Stay Free - Russel Brand - October 04, 2023


Weightloss Drug OZEMPIC: What They’re NOT Telling You! With Lee Fang


Episode Stats

Length

44 minutes

Words per Minute

161.09152

Word Count

7,182

Sentence Count

349

Misogynist Sentences

1

Hate Speech Sentences

7


Summary

Russell Brand is joined by Russell Brand to discuss the rise of Big Tech in alliance with globalist governments and how this is becoming the dynamic that will control information, data and surveillance, your ability to observe, imbibe and consume potentially dissenting voices, or dissident views, for the next few years, and how there s a raft of laws being ushered through right now in my country, in your country, and across the world that will make free speech and even opposition and free thought basically impossible. It s an incredible story, and a companion piece to our conversation with Dr. Robert Epstein, where he talked about how he s observed and demonstrated the degree of corruption that is demonstrable and the impact it s having on everything from elections to perception itself. Also, Lee Fang is coming on the show to talk about Lockheed Martin and the Ukraine-Russia conflict. Remember, join us on Rumble if you can, and become a member of our community by clicking the red button on your screen now. If you can t get enough Rumble, please do that by becoming an awakened wonder and support us by becoming a patron of the show, by subscribing to Rumble and becoming a member. You re gonna get a whole lot more than you thought you d dived in to on Rumble, and you re gonna love it! Thank you so much for your support, and if it s possible for you can't get enough, please support us, become a supporter of us by following us on RUMBLE. and become an awakened Wonder. by clicking that, too. And if you re-join the RUMBERRUPTER, by becoming ANEWING WON'T-WON'EASILY on Rumble. on your favorite streaming platform, and help us keep up to date with the latest episodes on Rumble and so much more! You can t have it all, you re not just one more awakening wonder . You ve got the chance to be a woke, woke, free, you ve got it, you have to be woke, you can be free, right? ? And you can do it, we re-free, you don t have to have it, can t be that? and it s not just that s gonna have it? And they re free, they re not, they can t just be that, they have it that way, right, right can be it, right ?


