The NXR Podcast - THEOLOGY APPLIED - Proof That Covid Policy Harmed More People Than Covid

00:00:00.000 Hey guys, real quick, before we get started, I have a small request.

00:00:03.440 If you've been blessed by our content and you like this show,

00:00:06.440 would you take just a brief moment and leave us a five-star review?

00:00:09.700 This is quite possibly the most effective thing that you can do

00:00:12.880 to ensure that this content gets out to as many people as possible. Thanks.

00:00:18.040 Hi, this is Pastor Joel Webman with Right Response Ministries.

00:00:20.440 You're listening to our flagship podcast, Theology Applied.

00:00:23.480 And today I am very privileged to have Jeff Childers.

00:00:26.440 He's returning second time now as a guest on the show.

00:00:29.500 we talk about COVID policies and the deaths that have ensued versus actual COVID deaths.

00:00:39.240 And what I like about Jeff Childers, this is not mere speculation. You'll hear me speculate from

00:00:43.560 time to time, and I usually try to label that as speculation so that people know I don't have a

00:00:47.780 crystal ball, and I'm not saying this is definitively true. But Jeff Childers is a

00:00:52.700 very gifted and successful lawyer. And he has shifted to constitutional law, and he has won

00:01:00.200 some serious, significant lawsuits against the state of Florida where he resides in regards to

00:01:07.640 COVID-type policies. And so pushing back on lockdowns, pushing back on masks. And so

00:01:15.120 his personality, his disposition, and his training really holds his feet to the fire in terms of

00:01:21.780 evidence, evidence, evidence. It needs to be objective. It needs to be definitive. And so

00:01:27.880 he has done a ton of research in regards to the deaths and side effects, harmful side effects

00:01:34.860 that have resulted, not because of COVID, but our crazy, insane response to COVID. And this is one

00:01:43.980 of the most interesting episodes we've done. That said, at the end, we talk a little bit about

00:01:48.060 Russia, Ukraine, what needs to happen there, and the possibility, the real possibility of

00:01:53.860 global-wide food shortages and what Christians need to do to prepare. All right, without further

00:01:59.540 ado, let's go ahead and get started with this episode of Theology Applied.

00:02:04.840 Applying God's Word to every aspect of life. This is Theology Applied.

00:02:10.520 All right, welcome to another episode of Theology Applied.

00:02:18.500 I am your host, Pastor Joel Webbin with Right Response Ministries, and today I am privileged

00:02:22.540 to have, for a second time, a returning guest, Jeff Childers.

00:02:27.920 Jeff Childers, welcome to the show.

00:02:29.480 Please introduce yourself.

00:02:30.640 Tell our listeners who you are.

00:02:32.560 Thanks, Pastor Joel.

00:02:33.360 My name, as you said, is Jeff Childers.

00:02:35.460 I'm, well, formerly a commercial litigation attorney.

00:02:38.520 I live in North Central Florida. I've been practicing law for a while. In May of 2020,

00:02:48.040 I felt compelled. I think the Holy Spirit just sort of grabbed me and shook me like a ragdoll, 0.99

00:02:54.840 and I started filing lawsuits related to mask mandates and vaccine mandates. We were successful

00:03:02.540 in our lawsuits. I think that's pretty rare. As far as I know, we have the only appellate

00:03:09.700 decision in the country finding that mask mandates are presumptively unconstitutional.

00:03:15.320 We got that out of the first district court of appeal in Florida, which sits over 33 counties.

00:03:21.520 They deliberately did not take me up to the Supreme Court, I think because they knew that

00:03:27.760 they would lose, and then it would have been the law for the whole state. We also got the first

00:03:32.960 broad injunction against a vaccine mandate against the city of Gainesville, Florida.

00:03:39.680 Subsequent to that, I've been involved in school board litigation. We've removed a school board

00:03:43.500 member. We've gotten a superintendent removed, and I've been advising other attorneys all around

00:03:51.200 the country. We have a list of allied attorneys. I've been writing a daily blog called Coffee and

00:03:57.600 COVID. It's a platform that I think God gave me to use to push back against the forces that I see

00:04:08.320 are working against us. And I'm sure I'm leaving some things out, but we've been very, very busy

00:04:14.220 in this space. Yeah, great. Well, I'm glad that you're back on the show. Without wasting any time,

00:04:20.500 let's just go ahead and hop right in. So one of the first questions that I had for you related

00:04:23.740 to COVID, because I want to kind of cover the gambit with Russia and Ukraine. I want to talk

00:04:27.560 about the potential, you know, supply chain issues that we already have, but then that may be

00:04:32.480 affecting food shortages, all these different things. We can talk about Florida, where you're

00:04:35.820 at with Ron DeSantis and Disney and the showdown there with this agenda to trans kids and to,

00:04:41.560 you know, to push ideology on children. And really the proverbial question of who do children belong

00:04:46.620 to? Ultimately, we know they belong to God, but who has God assigned children to? Do they belong

00:04:50.900 to the state or do they belong to parents and to the home? And so we can talk about all those

00:04:55.440 things, but let's start with COVID. We've seen kind of, it's like COVID disappeared, right?

00:05:00.600 Putin, love them, hate them. You know, most people hate them, but we got to give them credit for

00:05:04.160 curing COVID is what it seems like. The political, the science didn't change, but the political

00:05:08.560 science has seemed to change. And so my question is, you know, that we've seen the Democrats

00:05:12.820 moving off of our presidential administration, moving off of restrictions, lockdowns, mask

00:05:18.160 mandates, all these kinds of things. But is, is this maybe too good to be true? Is this maybe

00:05:24.760 just they realize that those policies are killing them in the polls? And can we expect some of these

00:05:30.600 things maybe to return after the midterms? What are your thoughts? So I think that the election

00:05:38.080 in virginia was extremely influential on democrats um as it was on many of us right to see that a

00:05:49.920 bright blue or deep blue state like virginia could go republican across the board and remember they

00:05:57.520 the republicans didn't just win um you know at the state level they got the governorship they got the

00:06:03.620 AG, they, you know, all those offices, but also right down to the local levels, down to school

00:06:08.860 boards and, you know, probably even dog catcher. And it was a wake up call, you know, and when you

00:06:18.280 read the, some of the internal messaging that we've seen coming out of the DNC and at the White

00:06:24.880 House, some of that stuff's been leaked and, you know, they're looking at that, that at particular

00:06:30.760 election cycle and using it as a predictor for what might happen in the 2022 congressional

00:06:37.720 elections. And that's terrifying to Democrats. And you even have a lot of the traditional

00:06:42.460 left-wing publications writing open letters to Democrat leaders saying, hey, you guys have got

00:06:51.940 to pay attention to this. Because what Virginia proved is that, number one, Republicans are super

00:07:00.000 motivated they really hate these mandates and that's driving you know them to the polls in

00:07:06.000 record numbers and a lot of democrats there was a an article um i want to say it was in the new

00:07:14.800 york times where they surveyed democrats and they it was very interesting they asked them

00:07:22.160 they asked democrats to self um rate on a scale of liberalism right from very liberal to moderately

00:07:31.360 liberal to not very liberal but still a a democrat voter and what they found is that

