think of.
01:17:20.000 What do you think is going to be the impact just in terms of journalism and discussing it and the calls for nuance and calls for peace when it comes to this horrific and brutal and difficult issue?
01:17:33.000 First of all, it's just awful.
01:17:36.000 Obviously, it's a terrible story and it breaks your heart.
01:17:44.000 One of the things that's really troubling about this era of journalism and even social media communication is that There's relentless pressure on people to have visible external symbols of compliance or support.
01:18:02.000 So anything from wearing masks to the Ukraine flag emojis to even for some people the American flag emojis or the black square or whatever it is.
01:18:14.000 There's always this pressure to kind of reduce things to, I'm on this side or I'm on that side, and I hate you because you're on the other side of this.
01:18:23.000 And let's come to those conclusions right away.
01:18:27.000 Let's do that in the initial hours of the event.
01:18:33.000 Whereas in my experience, it can take years before you really can have strong opinions about a thing because issues can be so complicated.
01:18:45.000 But you're right.
01:18:47.000 Of all the issues that there are in the world, this is the one that people feel most—they feel less tolerant of the shades of gray in between.
01:19:01.000 And I think that's dangerous because this is an immensely complicated issue and people on both sides of it would gain from learning the perspective of the other side.
01:19:13.000 And they're not going to do that.
01:19:15.000 They're going to wall up.
01:19:16.000 I mean, don't you think?
01:19:17.000 They're going to move to one side or the other and just pour invective and venom on one another.
01:19:23.000 And that's only going to worsen the situation.
01:19:26.000 When the only way out is to kind of reach some kind of mutual understanding or And I don't know.
01:19:32.000 I don't do you see that happening I'm not I'm not sure not sure that I is to speak to a genuine journalist That's what investigative journalism looks like and that's what investigative journalism does it looks at something that everyone assumes to be true wait a minute Andy Fauci is a great guy hold on a a second and suddenly revelations and suddenly reality is
01:19:50.000 different. How interesting what the legacy media investigate and what they don't investigate.
01:19:54.000 How revealing, whose side are they on?
01:19:57.000 Is it their job to investigate or is it their job to amplify and normalize the agenda of the
01:20:03.000 powerful? You let us know in the chat in the comments.
01:20:06.000 Remember, tomorrow we've been joined by Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia, who said that
01:20:10.000 Wikipedia even, that sort of trusted resource of all of us. Who among us doesn't write their entire show
01:20:15.000 based on Wikipedia entries?
01:20:17.000 I know we don't anymore because, as Larry Sanger says, it's propagandist and biased.
01:20:23.000 If you want to be part of this movement, and we are going way, way, way beyond anything we imagine now, here on Rumble, we will describe to you the nature of the problem.
01:20:32.000 There, on Locals, we are interested in the solution.
01:20:36.000 On Stay Free with Russell Brown, we talk about the numerous ways that the world has gone awry, the corruption of the military-industrial complex, the inefficacy of the state, the corruption of the legacy media.
01:20:45.000 On Locals, what's it going to be like next?
01:20:47.000 How are we going to reorganise?
01:20:48.000 How are we going to get out of this?
01:20:49.000 As well as meditations, biblical readings, looking at scripture, religion,
01:20:53.000 all the tools available to us, the five ways that are going to change the world,
01:20:56.000 whether it's cryptocurrency, new biomechanical technology,
01:20:59.000 simply alkane philosophy revivified.
01:21:03.000 And I want to thank the people that are supporting us on Locals,
01:21:05.000 and I want to urge you to join our community.
01:21:07.000 Become an awakened wonder, if you can.
01:21:10.000 And man, we'll find new ways of getting everybody on board.
01:21:12.000 It's so important for you to support us now.
01:21:14.000 Once the government gets involved and Big Tech demonetizes you, it's us now.
01:21:19.000 This is it.
01:21:19.000 You've seen from Matt Taibbi how important your support is and I want to thank Benita08.
01:21:24.000 Thank you for being an Awaken Wonder.
01:21:25.000 Marnie Howe, Mad Nick, Kay Kinsley One, Del Boy W12.
01:21:29.000 You are all so welcome here.
01:21:31.000 Thank you for becoming an Awaken Wonder.
01:21:32.000 Thank you for supporting our movement.
01:21:34.000 Who knows what we can achieve together.
01:21:35.000 Let's remain Optimistic, let's remain powerful, let us remain above and beyond fear, but more important than that, let us remain free.
01:21:43.000 Join us tomorrow, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.