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Hello there, you Awakening Wonders.
00:00:01.000 Thank you so much for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
00:00:04.000 We've got some fantastic things to talk to you about.
00:00:07.000 One, the state versus rumble, and curiously, the power of big tech in alliance with globalist governments and how this is becoming the dynamic that's going to control information, data, surveillance, your ability to observe, imbibe, consume potentially dissenting voices or dissident views for the next few years, how there's a raft
00:00:30.000 of laws being proposed, being ushered through right now in my country, in your country
00:00:34.000 and across the world. They're going to make free speech and even opposition and free
00:00:38.000 thought basically impossible. It's an incredible story. You're going to love it. It's a good
00:00:42.000 companion piece to our conversation with Dr. Robert Epstein, where he talked about how he's
00:00:46.000 observed and demonstrated the degree of corruption that is demonstrable and the impact it's
00:00:52.000 having on everything from elections to actually perception itself. Also, Lee Fang's coming on the
00:00:58.000 show. Now, in order for us to house these voices, we need your support. If it's possible
00:01:03.000 for you to support us by following us on Rumble, please do that. And if you can become an awakened
00:01:07.000 wonder and support us directly, That would be incredibly appreciated now more than ever.
00:01:11.000 Fang's going to be talking about stuff like a Zimpik and revelations around that obesity drug that's going to stagger you, profits from Lockheed Martin and how they benefit from the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict, and indeed free speech itself.
00:01:24.000 Remember, join us on Rumble if you can and become a member of our community by clicking the red button on your screen now.
00:01:31.000 Do you know what I think we need at the moment more than anything?
00:01:35.000 A portrait of Hillary Clinton.
00:01:37.000 That is what the world requires.
00:01:38.000 If I could just look at Hillary Clinton rendered in oils, not oil that was gleaned after the Gulf War conflict, paint oils, I think that would really soothe me at a time like this.
00:01:50.000 Oh, someone's doing one.
00:01:51.000 Great.
00:01:52.000 Let me start by thanking Secretary Blinken.
00:01:57.000 I am incredibly grateful to you for your leadership, the tremendous job you're doing.
00:02:04.000 If we had been in this room in its former much gloomier kind of look... A portrait of Hillary Clinton is guaranteed to lift the ambience of any room unless it's a room sort of somewhere in Syria or anywhere frankly where she's backed illegal wars.
00:02:20.000 Anthony Blinken said of this, the walk to the secretary's office on the seventh floor is a little bit awe-inspiring.
00:02:25.000 down the wood-panelled mahogany row surrounded by portraits of our predecessors,
00:02:29.000 all of them white men, Blinken said before the unveiling.
00:02:33.000 A couple of years ago, and talked about an invasion of Ukraine that, instead of driving
00:02:41.000 a stake between us and our allies, brought us closer together in order to support the
00:02:48.000 right of the Ukrainian people to defend their liberty and freedom and democracy.
00:02:55.000 People might have doubted that.
00:02:57.000 It's funny that Hillary Clinton refers to the dark times as the before-war times, and when she talks about allies and friendships, it's not the Care Bears, it's a bunch of people coming together to get involved in a profitable war.
00:03:07.000 What are we going to do now, a picnic?
00:03:09.000 Yeah, a picnic's fine, we'll do that after the war though.
00:03:12.000 Okay, we'll do a war then, a picnic?
00:03:13.000 There's not going to be a picnic.
00:03:14.000 It's not going to be a picnic for the American people.
00:03:16.000 They're paying for it.
00:03:18.000 Because we had burned so many bridges.
00:03:22.000 I'd actually tried to blow up one in Crimea.
00:03:24.000 That didn't go well either.
00:03:26.000 With our allies and our friends, so reinstating a foreign policy that plays to the best of American values.
00:03:34.000 What are the American values that benefit in here?
00:03:37.000 Profiteering, sustaining an unwinnable war, lying to people, using taxpayer dollars to sustain a war that can't be won, instead of supporting the people of Hawaii in their evident need and suffering.
00:03:49.000 Are these the American values that you voted for?
00:03:51.000 That puts our Interests and security front and center, but does it in a way that actually brings people to us, not pushes them away, would have been thought to be extremely difficult.
00:04:05.000 And indeed it was, but it was accomplished.
00:04:08.000 And we have seen the continuation of a lot of the values and priorities that we worked on into the Biden administration and In looking across the globe, defending democracy in Ukraine, expanding NATO.
00:04:28.000 Democracy where there are going to be no elections.
00:04:31.000 Just as an aside, too bad Vladimir.
00:04:35.000 You brought it on yourself.
00:04:36.000 Or we brought it on you by expanding NATO.
00:04:38.000 This could not be a happier occasion and thank you so much for hosting us.
00:04:43.000 Yeah, it's like we're exchanging a spectacle for reality and any alternative vision is likely to
00:05:00.000 be shut down according to legislation that's being ushered through.
00:05:05.000 Extraordinary that this is what state's personship looks like now, offering war instead of peace, celebrating alliances that are ultimately dedicated to bringing about death and profit, And presenting it as if it's just a congenial celebratory affair.
00:05:23.000 What an extraordinary demonstration of how far from the values of ordinary Americans the values of elites have become.
00:05:35.000 What are we talking about?
00:05:36.000 We're talking about independent journalism.
00:05:38.000 We're talking about the necessity for dissenting voices.
00:05:40.000 And on that note, we are introducing a significant voice in the independent media world.
00:05:46.000 It's Lee Fang, who you know from Substack.
00:05:49.000 You probably know about his work on Twitter Files.
00:05:51.000 Join us now.
00:05:52.000 We can't carry on YouTube.
00:05:53.000 We're going to be on Rumble.
00:05:54.000 See you over there.
00:05:55.000 You guys, we have Lee Fang, who, for a variety of reasons, is much beloved on this platform.
00:06:02.000 If it isn't his natural route lift, it's his investigative journalism that has made him adored across the spectrum.
00:06:09.000 Lee, thank you so much for joining us today.