00:07:39.120 only the very liberal cohort were in favor of mandates and and all the other groups of democrats

00:07:48.080 on that that self-rating scale were opposed to mandates and so the the article didn't

00:07:56.160 say this but what jumped out to me immediately is that those other voting groups the the ones

00:08:01.280 the democrats who don't like mandates are likely to vote with republicans right against a candidate

00:08:07.680 who is a pro-mandate candidate now it's a thorny problem for democrats because what else they know

00:08:14.880 about that group of very liberal folks who are still pro-mandate is that those are their most

00:08:20.740 active volunteers and voters. Right. Right. So they can't afford to lose that group. They can't

00:08:28.560 upset the regime. Yeah. And they also can't afford to lose the moderate and more conservative

00:08:35.700 Democrats. So that's a problem. Right. And I think what we saw on March 1st, when Joe Biden

00:08:41.940 gave a state of the union address is that attempt to thread the needle, right? To say that the

00:08:47.240 pandemic is over without really saying it's over and to lift the mandates without lifting the

00:08:53.180 mandates. And if you've been following the rules, sorry, if you've been following the news, then you

00:08:58.240 probably noticed that in the last few days, Florida and 20 other states sued the CDC over

00:09:08.620 the transportation mandate, which is one of the remaining mask mandates, right?

00:09:13.120 The one that requires you to wear a mask on airplanes.

00:09:16.000 It requires school kids to wear masks on school buses.

00:09:20.700 And I think it's very interesting, the timing, because my guess is that the Biden administration

00:09:26.600 wanted to lift that transportation mandate anyway.

00:09:29.920 If you look at the financial disclosures from the airlines, travel is way down.

00:09:38.620 and part of it is because of jab mandates and you know you can't go somewhere if you're not jabbed

00:09:45.240 right but that's a smaller group because i think the in the u.s 68 percent of adults are vaccinated

00:09:53.440 now um but i thought real quick i thought it was higher than that about 68 percent

00:09:59.320 is that fully well quote unquote fully vaccinated oh gotcha so maybe higher that got like one shot

00:10:04.760 or two shots and fully vaccinated just for the record, that is now three shot at two of Johnson

00:10:09.340 and Johnson, but three of Moderna and Pfizer. Is that correct? Um, I don't know. Is it four now

00:10:15.280 or is it 17 now? What, what, what is fully vaccinated now? I think it's going to depend

00:10:20.520 on who you're asking. Um, that, that definition is, has gotten very fluid. Um, and I think

00:10:28.060 they're all so different. Um, they're, they're using it differently for different purposes,

00:10:32.520 Right. So without getting into all of that and sticking with the airline thing that, you know, their their numbers are way down.

00:10:41.720 And one thing we know for sure is people hate those mask mandates.

00:10:46.280 Everybody knows that. And the airlines have more or less at their management level indicated to to Congress and the administration that they want those those mandates removed.

00:10:58.000 So with the combination of the political pressures and the combination of the pressures from the airlines themselves and the general population, I think Biden would have lifted those.

00:11:08.940 I don't know why they've been slow. That's sort of the last one. But I think it's to to, you know, to deal with that that group of very liberal Democrat voters and to, you know, give them a a, you know, recognition.

00:11:29.900 Right. Their concerns are important, too. And so they were slow to lift the airplane mandates.

00:11:35.760 But but DeSantis was very clever in filing this lawsuit now because Biden would have lifted the mandate anyway.

00:11:45.540 And so if he does it, it'll look like he's done it because Florida sued.

00:11:50.060 Yeah, that's good. That's shrewd. Jesus, you know, sometimes Christians, it's like, yeah, we want to be as innocent as does.

00:11:56.060 but we're called to be also as shrewd as vipers and Jesus even, you know, he tells the parable of

00:12:00.440 the steward, the manager in his master's house and his master goes on a long trip and he knows

00:12:06.220 that he's probably about to be fired. And so he's trying to, you know, to give himself an off ramp.

00:12:11.520 And so he goes to all these people who are, you know, debtors to his master and he lowers their

00:12:15.520 debt. You know, do you owe my master a hundred bushels of wheat? You know, go ahead and make

00:12:20.080 it 70, you know, and he, you know, down the line. And so he's creating relationships and network

00:12:24.860 for himself so that when the master puts down the hammer and he no longer has a good rapport

00:12:29.980 with the master, he has a good rapport with other people. And you would think he isn't,

00:12:33.400 he's stealing from his master, you know, but what's surprising about the end of the parable

00:12:38.080 when Jesus kind of reveals the moral is that Jesus uses this parable to illustrate the principle

00:12:43.140 of shrewdness. And he says, the sons of darkness are more shrewd than the sons of light. And what

00:12:49.660 he's saying ultimately is that Christians should be shrewd. And it takes a lot of discernment and 0.65

00:12:55.020 a lot of spiritual maturity and understanding of the word of God to find this razor edge line

00:13:00.880 in between deception and shrewdness. Christians are not called to be deceitful, but we are called

00:13:08.380 to be shrewd. I like Doug Wilson. He's had a really helpful commentary throughout the last

00:13:12.720 two years of madness with cultural commentary. And one of the things he talks about is, well,

00:13:16.740 is it a sin to wear camouflage in battle? Isn't that a deception? Isn't that a lie? You're telling

00:13:22.640 somebody that I'm not here when you actually are here. And so he just is trying to show that there

00:13:27.900 are ways of being shrewd, but that is not immoral. That's not an outright falsehood or a lie that

00:13:35.500 would be a sin. And so, yeah, I think that all that, back to Ron DeSantis, I think that that

00:13:40.540 is a shrewd play that is not wrong, but commendable. So all that being said, a couple of stats that

00:13:47.020 have stood out to me lately, CDC, I think they said like 85% of all COVID deaths were people

00:13:52.240 who had not one, not two, not three, but four, simultaneously four comorbidities. So with the

00:13:58.160 question of dying from COVID versus of COVID, 85% of these deaths, and then the CDC recently lowered

00:14:05.180 The overall, all that being as it is, still in addition to that, they lowered by I think 72,000 all of the COVID deaths in America and said, whoops, you know, I guess we overcounted.

00:14:17.660 So 85% of them are these people with four comorbidities, which seems to heavily imply these are deaths with COVID rather than of COVID.

00:14:26.780 Then you got 72,000 just taken right off of the number.

00:14:30.200 And then another stat recently came out that for those who are under the age of 65, that in 2020, in the year 2020, that there were more alcohol-related deaths than COVID deaths for those under the age of 65.

00:14:45.580 And that doesn't even begin, and we know that, I mean, I think it was a 25% bump. Alcohol-related deaths have, for multiple years running, have increased by about 3% to 4% each year, but it bumped all of a sudden from 2019 to 2020 by 25%.

00:15:02.960 And so you have more alcohol-related deaths than COVID deaths in 2020 for those who are

00:15:07.740 under the age of 65.

00:15:09.580 And that doesn't even account for suicide deaths, other drug-related overdose deaths,

00:15:15.060 and then things that are not deaths, but still detrimental in terms of depression and anxiety,

00:15:20.500 child development being delayed, you know, because you can't learn how to talk when you're

00:15:25.340 two if you can't see adults' faces, you know, because they're covered in masks.