00:06:11.000 Thank you so much for having me.
00:06:13.000 Mate, I know that the thing you want to talk about most of all is Azempic.
00:06:17.000 We've talked about it before on this channel.
00:06:19.000 We've talked about it with Calimeans.
00:06:21.000 We've talked about it as an emergent new drug that's going to conquer, that's conquering new markets, that's extraordinarily profitable, and that has been presented perhaps in ways that are, if not disingenuous, just dishonest.
00:06:36.000 Can you tell me what the story you've just broke on Azempic is, please?
00:06:41.000 Well, look, first, just to introduce it, you know, these are a new class of drugs.
00:06:45.000 These GLP-1 drugs, they kind of imitate a hormone, the GLP hormone that regulates insulin levels in the body.
00:06:57.000 They were first approved for diabetes.
00:07:01.000 And look, there are many benefits for people struggling with diabetes.
00:07:08.000 And this is one of the number one killers.
00:07:11.000 Around the world and in America.
00:07:12.000 But the issue here is that drug makers, Novo Nordisk, is the first big company to come out with a class of these drugs.
00:07:21.000 Many other big pharma companies are rushing to bring products to market.
00:07:25.000 In addition to regulating insulin and helping diabetics, patients have found that you rapidly lose weight on these drugs.
00:07:36.000 So Ozempic, also known as Wigovi, There are others that are coming.
00:07:42.000 They have blown up as a weight loss silver bullet.
00:07:46.000 And the companies that produce these drugs see a gigantic financial windfall.
00:07:54.000 The drugs not as a diabetes drug, that's part of the story, but the big part of the market is treating obesity.
00:08:02.000 44% of adult Americans are overweight, something like 100 million people.
00:08:09.000 It costs over $10,000 a year to take these injections, these drugs.
00:08:16.000 So to seize this financial opportunity to get Americans using Ozempic or Wegovy, what have you, There's a coordinated campaign by Novo Nordisk and other big pharma companies to reshape the public discourse, to plant dozens if not hundreds of media stories talking about, hey, if you're struggling with obesity, if you're struggling with body image issues, you're struggling with obesity stigma issues, if you're concerned about the racial disparities in obesity, you should consider this class of drugs.
00:08:52.000 don't feel concerned about asking your doctor for these drugs.
00:08:56.000 And in a lot of areas of medicine and in public policy, there are disclosure requirements.
00:09:03.000 If you publish a scientific paper, if you air a television advertisement,
00:09:08.000 at least in the United States, you have to disclose that,
00:09:10.000 hey, this was paid for by a drug company.
00:09:12.000 But those types of disclosure requirements don't exist for the media.
00:09:16.000 So for the biggest newspapers in the country, for the Washington Post, USA Today,
00:09:20.000 for the biggest broadcasters, for CBS News, NBC, and even for small local television outlets
00:09:27.000 and local news outlets, we're seeing a flurry of news articles
00:09:32.000 quoting physicians, experts, patient advocacy groups, celebrities, community activists, civil rights groups.
00:09:40.000 I mean, the list goes on of groups that are encouraging the use of these drugs for weight loss, where I think there are still questions to be answered if this is an effective treatment for most people struggling with obesity.
00:09:52.000 But there is this kind of coordinated campaign to get Americans on these drugs for obesity, And there's a lack of disclosure that these experts being quoted that are going to the media, shaping the public discourse around how we see these drugs, how Americans view whether they should take them, whether our insurance companies should provide them, should the government change the law, and should the government be paying for these drugs?
00:10:16.000 That's the big push right now.
00:10:18.000 There's no disclosure that these experts are being paid for by Novo Nordisk and other drug companies that stand to gain from the explosion of this market.
00:10:27.000 It's extraordinary how reality could be so carefully cultivated that a story like this, a narrative like this, can be constructed around a product which is plainly being engineered, I don't mean pharmacologically engineered, but I mean as a phenomenon and as a commodity in order to be highly marketable.
00:10:50.000 My understanding is that Azempic and the class of drugs require lifelong usage once you embark on them and it seems to me that you're saying that they are known to be effective for diabetes, that there is evidence that they are effective for weight loss but perhaps not sufficient evidence when it comes to potential side effects of long-term usage.
00:11:13.000 And in any event, the way that we are being sold the idea of this class of drugs is not objective.
00:11:21.000 There are undeclared interests and undeclared financial ties.
00:11:26.000 Can you give us some examples of those financial ties, Lee?
00:11:32.000 Yeah, just to give you a few examples.
00:11:34.000 There are many doctors that are being quoted almost on a daily basis.
00:11:39.000 There's a doctor in Texas named Deborah Horn.
00:11:41.000 Who's appeared in many different media outlets.
00:11:43.000 You can Google her name, look at Google News or what have you.
00:11:48.000 I highlight her quotes in a recent CBS News article.
00:11:54.000 She discusses the need for insurance companies to start paying for Ozempic and Wigovi.
00:12:02.000 She's pretty much the only physician quoted by this news article.
00:12:05.000 What's not disclosed is that she has received about a quarter million dollars from Novo Nordisk On the last few years.
00:12:13.000 And those are old numbers.
00:12:15.000 We don't have the latest disclosures.
00:12:17.000 It's probably much more.
00:12:19.000 That same news article talks to a think tank, the Urban Institute, and that basically, that the study looks and says, hey, we don't have enough states paying for Ozontic and Wygovia.
00:12:31.000 Only a few states do.
00:12:32.000 Well, who financed the study?
00:12:34.000 Again, Novo Nordisk.
00:12:35.000 I mean, this is almost like an entire marketing release from Novo Nordisk, but with no But it's framed as news.
00:12:44.000 It's only positive about the company, but there are no fingerprints showing that everyone quoted in the story was funded by the company.
00:12:51.000 It's extraordinary to note how frequently we find these days that news media is nothing of the sort.