00:15:28.920 And so it just seems like the verdict is coming back in in wave after wave after wave of not feelings or not hunches, but hard, cold evidence that we did more harm than good.

00:15:42.500 Do you have any thoughts on that?

00:15:45.340 Yeah.

00:15:46.460 I don't think there is any dispute that the lockdowns cause deaths and injuries.

00:15:55.800 uh even today i'm i'm pretty sure i've been busy but i i keep tabs on the news throughout the day

00:16:02.360 because i have to write for my blog and uh fauci was on an interview and if i'm remembering

00:16:10.400 correctly the quote that was attributed to him today was we'll never know the true cost of

00:16:15.440 lockdowns that's what he's saying today fauci said that fauci said that wow right exactly so

00:16:23.740 So if Fauci's acknowledging that, right, you know, it's got to be a lot worse than than he's suggesting for him to even go that far.

00:16:32.540 Right.

00:16:33.740 The other thing I would add to your comments is and I try to stay away from conspiracy theories.

00:16:40.280 I'm a lawyer. Right. And what I mean by conspiracy theory, I don't mean anything negative about that, because we've seen a lot of conspiracy theories like the Wuhan lab leak theory.

00:16:49.880 Right. Turn into fact. Right. And even the bio labs in Ukraine.

00:16:53.740 So, yeah, the difference between the conspiracy and the truth is usually three to six months.

00:16:57.360 But I know I think what you mean is you try to stick away from making assertions based off of speculation.

00:17:02.660 You want to have evidence. You're a lawyer. Is that what you're saying?

00:17:06.520 But I usually my litmus test is could I prove this in court?

00:17:09.700 Good. Right. And by prove in court, you don't have to have 100 percent proof.

00:17:14.840 You just have to meet the standard of proof. Right.

00:17:17.200 So you can prove things that that you can't conclusively prove, but you can prove it to a level in court.

00:17:22.700 that satisfies a judge or jury. So one of the things that we know is true and that I could

00:17:30.820 prove in court, and I could, I could prove this one conclusively is that excess deaths

00:17:34.960 in the U S are high. Right. And so what excess deaths means is they look at the number of the

00:17:44.700 average number of deaths from all causes. Okay. Whatever, whatever cause it is, they just don't

00:17:49.840 worry about the cause, but somebody died and then they compare that to a baseline. And the baseline

00:17:55.400 is the aggregate, you know, the average from all the years in the 10 or 20 years previous, depending

00:18:00.260 on what model you're looking at. And you can either be above or below that baseline. Right.

00:18:06.480 And so this is an important statistic. So you might have a really bad flu season

00:18:12.100 and we're not perfect at keeping track of people who die from flu. So you just want to,

00:18:18.140 Let's just look and see where we are in excess deaths. Right. The overall increase. Right. Exactly. So during that flu season, hey, one hundred thousand people died more than in a regular fall season.

00:18:31.420 And so now we can say, well, you know, we probably circumstantially a lot of those are related to this hard flu season because we don't have any other explanation for why there should be excess deaths.

00:18:44.740 Well, what we know is that during the pandemic, there have been two inflection points on excess deaths, right? So there was a spike in excess deaths in March of 2020. And those are probably related to COVID. And especially as COVID moved through the nursing homes and the elderly and at-risk populations, right? You saw a lot of-

00:19:05.740 Right. We would call those Andrew Cuomo deaths.

00:19:08.100 plus yeah uh and gretchen whitmer and you know a bunch of others that haven't had to pay the

00:19:17.440 piper yet but right um in addition those would be your lockdown deaths right so your suicides and

00:19:24.400 you know in particular moving through through 2020 well there was a second inflection point

00:19:29.760 And that was in December of 2020. And again, we don't know for sure. Right. But it wasn't COVID because at that time, you know, all you had was a lot of immunity that was built up by COVID survivors.

00:19:45.500 And plus in December of 2020, you had the rollout of the vaccines, which is supposed to reduce COVID mortality, right?

00:19:54.760 That's what they tell us.

00:19:55.620 They tell us that, hey, you know, they now admit another conspiracy theory, which is that the vaccines don't prevent transmission.

00:20:02.960 OK, maybe they don't prevent transmission, they say, but they reduce serious illness and death.

00:20:08.400 Okay, so as the vaccines are deployed in December 2020, you're expecting to see excess deaths coming down, right? But in fact, what we see is an increasing trend of excess deaths from December 2020.

00:20:25.140 there's a spike in the summer of 21. And then where we are now is we're on an increasing

00:20:33.820 trajectory. We don't know where it's going to peak, if it'll come back down again, but we're

00:20:38.360 substantially above the baseline as we sit today, right now, right? A huge, huge amount of excess

00:20:46.740 deaths. And I think, you know, probably all your viewers are familiar by now. It was widely

00:20:51.960 reported. You know, one of the executives at one of the insurance companies came out and said

00:20:57.580 that, you know, what they're looking at is a mortality event that is consistent with three

00:21:04.440 gigantic natural disasters combined. And what he was referring to, they're paying claims, right?

00:21:11.740 Right. It's that are way above the average level of claims that they plan for, even allowing for

00:21:19.120 three natural disasters. That's where they are. So what he's referring to is that level of excess

00:21:26.060 deaths that, I mean, you can find that in the government statistics right now. It's not

00:21:30.840 controversial, but it's not widely reported in the media. So we have this excess deaths,

00:21:37.660 real quick, just to recap, we have this, not just the spike. So we had the spike in March,

00:21:42.080 2020, and we're willing to say, okay, some of that was COVID probably. And some of that also

00:21:45.440 was related to lockdowns, maybe suicide or, you know, anxiety induced or alcohol induced or

00:21:51.060 whatever. But then there's this other spike that happens in December 2020, but then it doesn't go

00:21:55.600 back down to the baseline because by the summer of 2021, it's just not just one month, but month

00:22:02.300 after month from 2021 to where we sit today, just consistently above the baseline of excess deaths.

00:22:09.600 And simultaneously, what we have to factor in is that we have more vaccinated individuals than ever before, and we also have the effects of Omicron, which was mild, did not produce a lot of deaths, but also pervasive, very, very transmissible, which means that we should have, just from time passing by, two years, but then with Omicron also, and then with the vaccine, we should have the highest immunity today.

00:22:38.600 today than ever before. And yet you're saying that the excess deaths are still there. Therefore,

00:22:44.940 it must be related to something else. What do you think?

00:22:48.400 So that raises the question, what is causing the excess deaths? And so there are two things that

00:22:55.660 I can observe. I don't have an answer. Nobody has an answer. And as a lawyer, I don't even

00:23:01.840 have any evidence to put on in court, but I can observe a couple of things. So the first thing

00:23:07.160 i observe is a widespread lack of media curiosity in the reason for historic levels of excess deaths

00:23:16.240 okay so that means something right um you know i could speculate as to what it means based on

00:23:23.920 the way i've seen the media behave in the past but that would be speculation

00:23:27.260 i'm just observing that there you you know it's curious that given how interested the media was

00:23:36.560 in COVID deaths, the media has a corresponding lack of curiosity in the mysterious cause of all

00:23:45.100 of these excess deaths that we're seeing. Yeah. Good observation. So that's observation number

00:23:49.780 one. And then the second one is that when, when there have been articles related to the excess

00:23:55.440 desk the the um you know i would call mild curiosity that's been expressed has resulted in a

00:24:06.960 set of guesses that typically reduced to and this goes to your original point

00:24:13.760 that typically reduced to speculation by the experts that are interviewed for these news

00:24:20.240 article saying that it might be, again, just they're speculating too, it might be deferred

00:24:28.340 medical care that is causing all of the excess deaths that we're seeing.

00:24:35.000 Like elective surgeries and things like that that were all postponed?

00:24:38.700 Correct.

00:24:39.240 So during lockdowns, when you weren't allowed to go to the hospital or you were too afraid

00:24:44.140 to go to the hospital because the fear of getting COVID was greater than the fear of

00:24:48.420 deferring your your treatment uh those people put off their health care and so now we're paying the

00:24:55.740 piper from all this deferred health care right so right and real quick just uh for our listeners

00:25:01.100 elective surgeries doesn't just mean like you know getting plastic surgery and a facelift it

00:25:05.980 elective surgeries many of them are very serious things things that are life-threatening that a

00:25:10.720 person has to have surgery but it's just not immediate immediately urgent but that doesn't

00:25:15.320 mean that the surgery is not necessary. It is a surgery that must happen eventually, or the person

00:25:21.860 could die. And so even an elective surgery, that sounds like an insignificant, unnecessary surgery,

00:25:28.720 but these many of them are necessary surgeries. There's just a longer time gap, but that time

00:25:33.300 gap is not indefinite. And if it's pushed off too long, it really could cost the person's life.

00:25:39.280 Is that correct? Sure. Yeah. And a good example, I think, would be, you know, somebody whose doctor

00:25:44.660 recommends that they get a stent put in, uh, you know, a cardiac stent and, uh, but it's not

00:25:50.640 mandatory, right? So it's just something you need to do soon, as soon as you can get it scheduled

00:25:56.420 to fit with your calendar. And so that's something that can easily be deferred by that person.

00:26:02.360 Um, the, the other one that you see, uh, discussed a lot are, um, deferred things,

00:26:08.020 screenings, right? So cancer screenings, breast cancer, um, uh, prostate cancer screenings,

00:26:14.260 things like that. And so there's, you know, some speculation that people having deferred those

00:26:19.860 screenings, now they're getting the cancers that would have been caught and treated had they not

00:26:25.360 deferred those examinations. So there's a lot you could say about that, right? So if they're correct,

00:26:33.680 then these would be additional casualties of the lockdowns that you were referring to before.

00:26:39.280 That's right. And and if that trend line continues in that that delta, the gap right of excess deaths, that bolus of excess deaths is going to continue to increase the casualties that are directly attributable to lockdowns.

00:26:54.620 And it is conceivable that we will pass the COVID mortality, which is, as you also pointed

00:27:01.720 out correctly, the COVID mortality is currently decreasing as the CDC is now tightening the

00:27:08.220 standards on what can be considered a COVID death.

00:27:10.820 It's resulting in a reduction of the total.

00:27:13.440 So I think it's down over 12% now from the maximum.

00:27:18.500 So while the, you know, the COVID deaths are coming down, the lockdown related or deferred medical care related, if that's the explanation, are increasing and they may cross at some point.

00:27:29.940 Right. And that's just one factor from the lockdowns, you know, in terms of deferred health care.

00:27:34.360 And then there's also we can we can draw a pretty straight correlation to substance abuse, alcoholism, suicide.

00:27:40.820 We wouldn't necessarily count all suicides, but again, we would look at the baseline from

00:27:44.380 previous years, and then we'd look at the spike, that the excess suicide deaths, and

00:27:48.580 we could probably say, well, what novel thing happened in 2020 and 2021 that would cause

00:27:54.380 this excess, and COVID lockdowns and those kinds of things are a pretty sound explanation.

00:27:59.200 And then I think, I'm curious to pick your brain on this, but it seems like there's deferred

00:28:02.940 healthcare, but then there's also the possibility of just, did we at some level as a society

00:28:08.160 weaken our immune system?

00:28:09.840 Are we paying the piper with deferred healthcare, but are we also paying the piper by just having everybody in isolation and quarantine for a long time and then other sicknesses apart from COVID are now maybe hitting us all at once or hitting us harder?

00:28:24.380 In order to avoid COVID, did we build up a wave of flu or other kinds of things that are going to affect us more severely now because we weakened our immune systems by not living normal life?

00:28:40.480 Do you have any thoughts on that?

00:28:42.620 Yeah, I think that there's something to that.

00:28:46.080 I mean, you know, all of the excessive cleaning and hand washing and isolation and that sort of thing certainly reduced the normal exercise that our immune systems get from just being exposed to pathogens in the world.

00:29:05.600 and you know what we know you get there's this thing called you know bubble boy syndrome where

00:29:11.700 you over protect and your immune system atrophies and you become susceptible to

00:29:17.160 to illnesses that other people wouldn't be but there's a there's another issue that's related

00:29:22.400 to that that's worth discussion and that is we're seeing more and more a discussion of a

00:29:28.940 syndrome known as original antigenic sin. So it's a reference to the biblical concept of original

00:29:38.980 sin with the insertion of that word antigenic. So OAS is the acronym that you see in the medical

00:29:45.800 literature. And this refers to a side effect of the vaccines. And it's a side effect that's been

00:29:52.880 known in vaccinology long predating the covid vaccines and what it refers to is a

00:30:03.360 a curious artifact that when a person is exposed to a vaccine they develop antibodies for

00:30:13.360 that pathogen but also specific antibodies highly specific antibodies for that particular variant

00:30:22.560 is the simple explanation as opposed to someone whose immune system encounters the variant in

00:30:27.680 the environment and they develop a more broad antibody response and so what happens in the

00:30:35.520 original antigenics in the oas scenario is that the person then subsequently encounters a variant

00:30:42.320 of the original pathogen to which the antibodies are not effective but the body continues producing

00:30:50.080 the original antibodies and is not aware that they're ineffective against the variant that is

00:30:57.680 the body's normal system to detect that are defeated by this uh particular syndrome that's

00:31:03.200 related to to vaccines and in previous pandemics and epidemics there has been a consensus among

00:31:12.000 scientists that you don't begin vaccination until after the the the you know main activity of the

00:31:19.840 The pandemic has resolved and you've got a well-known established variant that you can treat because of this OAS problem.

00:31:29.060 And so there is a lot of speculation in the literature more and more all the time that one of the reasons we're seeing negative vaccine efficacy, meaning that vaccinated people now appear to be more likely to be infected with COVID than unvaccinated people.

00:31:47.020 And so one of the hypotheses to explain this is that we're starting to see the product of original antigenic sin due to vaccinating too early in the pandemic and people's immune systems getting locked into those original variants and antibodies for those original variants.