00:12:59.000 It's merely the broadcast arm of corporate interests that are in many cases evident, traceable and observable if you're willing to undertake the research or watch for the relevant and ongoing It's not surprising to learn that such a potentially profitable drug is marketed not in a direct, plain way in terms of its utility and efficacy, but through various rather more insidious means i.e.
00:13:29.000 It's presented academically and scientifically as beneficial.
00:13:33.000 Apparently independent think tanks are offered as giving objective information, which is
00:13:37.000 of course paid for information.
00:13:39.000 And beyond even this already egregious example of what appears to be a form of legal corruption
00:13:48.000 is the idea that science or science as it's commonly understood has itself become warped.
00:13:56.000 What I mean by that, Lee, is we're looking at information that is apparently objective,
00:14:01.000 but actually the momentum behind this product is not a desire to treat people's diabetes
00:14:10.000 or obesity.
00:14:11.000 It's a...
00:14:13.000 Profit driven motive that just has to pull into its vacuum any necessary information in order to meet those ends.
00:14:20.000 It's unlikely that people are going to do studies on long-term impact of a Zempik or what happens if you suddenly stop taking it and don't want to take it anymore because the findings of such clinical trials would potentially be Unprofitable.
00:14:35.000 So even, and I feel like we saw some of this in the pandemic period, information that's presented as science is actually a very carefully curated and managed reality that often is sort of the opposite of science, i.e.
00:14:48.000 not objective.
00:14:49.000 No, that's right.
00:14:51.000 I mean, even the internal studies from Novo Nordisk, these are the company's own studies, show that almost immediately, if patients get off these drugs, the GLP drugs, It's almost instantaneous.
00:15:10.000 Just to put this in perspective, Pfizer had one of the most profitable pharmaceutical products of all time in 2021.
00:15:20.000 You know, releasing their vaccine, that was something like $80 billion in one-year revenue just from this one product.
00:15:27.000 Well, recently, bankers, JP Morgan and other investment banks, put out some estimates for the GLP market for Wegovy, Zempik, and then, you know, there's many other competitors coming out very soon.
00:15:39.000 Within the decade, on an annual basis, these drugs will bring in about 70 to 80 billion
00:15:46.000 dollars annually.
00:15:47.000 And it's very different from a vaccine.
00:15:49.000 A vaccine is somewhat of a one-time event.
00:15:51.000 I mean, with the, you know, obviously there are boosters and, you know, other dynamics
00:15:55.000 around this.
00:15:56.000 But generally speaking, vaccines are a one-time event.
00:15:58.000 These drugs, as you mentioned, you're not supposed to get off of.
00:16:01.000 And while there are great benefits for diabetics to avoid dialysis and to extend their life
00:16:09.000 by taking these drugs.
00:16:10.000 For weight loss, you know, I think the benefits are not clear.
00:16:12.000 I mean, we're seeing very serious side effects.
00:16:15.000 I mean, very common side effects are the nausea and vomiting and other issues, but very serious, less common side effects are stomach paralysis, people who can't digest their food.
00:16:26.000 The food just kind of sits there in their digestive system, not moving.
00:16:29.000 There's thyroid cancer.
00:16:30.000 There are other effects that, you know, you look at this drug and you say, this is not a panacea for weight loss.
00:16:39.000 I mean, there are so many other interventions that many patients need, but for many policy makers,
00:16:45.000 for the drug companies and others, this looks like an easy, quick fix
00:16:49.000 to just throw money at a problem, to make enormous amounts of profit
00:16:53.000 for a small number of companies, and not look at the bigger picture.
00:16:57.000 You know, the issues around our food system, the issues around our agricultural policy,
00:17:01.000 the issues around the American culture and way of dining and eating, you know,
00:17:06.000 These are much more complicated, less lucrative issues to solve, right?
00:17:11.000 So it kind of, it does get back to profit.
00:17:13.000 Novo Nordisk is one of the most valuable drug companies, one of the most valuable companies in the world right now, just on the back of this one product, which is still taking off.
00:17:23.000 I mean, if they win this campaign right now, they're lobbying furiously.
00:17:28.000 to allow Medicare, the main kind of health insurance public program for older people in the United States, to cover
00:17:35.000 That's over $10,000 a year. That's a lot of potential profit.
00:17:35.000 this drug.
00:17:40.000 It's probably downstream.
00:17:41.000 It gets the private insurers to cover this as well.
00:17:45.000 This is going to mint many new billionaires if it's successful, this lobbying campaign.
00:17:49.000 And that's the main thing.
00:17:51.000 It makes you identify how we have to recognize and analyze unconscious assumptions that, or in any sensible world, remain relatively unconscious.
00:18:04.000 What I mean, Lee, is the idea that the motivation behind the pharmacological industry is
00:18:09.000 to find solutions to health problems.
00:18:11.000 That would seem like a sensible assumption, but under even a little analysis it becomes clear
00:18:17.000 that the function of the pharmacological industry is to make a profit. And that's a very different
00:18:22.000 ideological goal. And it sometimes seems to me that if there are any benefits to their products,
00:18:26.000 sometimes seems to me that if there are any benefits to their products, it's almost an
00:18:28.000 it's almost an inadvertent consequence rather than the raison d'etre of the industry.
00:18:29.000 inadvertent consequence rather than the raison d'etre of the industry. When a commodity
00:18:35.000 like a Zempik or other brand names available becomes hot like this, it's plain that the
00:18:42.000 mentality and the mindset, the relationships between the state, the insurance companies and the pharmacological
00:18:50.000 companies is not, oh wow, how are we going to help as many people as possible?
00:18:54.000 We simply have to resolve this.
00:18:55.000 Because if that were the mindset, as you have just said, there would be a soup to nuts,
00:19:00.000 forgive the analogy, analysis of the food industry, the way that big food lobbies, the
00:19:06.000 type of foods that we eat, the unconsciousness around diet.
00:19:10.000 It's far more convenient to have one arm of the corporate state machine fill you food of processed, carcinogenic, diabetes-inducing food than another arm strap you up and lash on a machine that injects you with