00:32:08.800 wuhan one what they they call that original covid variant and they're unable to deal with

00:32:14.880 variants like omicron or what they're now calling ba2

00:32:20.260 which is the the newer more transmissible form of omicron yeah which is crazy to think that you

00:32:28.720 know alpha or wuhan one you know and then to delta and delta was about two times as transmissible

00:32:34.080 And then they said Omicron was 70 times Delta, so 140 times the transmissibility than the original variant.

00:32:41.860 And then we're saying that, is it A2? Is that what it is?

00:32:46.060 BA2.

00:32:46.820 BA2 is, I think people are saying, anywhere from 40 to 70% more transmissible than Omicron.

00:32:52.520 So if you do the math, you're basically saying that now we have a variant that is legitimately 200 times plus the original variant in terms of transmissibility.

00:33:02.960 And the whole rhetoric from the very beginning was that COVID to begin with, with the original variant was the most transmissible, you know, the, the, the, are not was through the roof and all these kinds of things. And, and, and so it's like, yeah, I don't, I don't feel like we, we helped ourselves very much.

00:33:20.280 So, yeah, there's a lot of head scratchers as we get, you know, later in the pandemic, which is another reason for the politicians to go ahead and let's move past it.

00:33:32.740 Right. And stop talking about it so much.

00:33:35.060 So that was my next question. You kind of already covered some of it, but I want to throw the question out there regardless, because you might have something else that you want to add.

00:33:43.480 But I have written here, do you think there will be any long term side effects to the vaccine?

00:33:47.800 If so, what do you think these side effects are?

00:33:49.600 And you already mentioned the original antigenic sin.

00:33:54.660 Say that again.

00:33:55.580 Pronounce that, please.

00:33:56.480 Original antigenic sin.

00:33:57.860 Okay.

00:33:58.220 Original antigenic sin.

00:33:59.340 So that would be one potential side effect of the vaccine.

00:34:02.980 Are there any other ones that you've read in your ongoing research?

00:34:09.100 So let me start by saying what we were saying in our lawsuits related to the vaccines going back to last summer.

00:34:17.800 And that is by definition, by definition, it is impossible to know what the long-term effects are.

00:34:27.260 Right. Because it hasn't been a long-term.

00:34:29.960 You can't study something that hasn't happened.

00:34:33.800 Right. So, so just put that on burner number one. Okay. And that everything we say after this

00:34:40.620 is speculative because by definition, we can't know what the long-term effects of a brand new

00:34:47.900 drug are. All right. But we're starting to get some history, right? So we've passed the one

00:34:56.440 year anniversary of the deployment of the COVID vaccines. Now, the main thrust of the vaccinations

00:35:07.100 when they really started to pick up steam didn't happen until June or July of last year.

00:35:11.580 So we haven't really reached the one year anniversary yet of the, you know, sort of

00:35:15.820 the largest cohort of vaccinees.

00:35:21.980 You'll probably remember all the criticism of the slow rollout of the vaccines and the

00:35:26.800 trouble getting them to people and having to set up, you know, deals with Publix and

00:35:32.040 um, CVS and other locations to the private public, private partnerships to get the vaccines out

00:35:38.180 and all of that. So, um, those, you know, first few months of, of 21, um, it was a lower volume

00:35:45.280 anyway. So we really don't have that much experience yet with a large number of vaccines

00:35:54.860 into a one-year horizon. But we are starting to see more moving through December, January,

00:36:02.080 February of 21, now into December 21, January, February 22, and so forth. We're starting to see

00:36:10.040 that. And what I observe as a lawyer, as a person who's looking for facts that I could present to

00:36:17.420 a judge or jury, I noticed that all of the news about adverse effects and longer term effects

00:36:24.720 is bad, is negative for the vaccines. And there's very little good news about that.

00:36:33.280 So what I mean by that is that if I'm looking for a trend, right? And so there are a couple

00:36:41.720 possibilities. One possibility is that as we get news about the efficacy of the vaccines and the

00:36:48.920 longer-term implications and the health issues people are dealing with, that we see good news,

00:36:53.220 right? We could see that people are doing great that have been on the vaccines, that their health

00:36:57.680 has improved, that the death rates in vaccinated cohorts are declining relative to

00:37:04.900 unvaccinated and so forth, but we're not seeing that. The second possibility is the news is mixed,

00:37:10.900 Right. So there's some there's some areas where we're seeing some really good news related to to the vaccines over the space of that first year and then some bad news.

00:37:20.580 And it would be hard to net it out. We're not seeing that either.

00:37:24.020 What we're seeing is that almost all of the news relentlessly is negative for side effects related to the vaccines.

00:37:31.800 And there's a concept of subclinicality that you don't hear talked about much, but I think is very important related to this issue.

00:37:45.360 And what subclinicality is about is, you know, right now we know that there is, there are side effects, adverse effects related to the vaccines that are related to cardiac issues, right?

00:38:01.460 So myocarditis, pericarditis, that kind of thing.

00:38:05.560 And so we're learning about that because people are going into the hospital with these conditions or, you know, having blood clots and strokes and cardiac events and things like that.

00:38:16.100 But what we don't know about are how many people who are having cardiac related injuries that are below a level requiring hospitalization or direct treatment.

00:38:28.320 Right.

00:38:28.540 Right. So they may have some AFib, but it's not bad enough that they're feeling like they have to go into the hospital or talk to their doctor or something.

00:38:39.300 We have no way to measure that. One of the unfortunate byproducts of the, you know, sort of the tools that the government used to create artificial levels of fear and anxiety about the vaccines in order to encourage people to take them that we now know about that they, you know, were using these techniques to essentially propaganda techniques to encourage

00:39:09.300 higher levels of vaccination it's made people reluctant to talk about adverse effects

00:39:16.420 and so there's a it's made it very difficult to measure the true level of adverse effects

00:39:25.140 in particular in that subclinical cohort where they don't need medical attention because

00:39:30.820 they're unwilling to self-report to some degree right we can't measure to what degree

00:39:38.580 and we can't measure how many of them are having those subclinical effects, but it is reasonable

00:39:44.200 to think that they are out there in greater numbers than the numbers that we know about

00:39:49.420 who are going into the hospital for treatment. Right. Okay. And so then the question, I think

00:39:56.320 where you were going is what will the harvest be from, you know, all of those folks who are

00:40:03.720 experiencing right now, these subclinical levels, is it going to shorten their lives?

00:40:08.580 Right. Right. Are they more likely to to have cardiac events when they have extreme stress or high levels of exercise or things like that?

00:40:19.840 So it's impossible to say, but it's not looking good right now.

00:40:25.400 And, and I don't mean that to frighten anybody who's had the vaccine, the, the numbers of people who are experiencing adverse events is still very small as a proportion to the total number of people who have been vaccinated.

00:40:39.960 It's much higher than any drug that should have ever been approved by the FDA.

00:40:45.960 Yeah.

00:40:47.020 Right.

00:40:47.720 So what Dr. McCullough does a really good job of explaining this.

00:40:52.560 And, you know, before the COVID vaccines, if in a clinical trial, they had hit 50 deaths, they would have pulled the drug and they would have stopped the clinical trial.

00:41:03.480 Now, what we've seen in recent document dumps from Pfizer ordered by the court that in the Pfizer clinical trials, they hit 1223 deaths.

00:41:13.600 What? 1,223?

00:41:16.240 Correct.

00:41:17.200 Wow.

00:41:17.920 And the FDA approved it anyway.

00:41:20.040 so again it's far far above any level historically that would have required a drug to be pulled

00:41:28.080 yeah and what's so nonsensical to me is like so early you know to back up just a little bit you

00:41:33.680 said some of our listeners might be you know might have heard you the way that i did it's like well

00:41:38.580 you know the these side effects you know that are cardiac related it's a it's a minority report it's

00:41:44.400 a sliver you know of all those who have received the vaccine um but i think what what we need to

00:41:49.440 remind each other about and remind the listeners about is that those who would die of COVID was

00:41:55.220 also a small sliver. So when it's like, well, yeah, that side effect is, yeah, it's real and

00:42:02.820 yeah, it's there, but it's a minority of those who receive the vaccine. Yeah, but what we're

00:42:07.960 talking about is using this vaccine to combat a virus that has a very minority, small, less than

00:42:16.160 1%, you know, that killed. So, you know what I mean? So that's, you know, if this vaccine had

00:42:21.880 a small level of a side effect that would result in cardiac death, but we employed this vaccine

00:42:30.320 to combat the bubonic plague, you know, or to combat some kind of, you know, serious historic

00:42:37.760 plague that would wipe out a third of the population or half the population, then that's

00:42:42.620 a different matter. But when you're talking about a vaccine that has not been tested, and people

00:42:48.180 say, well, yeah, but I mean, look at the sample group, 68% of the entire population, millions of

00:42:53.900 people. Right, millions of people. So there's a lot of people who've gotten it. But like you said

00:42:57.660 earlier, there is not one test of someone who's had the vaccine for more than one year. So millions

00:43:04.960 of people have had, we've tested the vaccine on millions of people. But all we've tested is we've

00:43:08.800 tested the side effects of the vaccine within a very short period of time on millions of people.

00:43:14.880 We've tested the side effects of the vaccine for a long period of time on no one, on no one. And

00:43:20.560 we approve this, right? So it's like desperate times call for desperate measures. And I think

00:43:24.400 what I would assert is say, this is certainly a desperate measure by every standard of testing

00:43:29.900 and side effects and deaths, like what you just said, Peter McAuliffe and all those. This is

00:43:33.800 certainly a desperate measure by the standard that's always been used in the past. The question

00:43:40.640 though is, but was this really that desperate of a time? Was COVID that serious of a virus?

00:43:46.680 And that's where I would have to say personally, no, I think it was an overreaction. Do you have

00:43:52.960 any further thoughts that you want to add on that? Yeah, I want to be clear that if the adverse

00:44:01.780 effect problem was so insignificant that, you know, like, for example, Tylenol, there are people

00:44:08.380 who die from Tylenol every year, right? There's adverse effects to every drug. And if we were

00:44:12.660 talking about something like that, where there's some baseline level of adverse effects from any

00:44:18.240 medication, then I wouldn't be spending so much time talking to you about this. But the reason

00:44:24.500 that I'm concerned about it, and the reason that I'm spending so much time explaining and talking

00:44:28.480 about it is that there is a very real possibility that the number of folks injured or killed from

00:44:34.560 the medication could exceed the number who were injured or killed from the disease. And that is

00:44:41.500 unthinkable, right? I mean, that is a healthcare disaster of titanic proportions that would affect

00:44:50.380 society in more ways than we can imagine for uh i pray that that's not the case right right it's

00:45:02.040 unfortunate that the again the trend line is going the wrong direction right now we really

00:45:07.300 need that trend line to reverse that that the people who have had the injections need to start

00:45:13.140 showing better health indicators than than what we're seeing as a as a group and not in and the

00:45:19.360 numbers as small as they are. So that should be reassuring to people who have had the injection.

00:45:25.960 It's still, you know, small numbers of people who are seeing these adverse events, but they're

00:45:29.500 unacceptably high from any kind of healthcare perspective. So, you know, that's, that's the

00:45:37.600 landscape that we're looking at right now. And again, I hope, and I pray that this is, these

00:45:41.760 are transient numbers that they're going to start looking better soon. Yeah. Well, I'll, I'll second

00:45:46.700 that. Okay, well, I think all of that has been tremendously helpful of just getting the lay of

00:45:51.900 the land with COVID and COVID policies and what, you know, was the cure worse than the disease,

00:45:57.480 but shifting gears now, you know, to just keep you a little bit longer. Let's talk, I think one

00:46:02.420 of the big issues that our listeners would be interested in that I'm interested in is, you know,

00:46:07.040 there's a lot of opinions about the Russia, Ukraine. Now, obviously, there's the dominant

00:46:11.080 view that, you know, you're allowed to have, and then there are counter views, and some of them are

00:46:15.400 maybe conspiracy, and then some of them have, you know, some basis and reason. But my question is,

00:46:20.340 you know, with Russia and Ukraine, apart from, you know, the potential of World War II or III,

00:46:25.680 you know, or nuclear threats and all these kind of things, what about just your average, you know, 0.96

00:46:32.600 Joe Blow American in terms of the supply chain issues, you know, Ukraine produces a massive

00:46:39.280 amount of fertilizer for the entire world that can make the difference, you know, in what

00:46:44.940 percentage of crops are produced, not just by Ukraine or Russia, but multiple countries all

00:46:49.360 throughout the world. It could limit the harvest among farmers in multiple countries, nations all

00:46:56.400 around the world by 40, 50, 60%. So what would you say in terms of the question of food shortages?

00:47:05.800 Is that something that is reasonable that actually might happen? And would it affect America? Would

00:47:12.360 Do we actually have food shortages or we just have further inflation, higher grocery prices?

00:47:17.260 And with all of that, what are some things that Americans and specifically Christians can do?

00:47:22.020 Because we want to be prepared to take care of ourselves, our families, our churches, but also to be generous to those in need.

00:47:28.840 What do you think?

00:47:31.200 So with regard to food shortages, we're looking at global economic issues, right?

00:47:37.300 And the bigger, the more macro you get in economics, the simpler the rules are, right?

00:47:45.720 So what we're talking about is something called the law of supply and demand.

00:47:51.120 And I always like to point out, by the way, my undergraduate degree is in economics, and I loved it.

00:47:56.980 You know, and either you love economics or you hate economics.

00:47:59.160 There's no middle ground.

00:48:01.620 And I guess I was one of the nerdy ones that really liked it.

00:48:05.320 But they call it the law of supply and demand, the law, not the theory of supply and demand.

00:48:12.780 You can't beat the law of supply and demand.

00:48:16.260 It's like gravity.

00:48:18.520 OK, so when you have a shortage of anything, but food is in a special category of things that people can't live without.

00:48:30.140 Right. So there's some goods like yachts.

00:48:32.320 Right. And so if the supply of yacht goes down, yachts go down, not many people are hurt by that and not many people freak out or do do something else.

00:48:40.920 And there's other substitutes. Right. So you can you can go on a cruise ship instead of buying a yacht or, you know, do do other things.

00:48:46.300 But for food, food is something that people can't live without and there aren't any good substitutes for it.