00:19:25.000 drugs to reduce the fat for as long as you take it forever. What's behind even an enormous
00:19:31.000 story like this is almost more alarmingly the idea that the system itself is guided by malign
00:19:37.000 principles. I'm fearful of using language like profiteering or some kind of zombie
00:19:46.000 capitalism or a monstrous undemocratic, anti-American, anti-human ideology but it seems like the
00:19:54.000 only way to describe it, this kind of cart before the horse mentality.
00:19:58.000 It exists throughout cultural, social and even geopolitical life because I know elsewhere we have companies such as and specifically Lockheed Martin able to offer a positive outlook for the future of their investors and shareholders based on an assumption that the Ukraine-Russia war will continue.
00:20:21.000 Now of course this is another situation that's presented as Humanitarian intervention because there's a criminal war and it has to be resolved.
00:20:28.000 The narratives around it are highly censored and edited.
00:20:32.000 Conversation around it is shut down.
00:20:35.000 Can you tell us a little more about Lockheed Martin's relationship to the potential for an ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict?
00:20:44.000 Well, I took a look at some of the recent investor reports and there was a conference hosted by the investment bank Morgan Stanley here in California earlier this month.
00:20:57.000 It was a kind of a opportunity for the big companies to make presentations.
00:21:02.000 I reviewed those presentations.
00:21:04.000 They were fascinating because many of the big defense contractors
00:21:07.000 discussed the war in Ukraine.
00:21:10.000 And of course, I mean, the through thread here between Big Pharma
00:21:14.000 and Big Defense is that these are companies that legally have a fiduciary duty to their investors.
00:21:20.000 They don't serve necessarily national security or human health
00:21:24.000 or the public interest.
00:21:26.000 They serve their investors.
00:21:27.000 And so, for that very simple reason, at this investor conference in Southern California, recently Lockheed Martin and others discussed the business opportunities presented by the conflict in Ukraine.
00:21:41.000 Now, the US is escalating this war incrementally along with its NATO allies in terms of the types of weaponry they are providing.
00:21:49.000 Just last week, the Biden administration announced that they're releasing a long range missiles
00:21:55.000 produced by Lockheed Martin that are going to carry cluster munitions
00:22:00.000 and providing those to Ukrainian forces.
00:22:03.000 We've had the steady increase in the types of weaponry that we've provided to Ukraine
00:22:08.000 now that we're training F-16 pilots in Arizona and preparing for NATO allies to provide those planes
00:22:15.000 to Ukraine, a very major escalation.
00:22:18.000 But just looking at the munitions, I mean, this investor conference,
00:22:22.000 I clipped part of the video and posted it on my sub stack, but you have the executives at Lockheed Martin
00:22:29.000 basically saying, look, we've given so many munitions, air defense missiles, long range missiles,
00:22:35.000 various forms of rockets, anti-tank rockets like the Javelin.
00:22:38.000 Um, We've given so many that we now have these incredible resupply contracts with the U.S.
00:22:45.000 We've got to restock the U.S.
00:22:45.000 military.
00:22:46.000 stockpile and provide new contract deliveries to Ukraine, and given the escalation, we're seeing more business opportunities.
00:22:53.000 I'm paraphrasing here, but they use incredibly explicit language, and I think that this is important to see that there are Many different interest groups shaping public policy and the dynamics around this very complicated conflict between Ukraine and Russia.
00:23:09.000 And these businesses have a lot of say in Washington.
00:23:14.000 These companies underwrite the politicians.
00:23:17.000 They underwrite the biggest think tanks.
00:23:18.000 They also have a lot of influence in the media.
00:23:21.000 So they're shaping the contours of how we discuss this debate in a very subtle way.
00:23:26.000 You know, it's not like the Ozempic issue where you have all these talking head doctors and, you know, obesity activists appearing in the media without disclosing their ties.
00:23:36.000 It's not quite as overt as that.
00:23:38.000 But if you look at the largest think tanks, the largest kind of institutes that advise on national security priorities, that help write As well as the policy being directed, as you say, by lobbying, donations, shared financial interest, there's also the perception of this war.
00:23:50.000 funded by the defense lobby, particularly companies that stand to benefit like Lockheed
00:23:54.000 Martin.
00:23:56.000 As well as the policy being directed, as you say, by lobbying donations, shared financial
00:24:02.000 interest, there's also the perception of this war.
00:24:06.000 I was struck, Lee, when you said that in very plain language, you can hear in the discourse
00:24:11.000 between Lockheed Martin and their investors, the projections, requirements, and agenda
00:24:19.000 of that particular financial entity or corporation that, as you say, has only a fiduciary duty
00:24:25.000 to its investors rather than any moral obligations.
00:24:27.000 The moral obligations are supposed to belong to the government and the media.
00:24:33.000 And those moral obligations are fulfilled not through integrity, authenticity and rigorous self-examination and transparency, but instead by a kind of propagandist endeavor that prevents you from ever being able to regard the war as anything other than unprovoked and unjust attack.
00:24:53.000 And of course, you know, every time I mention this, so as not to be guilty of lacking nuance myself, I always I don't want to mention that it appears to be a criminal invasion and I'm not like a Putin apologist.
00:25:04.000 I'm simply a person trying as best as I can to understand the dynamics behind this war and why it is being sold to us in such a reductive simplistic and unhelpful manner and why people are not talking about peace.
00:25:18.000 The media, the dominant mainstream media, the legacy media, call it what you will, appear to be Heavily committed to presenting this conflict in a very simplistic way.
00:25:29.000 Photo opportunities that lead to bizarre incidents like a Nazi being applauded in Canadian Parliament.
00:25:36.000 The simplification of the history between Ukraine and Russia and some of the factions fighting in the Ukrainian army.
00:25:44.000 How do you suppose it is When you say it's not so simple or blunt as the Azempic example, talking heads with clear financial ties, giving you a narrative that's plainly beneficial to their own financial interests.
00:25:59.000 How is it that it's so difficult to present alternative stories or even to aggressively inquire as to the origins of this conflict and the potential malign reasons for its perpetuation?
00:26:16.000 I mean, that's an extended conversation, but if you look just kind of broadly speaking, you know, almost for any complicated policy issue, you need kind of an interest group. You need, for lack of a better term, a
00:26:31.000 lobby. I use that term broadly, whether that's organized citizens or organized business
00:26:35.000 groups or what have you, to represent a perspective and to go argue for that perspective to the
00:26:42.000 media and to policy makers and make a case.
00:26:44.000 In the case of Ukraine-Russia, there's no real interest group that's lobbying for peace, right?
00:26:54.000 There's no one that gains financially, really, from peace.
00:26:57.000 I mean, perhaps, you know, there are, you know, interrupted grain and trade ties with the war in Ukraine.
00:27:07.000 But generally speaking, there's a lot more people making money than there are losing money, especially in the United States.
00:27:14.000 These folks are not organized.
00:27:16.000 And then you not only have the defense contractor lobby that's very influential, But you have kind of the permanent Washington blob of, you know, the military, the intelligence agencies that go on the Sunday talk shows and are quoted headline news talking about the, you know, kind of glorious victories that Ukraine will have in their counter offensive every day in the media.
00:27:40.000 This is kind of more of a imperial mindset in the American media that just sees a very black and white, almost Cold War era, conflict with Russia and an opportunity to bleed.
00:27:53.000 I mean, this is in their terms and what people like Senator Lindsey Graham
00:27:58.000 and others have said, an opportunity to bleed Russia,
00:28:01.000 to kill Russian soldiers, to diminish and destroy Russian military assets.
00:28:08.000 And they have the biggest platform.
00:28:11.000 You know, and just looking at this as an interest group story,
00:28:14.000 the blob in DC, the defense lobby has the biggest platform.
00:28:20.000 The peace lobby, for lack of a better term, does not.
00:28:24.000 And so you really have one side that's taking up all the oxygen, and we don't have a sober-minded discussion of what are the ramifications of escalation?
00:28:33.000 What's the endgame?
00:28:34.000 What does peace look like?
00:28:35.000 What are the incentives for negotiation?
00:28:38.000 Who's pushing these leaders to do that?
00:28:40.000 At the end of the day, Ukraine is heavily relying on the United States.
00:28:44.000 I would love a situation where Ukrainians have full agency and can negotiate on their own, but for many reasons, the United States is in the driving seat right now.
00:28:56.000 Ukraine is militarily and financially dependent on the United States.
00:28:59.000 The United States has a role in setting any kind of peace negotiations, but we're not seeing that.
00:29:05.000 We're not seeing anyone really push for that, and we've seen the few voices on Capitol Hill.
00:29:09.000 There was that small effort last year by a number of progressive House Democrats to just write a letter saying Pending to the Biden administration saying, hey, can we please have peace negotiations as an option, not saying we need this or we're going to cut off aid or anything kind of, you know, dramatic.
00:29:28.000 And just by drafting that letter, someone leaked the draft.
00:29:32.000 You know, people went apoplectic and the lawmakers who are even drafting that letter apologized for even considering that as an option.
00:29:39.000 So, you know, we just have a very one sided debate right now in Washington.
00:29:42.000 Yeah, it's terrifying and becoming more terrifying.
00:29:45.000 I'd forgotten about that letter.
00:29:47.000 And I recently saw a bit of propaganda, Republicans for war in Ukraine, where they sort of tried to eliminate.
00:29:55.000 Yeah, yeah, that.
00:29:56.000 Like even the possibility that it could be discussed or that there could be an opposing argument anywhere in Congress or the Senate was sort of closed down.
00:29:56.000 Yeah.
00:30:05.000 We should get on board with this war.
00:30:07.000 Also watching Hillary Clinton with Jen Psaki able to Sort of blithely reiterate points about Putin's election interference, Putin as a authoritarian dictator, their imperialist goals and you could sort of just watch live facts being denied, lies being told, simplification being offered as news and they just sort of nodded together as if what was being reached was
00:30:42.000 A true consensus.
00:30:44.000 We're sort of living, it seems to me, perhaps at a pivotal moment because of some of the laws that are being passed like the online safety bill in the UK, but I know there are sort of comparable laws throughout the world that are going to grant governments the power to essentially shut down dissent as always under the auspices of safety and the kind of reasonable censure that most people would anticipate around hatred and pornography involving minors.
00:31:08.000 But Actually, it seems that with the vast power of Google now, we spoke to someone very interesting the other day, Dr Robert Epstein, who told us about the ability of Google to manipulate information and sway elections, and his studies were pretty, I would say, persuasive, and he's certainly someone who I'll be talking to more.
00:31:30.000 I wonder, What you feel with perhaps, I guess, one of the emblematic stories that demonstrates this ability of the media to manage, control and manipulate information is that remains the Hunter Biden laptop story.
00:31:44.000 The way that his role at Burisma has been reported on.
00:31:48.000 Can you tell us a little more about that, Lee, and what it says about media reporting in particular?
00:31:56.000 Well, you know, this story that I wrote recently, it's complicated because there are a couple dynamics here.
00:32:04.000 One is just the traditional way that the elites, powerful people in the media and in politics and business spin the press every day.
00:32:14.000 I mean, there's just a cottage industry of crisis PR firms and, you know, fancy consultants that help spin lies and make sure that
00:32:24.000 reporters never kind of get the truth when they're asking tough questions. And then there's this
00:32:28.000 kind of algorithmic, deep state, I suppose, censorship that we've seen also in this story
00:32:34.000 where, because of partisanship, because of power, you know, there's been efforts to push
00:32:40.000 the story out of public view and kind of falsely claim that it's an example of Russian disinformation.
00:32:46.000 I know this is something that you've covered a lot, especially the Hunter Biden New York
00:32:50.000 Post story in October 2020.
00:32:52.000 But you know, what's interesting to me for the Hunter Biden laptop...
00:32:57.000 You know, I took a look at the emails recently and I've been writing some stories around it.
00:33:02.000 I think this is true for both Republican and Democrat and other elites, but we just have this special portal, this window to see the kind of sausage making and the inside.
00:33:11.000 So I've been doing a couple of these stories, looking at the Biden laptop emails and looking at how Hunter Biden for 10 years managed his public image in ways that I think all the elites do.
00:33:22.000 We just have a special window into Hunter Biden.
00:33:24.000 So in fairness to him, I think this is true for many elites.
00:33:28.000 But he was hiring special consultants to airbrush his Wikipedia, to airbrush the Wikipedias of his foreign business partners in Ukraine.
00:33:38.000 and these are very expensive, $4,000, $5,000 a month firms that they use fake accounts,
00:33:45.000 a whole network of fake accounts that go in and edit the negative stories out and add all
00:33:53.000 Hunter Biden's charity work and all the awards into those pieces.
00:33:58.000 And, you know, also working with these consultants when he was dealing with stories, with questions from the press, when the New York Times, when Time Magazine, you know, the biggest outlets, Wall Street Journal, were asking questions when he was hired to this Ukrainian company, you know, this Ukrainian company that was under investigation that was kind of notoriously corrupt.
00:34:17.000 Had hired him in 2014 at a time when the US was working with Ukraine and promising anti-corruption reforms, when Joe Biden was the liaison from the Biden administration to work with Ukraine to institute ethics reform.
00:34:33.000 His son was hired by one of the most notorious oligarchs.
00:34:36.000 I mean, this was a kind of obvious story.
00:34:37.000 I even wrote about it at the time.
00:34:39.000 I was writing at smaller outlets.
00:34:43.000 I've had my own personal blog writing about Hunter Biden.
00:34:45.000 It was refreshing to see my own stories being circulated in his emails back in 2014, because I was looking at these conflicts of interest.
00:34:52.000 A lot of people were asking these questions, and even back then, you can see the emails where Hunter Biden was spinning these reporters saying, you know, this is, and he was using his spokesperson, you know, he was saying, you know, these, this board thought, you know, the compensation level is completely normal.
00:35:10.000 It's what every company kind of provides a typical board member.
00:35:14.000 That wasn't true.
00:35:15.000 You know, he was being paid about a million dollars a year for perspective, you know, Fortune 500 companies,
00:35:21.000 some of the biggest companies in the world only pay about a hundred thousand per year.
00:35:25.000 You know, he was receiving 10X the normal compensation rate.
00:35:28.000 He claimed, oh, you know, I'm working on geothermal issues and corporate transparency and good governance.
00:35:34.000 You know, the emails show that plainly not true, that, you know, he was helping get the kind of Ukrainian
00:35:40.000 oligarchs that he was employed by a special visa.
00:35:43.000 They've been banned from the U.S.
00:35:44.000 because of their corruption issues, helping them kind of dislodge a prosecution in Ukraine and kind of work on various kind of lobby efforts to influence the U.S.
00:35:56.000 And that brings me to the other thing, you know, a lot of Reporters very reasonably asked, are you lobbying?
00:35:56.000 government.
00:36:03.000 Are you influencing the State Department?
00:36:05.000 Are you influencing your dad?
00:36:06.000 Are you meeting with, are you setting up meetings?
00:36:08.000 Are you hiring lobbyists?
00:36:10.000 And of course, the answer was no.
00:36:12.000 And that answer was reprinted in all the biggest media outlets in the US.
00:36:16.000 But the emails show that again, this was plainly not true.
00:36:19.000 They were setting up meetings with John Kerry, who at the time was heading the State Department.
00:36:25.000 John Kerry's staff, I should say, with his top deputies, you know, it's kind of ironic when you look at some of these email threads with Hunter Biden, you know, they're talking about how to respond to the New York Times.
00:36:38.000 And the New York Times said, you know, are you working with any lobbyists?
00:36:41.000 And the person who helped coordinate the response to the New York Times was one of the lobbyists they just hired the previous month.
00:36:49.000 And they said, of course, no, we're not.
00:36:51.000 So, you know, again, I don't want to Unfairly beat up on Hunter Biden, because I think this dynamic exists for the elites across the board, Democrats and Republicans.
00:37:00.000 But we have this window into his emails, and it just really shows the spin cycle, how reporters respond every day, how the elites shape both social media and mainstream media, and it's very difficult to get the truth.
00:37:13.000 Do you think that this is an issue that's sufficient to destabilize Biden's presidency?
00:37:20.000 And I ask that really only to demonstrate that we appear to be living in a deeply fragmented world.
00:37:27.000 It's been commonly said really since the advent of immersive social media that we live in silos and that there are numerous cultural fissures.
00:37:35.000 But now it appears that I can't envisage a 2024 election where whoever is victorious
00:37:43.000 is hailed by both sides as the noble and righteous winner.
00:37:48.000 I can't really see how this kind of sentiment of deep hatred now towards legacy media, towards
00:37:56.000 the government, this total lack of trust in almost every institution that people fund
00:38:03.000 through their tax dollars or pounds or whatever the relevant currency is.
00:38:06.000 I can't see now how this can be sustained, other than unless there is going to be an
00:38:13.000 attempt to centralise and control information to such a degree that to be a dissident becomes
00:38:22.000 I wonder what you feel about this fragmenting space?
00:38:25.000 I wonder what you feel about your own role as a journalist that, based on what I know of your work and you as a man, are committed to telling the truth when telling the truth is a difficult thing and allowing people the dignity and honour of determining for themselves what to do based on the facts that are available.
00:38:43.000 How do you feel that this space is going to evolve?
00:38:46.000 How difficult do you feel it's going to be to be an independent media voice in this evolving space?
00:38:52.000 Do you have any sense that we're approaching anything like an endgame based even just on the various rafts of legislation that are being globally passed?
00:39:01.000 I mean, I feel conflicted, to be honest with you, because I see multiple perspectives, and I have my own personal role as someone who works in independent media, but I'm also, you know, I'm a citizen, I'm an American, I want good things for the public interest, I want good laws passed, and shared prosperity, whatever, you know?
00:39:23.000 Because we can't just have a completely fractured dissident media.
00:39:26.000 We do need strong institutions.
00:39:29.000 We need high quality newspapers that shine a light on corruption and tell you what's going on on a day-to-day basis.
00:39:37.000 In addition to that, we do need an outside voice questioning the media and questioning power.
00:39:45.000 How do we maintain a balance is very difficult because if you look at the major mainstream institutions of the media, they've lost credibility.
00:39:54.000 They've shifted to a subscriber model desperate for revenue.
00:40:00.000 Because they've lost so much revenue to Facebook and Google that they're captured by their subscribers.
00:40:07.000 They don't have enough reporters and editors.
00:40:09.000 So when you're a powerful public relations firm or corporation or powerful government official, it's very easy to go to a newspaper that doesn't have a lot of fact-checkers and a lot of adversarial reporters and spoon-feed the media to give them a prepackaged news story And, you know, they're under budget and overworked and they say, OK, this looks like a scoop and they basically republish it.
00:40:32.000 Um, and they're under increasing pressure from government agencies to censor, to say that, hey, look, if you publish, you know, the wrong narrative or the wrong person, um, that's a form of disinformation or hate speech or what have you.
00:40:44.000 And, you know, that's going to lead to, you know, you being shadow banned on the social networks on Google and the internet platforms and Facebook, that means less advertising dollars and they're already being pinched.
00:40:56.000 Um, you know, that's not a great dynamic either, because how are you going to have an open society and public debate now for independent media?
00:41:06.000 I'm part of that.
00:41:07.000 I try to hold myself to a high standard, high journalistic standards.
00:41:11.000 If I make a mistake, I rush to issue a correction.
00:41:15.000 I call people.
00:41:17.000 I try to provide context.
00:41:18.000 I try to be fair to all sides in a debate.
00:41:20.000 But for a lot of independent media, some are less scrupulous.
00:41:23.000 You have a lot of bad faith independent media out there.
00:41:27.000 With lower standards.
00:41:29.000 While we need an independent press, a dissident media to constantly criticize and shape institutions and to provide more relevant news to our viewers and to our readers, that's not a sustainable business model either.
00:41:43.000 I wish I had the resources to provide all my news articles for free.
00:41:48.000 I have a paywall on most of my my content because I need to make a living and pay rent.
00:41:54.000 But it's, again, not a sustainable business model for just people like me or you to be an independent press.
00:42:00.000 We need kind of a broad public interest that informs everyone.
00:42:04.000 And how to shape that isn't clear, especially in the age of the internet.
00:42:07.000 No, man, you made me feel like it's a very complex issue, indeed, but also that your personal integrity
00:42:16.000 and the possibility that the support of integrity like you demonstrate could create new pathways,
00:42:23.000 could create accountability, and could amplify the voices that I believe desperately need amplifying.
00:42:29.000 Lee, thank you so much for joining us today.
00:42:32.000 It's always a great pleasure to speak to you and to see you.
00:42:36.000 Thanks.
00:42:37.000 Thanks once again.
00:42:39.000 Good seeing you, Russell.
00:42:39.000 Thanks so much for having me.
00:42:40.000 Good to see you, mate.
00:42:41.000 You can read Lee's investigative work on his substack by going to leefang.com, and I suggest you do that.
00:42:47.000 I'm serious when I say he's a journalist with genuine integrity.
00:42:50.000 Just listen to the way he speaks.
00:42:51.000 Listen to what he cares about.
00:42:52.000 Guess who's joining us on the show tomorrow?
00:42:55.000 Stella Assange.
00:42:56.000 Stella Assange is a lawyer.
00:42:57.000 Of course, she's married to Julian Assange, and she's an activist whose very life is consumed Well, actually she's a mother, so her whole life can't be consumed by it, but primarily she's trying to campaign for Julian Assange's freedom for publishing information that was unfavourable to the state, and you all know the condition that Julian is in now.
00:43:16.000 From our conversation with Glenn Greenwald, it seems that there's been some evolution, blessedly, in that story, and that the Australian government Mostly because of activism among their citizenry are demanding some justice for Julian Assange.
00:43:27.000 So we'll be talking about that in particular with Stella.
00:43:29.000 Now, if you want to support us and you know now how important it is, please become an Awakened Wonder if it's within your means.
00:43:35.000 If it's not, please stay with us and enjoy this content for free.
00:43:38.000 It's much more important that we have you than we have your resources.
00:43:41.000 But as this situation evolves and develops, surely we shall need both ultimately, because we are committed to building something here.
00:43:48.000 We are committed to going beyond independent media and into an independent movement for true freedom, for truth, integrity and freedom.
00:43:57.000 If you become a member you get guided meditations, reading, Q&As.
00:44:00.000 I'm sure the situation will evolve and we will certainly do our very best to provide you with as much as we can and I'd like to welcome Our new members Uncle Tony, BadMonkey61, LaLaKetchup, HumptyDumpty and JediFish, all now reveling in the glory of the Awakened Wonder movement.
00:44:16.000 Please join us tomorrow, not for more of the same, that'll be no good, not after a day like today, but for more of the different.
00:44:21.000 Until then, if you can, stay free.
00:44:23.000 Many Switching. Switch on, switch off. Many Switching.
00:44:29.000 Switch on, switch off. Many Switching.
00:44:33.000 Switch on.
00:44:34.000 Switch off.
00:44:34.000 Man, you switch it.
00:44:35.000 Switch on.