00:48:54.180 Okay. So if you don't have food, it's not like you can watch it on TV or something like that. I mean, you know, or wait until you put it off for a few months, you've got to have it.

00:49:06.740 So when we talk about a shortage, what we're saying is that the supply is reduced. We have a reduced supply of whatever that good is. So in the case of a food shortage, we have less supply of food.

00:49:17.680 And that all makes sense. And there's nothing particularly interesting or controversial about that.

00:49:22.220 But what the law of supply and demand says is that when the supply goes down, the price goes up.

00:49:29.700 There's a famous graph and it's got an X in the middle of it. And, you know, it has to do with supply.

00:49:34.940 And so when you have high supply, prices are low, right? High supply, low prices.

00:49:40.880 when supply is low prices are high there's an inverse relationship in supply and demand and

00:49:48.060 that and those those lines get more extreme the less able people are to find substitutes for a

00:49:56.500 good gotcha and since food is one of those goods where it's very difficult to find a substitute

00:50:03.960 or impossible to find a substitute that inverse relationship is very extreme so as the food

00:50:10.320 shortage becomes more pronounced as the supply gets less and less, the prices spike. They go

00:50:16.680 astronomical. Okay. So the first thing that people should observe about that is that food shortages

00:50:24.120 will hurt lower income countries more than higher income countries. Now they're going to hurt higher

00:50:32.480 income countries because more, a greater proportion of your budget is going to go to buy food, which

00:50:37.880 means that you're going to the way you're going to handle substitutions is you're going to buy

00:50:41.440 less of other things because more of your budget is consumed by foods but you're probably not going

00:50:47.380 to go without food but in third world countries they don't have room in their budget they can't

00:50:57.620 take away from their vacation and from that new car that they're not going to buy and other places 0.97

00:51:02.820 like higher income first world countries can, they're just not going to buy food and they're 0.81

00:51:08.220 going to starve if the food shortages are bad enough. And so the people who are going to be

00:51:13.640 hurt the worst by these food shortages are the people less able to accommodate those increased

00:51:20.980 prices. They won't have any choice. And so the food will go to the countries with money to pay

00:51:27.640 for it um you know if it gets to the point where americans are starving then the rest of the world

00:51:34.240 is going to get wiped out yeah it's going to be starvation on a scale you've never seen before 0.86

00:51:39.140 so we're going to pay a lot more for food and third world countries people are going to be

00:51:45.280 starving and then the question is um are we accounting for those potential deaths in whatever

00:51:54.000 calculation we're making in how we approach the ukraine russia conflict and when i say you can't

00:52:01.680 crane russia conflict i'm not you know implying that that i don't believe it's a war or or

00:52:07.040 whatever that's not it what's happening to the ukrainian people is horrible uh it needs to stop

00:52:13.040 russia needs to get out of ukraine but the question is diplomatically politically

00:52:17.600 geopolitically how you know do we as the united states of america respond should we should we be

00:52:23.360 having our president going out and saying that that putin can't remain in office and essentially

00:52:28.520 threatening regime regime change in russia and i know uh you know biden came out recently and

00:52:35.580 denied that he meant that it he was calling for regime change but the question is not what he

00:52:40.520 meant the the question the the more significant question is how did russia take it right not what

00:52:48.000 biden said but what did putin hear and when you're talking about putin you're talking about a guy who

00:52:52.840 is, so on the one hand, I'll say a couple of things that are unpopular. Putin is a nationalist

00:52:59.800 and I prefer a nationalist to a globalist. That said, I think he's a nationalist war thug. So I 0.95

00:53:05.740 don't think he's a good guy by any stretch of the imagination. Putin in some ways reminds me of Trump

00:53:10.040 a little bit, that he's not the kind of guy that you want to tick off. He's desperate and he's

00:53:17.240 already been shocked by the lack of success, and you have to hand it to Ukrainians, the fact that 0.98

00:53:25.320 they have held off troops that far outnumber their own. I think Putin really thought that this was

00:53:32.020 going to be, they say Rome wasn't conquered in a day. Well, I think Putin thought that Ukraine 0.85

00:53:37.240 was going to be conquered in a day, or at least certain parts of it, and has been remarkably, 0.64

00:53:41.760 He's been remarkably unsuccessful with his invasion, which means you already have a guy

00:53:46.940 who, who seems to have some problems, some, some insecurity, fragile, you know, kind of

00:53:53.380 problems, just his personality, his disposition.

00:53:55.340 And then that coupled with situationally being unsuccessful.

00:53:59.380 And then you have, he's got a report back.

00:54:02.000 He can't, he can't, he's the kind of guy, it seems as though he's the kind of guy, both

00:54:06.660 by disposition and circumstantially what's happening that cannot afford to lose.

00:54:11.540 he has to have some kind of win. And so if you challenge a guy like that, it's like a guy

00:54:16.180 standing on a ledge. If you're trying to de-escalate the situation, and it's not just a

00:54:22.120 guy standing on a ledge threatening his own life with suicide. To make the illustration more

00:54:26.760 accurate, it's a guy standing on a ledge holding two children who would die also. And if you're

00:54:32.580 at the bottom, you don't want to say, you drop those children or we'll shoot you in the head. 1.00

00:54:39.700 like that's not your first you know i mean you don't want to necessarily lead with that 0.99

00:54:44.300 putin needs some kind of off-ramp and you're absolutely right there you know nobody i believe

00:54:50.180 in sovereign nations i believe in ukraine's right to defend itself i believe that they have a right

00:54:54.300 to police their borders um all the democrats you know in our nation believe that i wish they

00:54:58.180 believed about our nation policing our borders and everything that they believe about ukraine i wish

00:55:02.480 they believed about america but all that being said i do think those are biblical principles

00:55:06.280 God sets up nations. Nations are God's idea. The nations eventually are Jesus' inheritance. He's

00:55:11.980 coming back for the nations. God appoints borders and times and all these different things. So I

00:55:17.700 support Ukraine in all that regard. But liberals always think in terms of solutions, free ice cream

00:55:23.840 for everyone. And that's just not the way the world works. The world typically works in terms

00:55:28.880 of liberties and cost, not just solutions, but cost and concessions. And you're absolutely right

00:55:35.200 to say there may be a cost to Ukraine in order to counter a larger cost of global starvation.

00:55:43.740 Is that some of what you're getting at? Yeah, exactly. I mean, I think that

00:55:47.980 we would hope that our leaders are considering the entire picture and not just, you know,

00:55:56.580 teaching putin a lesson or uh you know winning a war or whatever they're you know the the diplomats

00:56:05.920 should be working full out on both sides right putin's got some and and by the way i i'm an

00:56:13.700 anti-communist since i was a fetus right so um and and putin is a former kgb uh czar right and

00:56:21.980 the person i would least trust in the entire world and i don't like communists i don't trust them and

00:56:28.480 i don't trust putin but he has enunciated some legitimate grievances right so he doesn't want

00:56:36.220 nato in ukraine he doesn't want ukraine to become a nato country and he doesn't want

00:56:41.540 nato military assets in ukraine right on his border and you know what all of us can understand

00:56:46.160 that we wouldn't want china entering into some strategic military partnership with mexico

00:56:51.720 and moving chinese military assets in there right we would probably do something about that right

00:56:57.140 okay so so i'm going to put that one under the category of a legitimate grievance that

00:57:01.620 that putin has now he's also complained about uh these biolabs to the un which is where he's

00:57:10.180 supposed to take it right and the un didn't do anything and the media first fact checked that

00:57:17.660 biolab story as false and then had to admit that it's true because we do have biolabs in ukraine 0.60

00:57:23.240 and you know what again if china was building biolabs in mexico we probably wouldn't be happy

00:57:28.800 about that right okay so that's a legitimate grievance that putin has now are we negotiating

00:57:34.160 in good faith to you know reassure the russians hey okay we don't want global starvation we we

00:57:40.740 will agree not to put nato assets in ukraine and you know what it was a bad idea for us to open up 0.83

00:57:46.880 those bio labs you're right we're sorry we're closing them we'll never do it again okay is that

00:57:52.860 on the table because and it may be i hope that it is behind the scenes right i hope that it's a

00:57:58.180 need-to-know thing and we don't know because we don't need to know but i'm not sensing that

00:58:03.020 instead i'm sensing kind of a lot of um bellicose rhetoric and escalation yeah yeah yeah rather than

00:58:11.240 hey let's let's diffuse this situation and let's help russia get out of ukraine as quickly as

00:58:17.560 possibly as possible but let's you know let's address some of these legitimate things that 0.88

00:58:24.560 the russians not let's just you know right now it seems like we just want to call the russians evil 0.91

00:58:28.500 and like there's no justification or explanation for what they're doing when a child could see 0.81

00:58:34.700 that putin's got some legitimate issues right let's deal with those issues that's that's all

00:58:40.200 i'm saying i completely agree and i think part of the reason so it's like it seems you know like

00:58:45.560 common sense let's diffuse the situation not just for the sake and diffusing the situation just to

00:58:50.520 be clear i'm aware of of uh liberties and costs i'm aware of you know cost benefit analysis so i

00:58:56.720 understand when i say diffuse the situation i understand that diffusing the situation

00:59:00.540 includes in that a cost to ukraine and perhaps an unfair cost to ukraine and i'm aware of that but

00:59:08.600 I'm talking about the cost to Ukraine as an American who's not in Ukraine, who won't pay

00:59:13.780 that cost. And so I recognize the dilemma here. But a cost to Ukraine in order to avoid a global

00:59:22.140 cost of food shortages and energy crisis and all these other, and of course, the potential of

00:59:28.220 outright war, worldwide war. And so- From a nuclear destruction.

00:59:34.420 Yeah, absolutely. So that's something that seems like a pretty big deal that even Ukraine

00:59:38.420 would benefit by not having, you know, there not being a global nuclear war. So, all that being

00:59:42.880 said, you know, cost and benefits, diffusing. And my point is to say, it seems like common sense

00:59:49.780 would suggest we need to diffuse here. And I wonder sometimes if, you know, part of it, I think,

00:59:55.420 you know, Biden is senile. And I think, you know, like there's, I think some of it really is just,

00:59:59.320 he doesn't know where he is and he doesn't know what he's saying. But then part of it, you know,

01:00:03.040 I also wonder, is some of this intentional, right? So I think it was Chesterton that said,

01:00:10.300 never attribute to malice what can be easily explained by stupidity. But even stupidity 1.00

01:00:16.920 gets things right occasionally, just by the laws of average. But when you get everything wrong and 0.99

01:00:23.360 you're never right on anything ever, like the fact that Biden has never been right in 48 years 0.99

01:00:28.460 of his government career on any foreign policy, then at that point, stupidity can't even explain 1.00

01:00:34.200 that level of failure. And it seems as though maybe there is some kind of malice. And when I 1.00

01:00:40.880 think of what the motives might be there, and of course, this is speculation, I admit that,

01:00:45.560 I wonder if there's maybe a hidden motive not to diffuse global tensions and what's corresponding

01:00:53.220 right now between Russia and Ukraine, because if we diffuse that, then the focus has to shift back

01:00:58.140 to what's going on at home. And none of it's good. And none of it bides well for Democrats

01:01:05.040 heading up to midterm election. And so I wonder if there's a procrastination in diffusing the

01:01:11.880 situation over here in order to distract people, namely American citizens, long enough to get

01:01:18.020 through November at home. That's one of my thoughts, at least. Yeah. And again, you're

01:01:25.240 inviting me to enter into that realm of speculation. You don't have to. I am throwing

01:01:29.840 it out there myself. You don't have to join me if you don't want to. Yeah. Obviously,

01:01:35.040 there's a lot of theories floating around. And what I found it more profitable to do,

01:01:39.600 and we're not going to be able to do it this time because I have a plane waiting on me and

01:01:42.700 they just gave me the headset that it's ready. But we can do it another time. And that is,

01:01:48.840 I find it much more profitable to look at at what groups have incentives based on the existence of this conflict. Right.

01:01:59.700 And we can say we hope that these like, you know, for example, the U.S. defense industry.

01:02:05.760 OK, so they profit. We're when the Congress talks about sending a 14 billion dollar aid package to Ukraine, they're not talking about shipping them pallets of cash like the Iranians got. 0.94

01:02:16.900 right they're talking about sending them war material and that war material is going to be

01:02:22.760 purchased from u.s defense contractors like general electric raytheon um you know and so

01:02:28.940 forth and and that's fine and that's what they they exist for right they they're legal they make

01:02:35.620 uh bombs and tanks and guns and things like that and that's fine but we need to be winning

01:02:43.300 and aware of the fact that their incentives are sort of on the opposite side of diffusing the

01:02:49.100 conflict. That's a good point. And we hope that they do the right thing and we hope that they

01:02:53.400 make the right choices, but they're also facing counter incentives. And then we can start to look

01:03:00.780 at some other groups in the current geopolitical landscape, who are other groups that have

01:03:07.600 incentives for further conflict instead of less conflict. And I think we can have a pretty

01:03:13.180 productive conversation about that because we can all agree, no matter what side you're on,

01:03:17.660 that we need to reduce those negative conflicts wherever we can, or negative incentives wherever

01:03:22.720 we can, right? In order to then reduce the conflict. Absolutely. Jeff Childers, you got

01:03:28.120 to catch a plane, but this has been very helpful. It's always a pleasure getting to have you on

01:03:33.000 twice. And I think a third time's the charm. So I'd love to have you again sometime and

01:03:36.640 maybe we can talk more about, well, we'll see what's going on in our crazy world at that time.

01:03:41.260 But thank you for coming on the show. Thanks, Pastor. Good talking to you.

01:03:44.840 All right. God bless. Thanks so much for listening. But real quick, before you go,

01:03:48.880 do us a small favor, take a moment, and leave us a five-star review if you enjoyed the show.

01:03:54.420 This is undoubtedly the best way that you can help us get this biblically faithful content

01:03:59.680 to as many people as possible. Thanks so much.

The NXR Podcast - April 05, 2022

THEOLOGY APPLIED - Proof That Covid Policy Harmed More People Than Covid

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript