Speaker | Time | Text |
---|---|---|
unidentified
|
Well the virus has now killed more than a hundred people in China and new cases have been confirmed around the world. | |
You don't want to frighten the American public. | ||
unidentified
|
France and South Korea have also got evacuation plans. | |
But you need to prepare for and assume. | ||
Broadly warning Americans to avoid all non-essential travel to China. | ||
This is going to be a real serious problem. | ||
unidentified
|
France, Australia, Canada, the US, Singapore, Cambodia, Vietnam, the list goes on. | |
Health officials are investigating more than 100 possible cases in the US. | ||
Germany, a man has contracted the virus. | ||
The epidemic is a demon and we cannot let this demon hide. | ||
Japan, where a bus driver contracted the virus. | ||
Coronavirus has killed more than 100 people there and infected more than 4,500. | ||
We have to prepare for the worst, always. | ||
Because if you don't, then the worst happens. | ||
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
Pandemic. | ||
Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
I want to drill down on this question of Afghan refugees because there's quite a split inside your party about bringing our Afghan allies, the people who stood up for us for those last 20 years, bringing them into this country. | ||
GOP Congressman Tom Tiffany says the Biden administration's plan to bring plane loads into the U.S. | ||
now and ask questions later is reckless and irresponsible. Ohio Republican Senate candidate J.D. Vance, author of Hillbilly Elegy, says he'd like to hear zero about Afghan refugees until we get every single American out first. Senator, there's a real difference of opinion inside your party. | ||
unidentified
|
First of all, a great nation is a nation that keeps its word. | |
The American people need to understand who we're talking about here. | ||
We're talking about men and women who risked their lives to protect Americans. | ||
They fought hand-in-hand with our troops, and we made promises to them. | ||
There are 32 million Afghans. | ||
We're talking about 60,000 to 80,000 people. | ||
So the first thing to say is the American people need to understand who we're talking about. | ||
We're talking about heroes who fought with us to take the fight to al-Qaeda and the Taliban. | ||
The administration has been way too slow to get people out of harm's way. | ||
They can get them to Kuwait, they can get them to Qatar, they can get them to Bahrain, they can get them to Ramstein in Germany and sort through the larger processing and bureaucratic issues there. | ||
But number three, when you fought on behalf of Americans to protect our people, you're welcome in my neighborhood. | ||
Okay, welcome. | ||
You're in the War Room. | ||
Tuesday, 24 August, Year of Our Lord 2024. | ||
What's the saying? | ||
There are decades in which nothing happens and then there are weeks and months in which decades happen. | ||
We're in the middle of this right now. | ||
One of the more important weeks in the nation's capital and throughout the world as the Democrats overnight did not get the votes to kind of jam through this six trillion dollars of spending. | ||
Why? | ||
We'll put it up later in the second hour. | ||
The Democrats, the Hispanic working class Democrats in the Rio Grande Valley, as we told you, three of them, three districts all unite in the Rio Grande Valley. | ||
Populism, economic nationalism, national security, real national security, America First, national security is working. | ||
Okay, near 80 million downloads. | ||
The podcast live everywhere in Mandarin, in Japanese now. | ||
I want to thank our Australian audience, Brazil, UK, Europe, and of course all the deplorables in the United States, and Lao Bai Jing, the deplorables of China. | ||
We're your allies as you try to overthrow the transnational criminal organization that is the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
I want to start with J.D. | ||
Vance. | ||
J.D.' 's a very well-known author and has become a real fire breather in the populist movement here in the United States. | ||
He's currently running in a very tough competitive Senate primary for the Republican nomination in the great state of Ohio. | ||
J.D., before I get to little Ben Sasse and Chris Wallace singling you out there, which I actually think was a badge of honor, I want to ask you about your assessment. | ||
I think the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Daily Mail breaking this morning that the head of the CIA took a red eye to Kabul to basically sit down and start negotiating with the head of the Taliban. | ||
You're a former Marine. | ||
Give us your assessment Of how this administration's handling things and these, you know, 10, 15,000 American hostages. | ||
We don't know how many because we can't get a count from the administration. | ||
What's your current assessment of how things are being handled? | ||
Country that defeated the Nazis in World War II and one of our most important national security leaders is going to Kabul to bend the knee to the Taliban leader, which I mean, let's be honest here. | ||
This is like an illiterate band of peasants. | ||
who managed to overthrow the Afghan National Army. So I just think it's pathetic that we have, we're reduced to this. Of course, we're in this situation because we didn't get our own people out before doing this withdrawal. And we're now letting, of course, tens of thousands of refugees into this country. Meanwhile, 10 to 15 percent of the people that are on the planes are not American citizens. I just don't understand why we've let ourselves get in this situation where we are begging the Taliban to let our own people out of their ridiculous country. | ||
Why didn't we worry about this first? | ||
And why are we talking about Afghan refugees when we're not even having our own citizens coming into our country? | ||
It's ridiculous. | ||
So you're, as a Marine, you would say, hey, citizens are to come out first, maybe our allies second, then you take, then you give up Bagram, then you bring, then you roll out the troops at the end. | ||
They've kind of done it in reverse and now it's a mess. | ||
Do you agree with me? | ||
I call these, and I think Sean Hannity jumped in last night, I call these 10 to 15,000 hostages. | ||
Do you think the American citizens are essentially hostages to the tender mercies of this medieval theocracy that is the Taliban? | ||
It's unfortunately exactly right. | ||
They are hostages. | ||
And the Taliban knows it. | ||
The way that they're acting, the way that they're not letting our people through to the airport, they know that they have us. | ||
They have leverage over us because they have our people. | ||
And I don't know if it's 10,000 or 15,000. | ||
I hope that it's less. | ||
But they've got a lot of people there. | ||
And this is, you know, this is like the Iran hostage situation. | ||
5, 10, 15, 100 times worse than it was back then. | ||
And these guys have really got us, and they know it. | ||
The other thing we've got to worry about, Steve, is you know it's not just the Taliban there. | ||
They've got ISIS there, they've got other terrorist groups. | ||
There are people there that might be willing to negotiate with us, but there are people there that just want to kill Americans, and we've got to worry about those folks too. | ||
And of course, again, it's like, what is the Biden administration doing? | ||
One of the craziest parts about this, if you think about it, is by inviting this refugee crisis, they've flooded the airports, they've flooded the zone, they've made it impossible to get through this morass of people. | ||
If they had focused on getting our own citizens out first, they maybe could have created some order. | ||
And in that orderly process, maybe we could have avoided a hostage situation. | ||
Of course, it's too late now, too late to cry over spilled milk. | ||
Do you support, if we got our own citizens out, to take out people that were real allies, commandos, interpreters, people that were really there for us. | ||
Would you have a problem if they came out but they stayed in region, in bases in Iraq and Kuwait and Egypt, UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia? | ||
Would you have a problem with that? | ||
Is your concern bringing them to the United States or is it just taking them out altogether? | ||
No, absolutely. | ||
I think you got to help the people that were helpful to us, but you got to do in the right way. | ||
You don't have to bring them all to the United States first, Steve. | ||
And the second most important thing is you've got to vet them properly. | ||
I saw yesterday that somewhere between 0.5 and 1% of the people that were taken out are like biometrically verified members of terrorist organizations. | ||
So if you take 50,000 people out of the country and a half a percent of them are terrorists, you're talking about a thousand really bad dudes. | ||
That's not even the people who don't like America, who aren't on our team. | ||
Those are like The first couple years of the Trump administration, the biggest thing was blue on green, which is Afghani shooting American soldiers in the back or trying to blow up these generals. | ||
Remember, those are the most highly vetted people we had. | ||
Those were commandos. | ||
Those were high people. | ||
They got in all the time. | ||
The vetting process... | ||
And this is what Stephen Miller did, and I had a small part in doing the vetting process for the travel ban. | ||
And this is why he didn't have any terrorist attacks for a couple of years. | ||
Those are just hard realities. | ||
This is the concern. | ||
Yeah, go ahead. | ||
And this is the concern, Steve, and that's when we were in a situation of low chaos. | ||
If we couldn't vet people properly four years ago, two years ago, how do you possibly think we're going to be able to vet them properly now, given the chaos at the Kabul airport? | ||
It's just ridiculous, and we need to be able to say, none of these people get to come to our country right now. | ||
OK, as America First, they're talking about, and you just mentioned it, ISIS is there, Al-Qaeda is there, Haqqani Network, you've got Pakistan, ISI, which are all bad guys. | ||
The statement was made last night that after 20 years and $2 trillion and 6,000-7,000 dead when you count the contractors, the pipetters, We've now created, allowed a terrorist super state to be recreated. | ||
With America First, I know is your national security policy. | ||
How do you offset, since you're not a neocon, how do you offset the fact that we now have created, after 20 years of the globalist project, trying to stand up a democracy, a failed effort, how do you deal with now the fact that we're going to have a terrorist super state? | ||
All the tribes are coming together on 9-11 in Afghanistan. | ||
They're going to have a massive celebration, right, of their victory. | ||
How do you offset that with America First national security policy? | ||
Look, I think you've got to get the Pakistanis and the Indians involved, the folks in the region, and make sure this doesn't become another hotbed for terrorists. | ||
But if it does, you've got to be willing to go up there and blow things up. | ||
Not nation-build, not try to create an American-style democracy out of a bunch of warring Muslim tribes, but a real willingness to go in there and say, if you attack Americans, if you start developing terrorist capabilities, we're going to blow you to kingdom come. | ||
That's the threat that American power is able to provide So long as we're not distracted by nation-building and trying to turn this country into something it will never be. | ||
Talk about nation-building and nation-destruction. | ||
I know you gave a really amazing speech by the Claremont Institute over right near the Pentagon in Northern Virginia a couple of months ago. | ||
We had you on the show right afterwards. | ||
A real throwdown to the oligarchs, to Wall Street, to the corporatists. | ||
Right now, Bloomberg's got a story up. | ||
Yeah, I think it's $843 million an hour. | ||
It's cost $4 trillion has been added to our balance sheet of the Federal Reserve to get us over this bridge, this yawning gap caused by the CCP virus, by COVID-19. | ||
$4 trillion. | ||
In this town right now, they worked all night. | ||
They're trying to negotiate essentially another $6 trillion. | ||
This will put our young people, everybody under 35, you're going to be a Russian serf when this thing is passed because there's no turning back. | ||
There's no turning back. | ||
Yeah. | ||
You know, President Trump, you know, Crapo, there's been 19, I call them collaborationists, including the guy you're trying to replace, Rob Portman, decent guy, but he's been the tip of this thing for, you know, for bipartisanship. | ||
Crapo, I think, has got an endorsement of President Trump. | ||
This stands totally opposite of what Trumpism is. | ||
What are your thoughts about what's going on? | ||
What would you do as a senator? | ||
And if you had a chance to advise President Trump, would you recommend he pulls Crapo's endorsement as a signal to everybody that you can't just get an endorsement and then go about and just go against core Trump policies? | ||
Yeah, look, I'm not going to tell President Trump what to do, but the simple fact is, Crapo and Portman made a huge mistake, and I think you're right, they are collaborating, because there are two problems with this bill. | ||
One, it's the substance of the bill, a lot of ridiculous Democrat handouts, but it's also that it gave cover for the $6 trillion reconciliation package, a package, by the way, that includes amnesty for millions of illegal aliens. | ||
So I think that the problem here is not just that we got a bad bill, it's that we gave the Democrats Bipartisanship. | ||
We gave them this talking point. | ||
Bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship. | ||
And what they've done with it is stabbed Republicans in the back who work with them and worked on this new bill. | ||
Which, yeah, the six trillion dollars in spending is a terrible idea. | ||
But if you legalize millions of illegal aliens at this moment in our country's history, we may never win a national election again as conservatives ever again in this country. | ||
So it's an all-around disaster. | ||
I think Crapo should be ashamed of himself. | ||
We've got to get out of this situation where we try to achieve bipartisanship, not to get anything good done for the American people, but so we can wave the flag and say we did bipartisanship when what we got out of it was a crappy bill. | ||
Okay, so if you win the primary and then win the general election, you'll come in as a senator from Ohio, and Ohio is the heart of Trump country. | ||
You come in as kind of a power senator right off the bat. | ||
It doesn't matter how junior you are. | ||
What would you tell Mitch McConnell? | ||
Because Mitch McConnell's in back of all this, right? | ||
He's in back of all this. | ||
Let's face it. | ||
The donors and the Wall Street faction of the Republican Party want this. | ||
You threw down over there in Northern Virginia, so what are you going to tell Mitch McConnell, and how are you going to be different Then these other guys will just get in there and just go along with the donors. | ||
We've got about a minute and a half, JD. | ||
Yeah, I think a simple fact, Steve, is we've got to stand up for our own people and not for the donors. | ||
And you're right. | ||
Mitch McConnell, a lot of other folks in the Republican establishment have consistently deferred to the interests of the donors. | ||
I mean, just look at this infrastructure bill. | ||
During four years, President Trump tried to get an America First infrastructure bill. | ||
They wouldn't do anything for him, but they're willing to bend over backwards to give the same thing to Biden. | ||
We have a choice in this country. | ||
Are we going to keep on giving special tax breaks Special privileges to companies, to multinational corporations that are destroying this country, even though they're donating to Republicans, or are we actually going to fight against them so that people in our country don't turn into long-term serfs, long-term renters who own nothing, have no future, and no real stake in this country? | ||
We've got to stand up for our own people, and that means, by definition, being willing to fight the donors. | ||
That's what I'm going to do when I get to D.C. | ||
Okay, J.D., how do people get to you? | ||
How do they follow you on social media? | ||
How do they get to find out about your campaign? | ||
Yeah, jdvance.com. | ||
If people want to support us, learn more about our issues, jdvance1 on Twitter. | ||
We're on Facebook, too, so please come and follow our campaign. | ||
Look, this is a campaign that's going to require a lot of help, a lot of support, so I hope folks will get involved. | ||
We've got a lot of momentum. | ||
I'm excited about it, man, but it's a long road. | ||
It's a tough one out there. | ||
Good luck. | ||
We love competitive races, and you got one out there. | ||
It's great to see a JD and a fantastic speech over in Northern Virginia, and great fighting for America first. | ||
Okay, short commercial break. | ||
We're going to come back. | ||
We've got Dr. Lamone. | ||
There's so much going on. | ||
FDA approval, kind of a jury-rigged process. | ||
Dr. Lamone's going to walk us through it. | ||
We're also going to have Michael Yon. | ||
Michael Yon, the great combat correspondent, spent years in Afghanistan. | ||
He's going to tell us what's really going on. | ||
This show is packed today, so strap in. | ||
All hell's about to break loose in the War Room. | ||
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
Pandemic with Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
The epidemic is a demon and we cannot let this demon hide. | ||
War Room. | ||
Pandemic. | ||
Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
If all things go the way we want them to go, and we're really successful with this BLA that we just discussed over the last couple of minutes, and we get really the overwhelming majority of the people vaccinated, I think as we get into the fall and the winter, we could start to really get some good control over this as we get into 2022. | ||
approval in a moment. First, I do want to ask you something about you that you said to NPR today. | ||
unidentified
|
No. | |
You said if the majority of Americans get vaccinated, quote, we could start to really get some good control over this as we get back into the fall of 2022, a year from now. Is that the best case scenario? And what does control look like? | ||
No, you know, I know, Anderson, I have to apologize. | ||
When I listened to the tape, I meant to say the spring of 2022. | ||
So I didn't misspeak. | ||
And in the conversation with Mary Louise Kelly, she was saying, when do I think we're going to start to get some control? | ||
I said, if we can get through This winter and get really the majority overwhelming majority of the 90 million people who have not been vaccinated vaccinated. | ||
I hope we could start to get some good control in the spring of 2022. | ||
I didn't mean the fall. | ||
I misspoke my dad. | ||
Okay, I can't take any more of this guy. | ||
And by the way, I think this MSNBC clip too is even better. | ||
Because I'm sure I saw him, I was watching him when he said the fall of 2022 and that's where I kind of jumped out of things. | ||
This is insane. | ||
Okay, let's bring in now Dr. Malone, you're back in the war room. | ||
By the way, go to MyPillow.com today, right now. | ||
Promo code WARROOM. | ||
Toppers, pillows, the total sleep system across the board. | ||
The towels, unfortunately, towels are gone. | ||
We told you how to jump on that. | ||
You got the Giza sheets, the two-for-one Giza sheets. | ||
So you got sheets, pillows, toppers, but these sales are not gonna last forever. | ||
Take action, action, action. | ||
MyPillow.com. | ||
Promo code WARROOM. | ||
Do it today. | ||
Dr. Malone, I've got so much to go through, and I want to start in the FDA process and let you just run with it, but I've got to start with Tony Fauci. | ||
He clearly said yesterday, and I think it was a couple times, that it was the fall of 2022. | ||
That wasn't a misspeak. | ||
He put it out there and he got blown up and he had to walk it back. | ||
What is this guy thinking about? | ||
What are they conceiving over there, NIH? | ||
That would make them think that, you know, he said fully vaccinated, not talking about antibodies, not talking about people who've had the disease before, not herd immunity, but fully vaccinated. | ||
I think he used the number 90%, right? | ||
Which means the school kids and the high school kids have to get it. | ||
Just that's how the math works. | ||
What is this guy? | ||
What is he signaling to us? | ||
Well, remember this is moving the goalposts from 70% uptake, which was what had been the party line for For herd immunity. | ||
I can't say what goes on in Tony's mind. | ||
He just says one thing after another and then flip-flops and then denies that he's misrepresented things previously. | ||
I have no idea what's going on in his mind. | ||
The truth is that the vaccine data that they're using in the licensure is outdated. | ||
The efficacy of this in preventing infection and transmission is poor, it's somewhere under 40% according to the Israeli data, and there's no way that they can get to herd immunity. | ||
So that's probably why they've dropped this discussion. | ||
If you pick out the nuance in his words, he's using kind of subtle weasel words that allow him to hedge his bets. | ||
So he's using really soft language that, oh, we could get this more under control, and these kinds of things. | ||
It's very much a contrast to his prior More definitive statements that have all been proven untrue. | ||
Well, he says this on the day that they announced the FDA approval, and then immediately the military comes in and says, everybody's got to get vaccinated. | ||
unidentified
|
Right? | |
They're going to have the government come in, everybody's got to get vaccinated. | ||
De Blasio will have more cold opens in the C-block, so you can hear De Blasio and Meek and everybody literally dropping the hammer. | ||
But I want to go through, you're the expert, you're the inventor of the underlying technology of messenger RNA. | ||
Walk through just the documentation of the FDA approval, because this thing was fast-marched, not just from a year's process to what it took, but it was even supposed to be after Labor Day till this week, because he needs to change the conversation. | ||
He needs to get back on CCP, out of Afghanistan, out of the economy, out of the southern border invasion, all of it that's spinning out of Arizona, about to drop the report on his illegitimacy in the state of Arizona and others. | ||
Just walk me through, as technically as you can do it. | ||
You've gone through the FDA process many times. | ||
What was actually delivered yesterday, in your esteemed opinion, sir? | ||
Thanks for that. | ||
This is a fascinating case of a bureaucratic kind of shell game, the likes of which I haven't seen before. | ||
We actually have two distinct letters here. | ||
That's the first part. | ||
There's a letter for Pfizer and a letter for BioNTech. | ||
The New York Times and the Washington Post got it wrong. | ||
The authorization is not for Pfizer. | ||
The authorization is for BioNTech, and it will only be initiated at the time that BioNTech-labeled product becomes available. | ||
So one of the things that I want your listeners to understand is that the The liability coverage, the blanket coverage that allows Pfizer to not be liable for any adverse events, only applies to the Pfizer product, which is still under emergency use authorization. | ||
They can only give that blanket authorization. | ||
And by the way, there's been no successful claims prosecuted under that for any compensation. | ||
They can only give that under emergency use authorization. | ||
So, point number one for your listeners, if you're faced with a situation in which you have to accept vaccine, I strongly suggest that you hold off for the BioNTech commodity labeled product. | ||
That's the one that will no longer have liability protection in the same way that the Pfizer emergency use authorization product does. | ||
One of the things that's fascinating here, I have to read this to you. | ||
In the letter to BioNTech, the FDA has decided to bypass the normal process of having an external advisory committee review their decisions and comment on it, which also requires a public comment period. | ||
This has always been done for any prior vaccine that I've ever been aware of. | ||
Here's what they say. | ||
We do not refer your applications to the Vaccines and Related Biologics Products Advisory Committee because our review of information submitted in your BLA, including the clinical study design and trial results, get this, did not raise concerns or controversial issues that it would have benefited from an advisory committee decision. | ||
So they've decided to just completely punt, and I humbly submit That there is a ton of controversy going on around these vaccines here in Europe, in Australia, etc. | ||
And this is another, I don't know what else to say, bold-faced lie, that there are no concerns or controversial issues, not the least of which in controversial issues is the cardiotoxicity for which there are many, many studies now required. | ||
So what they've done here, I think, is jam through something That will enable the government and commercial entities and states to mandate vaccines to the military and otherwise. | ||
But by their own statements, they don't have the data to support the safety and efficacy claims. | ||
The efficacy claims that they do have are clearly outlined based on data that is completely outdated. | ||
It's based on the alpha and beta variants. | ||
I can go on. | ||
You want to jump in? | ||
I do want you to go on, but yeah, I do want to jump in. | ||
Just hang on for one second. | ||
I just want to make sure we get this on the table. | ||
You've spent your career as a vaccinologist. | ||
You've spent your career working on vaccines. | ||
You're not an anti-vaxxer. | ||
You're actually pro-vaccine. | ||
In anyone that you've ever worked on, or anyone that you know about, any vaccine that's gotten FDA approval, have you ever, in your memory, seen where they didn't have an outside advisory committee that took it, and where they didn't have a time for public comment on said vaccine to the outside advisory committee? | ||
Have you ever seen that before? | ||
Not in my memory or experience. | ||
And these committees are usually quite rigorous, although often stacked. | ||
So they They don't even feel the need to go to their own hand-selected committees to comment. | ||
They're just saying, well, there's no controversy here, there's nothing to see folks move on, and we're just going to go straight to authorization for the BioNTech product. | ||
Would you be open? | ||
to us putting together an advisory committee. We'll make it even-handed. | ||
Obviously we'll have you on it and actually have you guys opine to it and then have public comments. I mean we would set up our site to get as many public comments as possible. If the government's not going to do it, maybe we should if that's the normal process. I think a lot of people would feel better if this was run by normal Roberts Rules of Order. | ||
It looks like it's, they've seen the Navy, it looks like it's gun decked, right? | ||
This thing feels like it's gun decked. | ||
I'm not a professional, but people I've talked to overnight said there's something wrong with this process. | ||
And the data, I want to go back to the data. | ||
Are you saying the data that's attached, that you can look at, you don't think deals with the Delta variant or any of the current variants, it deals with the original? | ||
And so therefore, they're kidding themselves? | ||
Is that your point? | ||
That they haven't taken the most relevant? | ||
That's absolutely true. | ||
They haven't cited that. | ||
They cite the original studies that are quite outdated now. | ||
There's a bunch of other details in here. | ||
Some are not... Hang on. | ||
I want to get to that after the commercial break. | ||
But in terms of your committee idea, others are floating the same idea, and I think there's a great opportunity to bring together a consortium of interested parties To take this type of approach that you're proposing here. | ||
Yeah. | ||
And what we want to do is make sure that there's the same level of caliber of expertise as the advisory committee of the FDA has. | ||
We're not trying to say, we're going to get all the anti-vax crowd. | ||
We want the same level of professionalism. | ||
Give us, you know, whatever it is, a white paper, we'll work with it, and then have public comments. | ||
The problem with this concept, and it's a great concept in theory, if we had an open and transparent FDA and CDC. | ||
But normally the committee has access to data and we will not have that access because they're still hiding it. | ||
Well, this is kind of like the 3 November movement, right? | ||
Let's get to the facts first. | ||
Let's get to the receipts. | ||
Then we'll see what the process does. | ||
OK, short commercial break. | ||
Dr. Malone back in the war room. | ||
Just a moment. | ||
unidentified
|
War Room. | |
Pandemic. | ||
With Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
The epidemic is a demon and we cannot let this demon hide. | ||
War Room. | ||
Pandemic. | ||
Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
Look, human beings do well when they have carrot and stick. | ||
So a mandate helps people to realize it's time. | ||
FDA final approval on Pfizer said it's time. | ||
Now, the Biden administration could do something else that would really help us all move forward. | ||
Speed the approval of the vaccine for the 5 to 11 year olds. | ||
It's time for that. | ||
Look, if we can get that last piece done, because right now we can vaccinate kids 12 and up. | ||
We're having a lot of success in New York City getting that done. | ||
But we need that last piece. | ||
And we need every child in America back in school. | ||
So I know Joe Biden cares, to his great credit. | ||
I know the team's working non-stop. | ||
But they've got to make this a central priority. | ||
Get that vaccine ready for the 5 to 11-year-olds. | ||
And then there's not even a question anymore about our schools. | ||
Everyone in the school building at that point could be vaccinated, should be vaccinated. | ||
A lot happened yesterday, though, in the fight against COVID. | ||
The big development that I think a lot of people were waiting for yesterday, the FDA granting full approval to Pfizer-BioNTech. | ||
I can't take de Blasio. | ||
I appreciate it. | ||
I love the team, the producer team here, and I love the team in Denver. | ||
I can't do de Blasio and Mika back-to-back. | ||
I just get too much. | ||
We are data-based, evidence-based, and science-based. | ||
There are people out there that are fantasy-based. | ||
And Bill de Blasio, it's scary, the fantasy he's living in. | ||
We told you folks, we told you, we told you, we told you, on August 15th, when school starts going back, they're gonna jam something up, they're gonna, their whole focus, and Fauci said it at this AP interview months ago, we were the ones that found the buried lead, that it's about the school kids. | ||
This is where they stopped talking about herd immunity. | ||
Or this is where they started directly relating herd immunity to not 70% of people having it, but had to be vaccinated, and threw the number at 90%. | ||
And I said, the only way the math works is to get to the kids. | ||
And Fauci admitted that the next day with Savannah Guthrie on NBC. | ||
And so here's where we are, de Blasio. | ||
They want to get the vaccine in the children. | ||
There's no doubt about it. | ||
That's not the war room saying that. | ||
That's de Blasio and the apparatus saying that. | ||
I want to turn now to Dr. Malone. | ||
Dr. Malone, is what Bill de Blasio said have any basis in reality right now, given that you're a vaccinologist and you've read this FDA approval? | ||
Is that back up what Bill de Blasio was talking about? | ||
In my opinion, Mr. de Blasio is basically pushing a propaganda line, and it's not based in science or reality. | ||
There are many, many peer-reviewed studies out now that the risk of COVID-19 in the pediatric cohort is basically non-existent, unless it's children that have very high comorbidity risks, like morbid obesity. | ||
What Mr. de Blasio is saying here makes no sense. | ||
The kids aren't at risk, and furthermore, if he had taken the time to read the FDA authorization letter rather than just recite talking points, he would find that the FDA is quite explicit that there are multiple ongoing pediatric safety studies that have to be performed. | ||
That they're not currently able to evaluate the risks associated with the cardiac disease associated with the vaccine. | ||
They don't have sufficient data, and even in the FDA's own documents here, they overlook that the CDC has just announced that the risks for Cardiac disease affects maybe two and a half or more times greater. | ||
So, de Blasio is basically saying we have to vaccinate kids that are at no risk with a vaccine that will not protect them from infection and spread, and which is associated with significant risks for long-term disease of their heart. | ||
Fine. | ||
But I just want to go back to the core documents. | ||
In those core documents, The way they're drafted, does the FDA authorization as it's drafted right now, authorize the use of this vaccine, not the Pfizer but the Bio one, the letter that authorizes this, does it authorize the use of that vaccine for children right now, today, like in a New York City public school? | ||
Absolutely not. | ||
It authorizes 16 and above. | ||
He authorizes 16 and above, correct? | ||
He hasn't read the documents. | ||
He doesn't know what he's talking about. | ||
And what is the condition precedent that has to occur before you actually get to the kids 16 and younger? | ||
They have multiple studies that are required and ongoing that they have to complete in the various sub-brackets within that group to demonstrate safety, particularly focusing on the myocarditis and the pericarditis. | ||
So those studies are projected to not be completed until 2023. | ||
That's the 23rd. | ||
Isn't there also some studies in there that said something about 2024? | ||
I mean, the 2023 are some studies. | ||
Aren't there other listings in there, the things that they don't believe will be accomplished until 2024? | ||
So we're not going to have the full study data for at least three years to make a decision about whether or not this is sufficiently safe to administer to children. | ||
We also don't have data. | ||
They admit we don't have data demonstrating safety in pregnancy. | ||
That's a key thing. | ||
And there's a pregnancy and teratogenicity study that's also on. | ||
And that will be, right now, the due date for that is 2023 or 2024 as listed in the document. | ||
Let's see. | ||
I don't have that at my fingertips in terms of when the study will be completed. | ||
Okay. | ||
But my point is, By the way, that would be the normal logical progression of the FDA. | ||
To start something like this, the FDA would be 2023 or 2024 in a normal process where you had the advisory committee, you sent the data to them, they reviewed things, you had public comment. | ||
It's a 2023, 2024 or beyond if it was in a normal situation? | ||
Yeah, it usually takes six to nine months to get your final study report after database lock, completion of the study, etc. | ||
And then the advisory committee has to review and evaluate. | ||
So this is conditional approval. | ||
And it's conditional approval for one of the two. | ||
The Pfizer is actually not approved. | ||
The Pfizer is still EUA. | ||
The BioNTech has very conditional approval and a huge list of studies required to be performed. | ||
And so this statement that Mr. de Blasio and others are making right now about the logic of pediatric vaccination enforcement mandates. | ||
The data just aren't there. | ||
But I want to go back to Tony Fauci, by the FDA's own admission. | ||
I want to go back to Tony Fauci's misspeaking. | ||
I think he's used the term in the number, once we get our hand on it, 90 percent, right? | ||
When we get our hand on 90 percent, whether it's the fall, spring, or fall of 2022, He's assuming mathematically that you're doing this with adolescents and kids. | ||
That's just the way the math works, right? | ||
To get to those levels of... He's calling herd immunity... I agree. | ||
People are vaccinated. | ||
You agree? | ||
That seems to be an implied assumption. | ||
There's another thing I'd really like to highlight. | ||
Hang on, before we get to the highlight, I just want to make sure we're following this thing. | ||
But, to go back to the document, right now the studies for the children are not going to be delivered until 2023. | ||
Is that correct, Dr. Malone? | ||
2023-2024, yes, correct. | ||
2023, 2024. Yes, correct. Okay, so how can Tony Fauci, because they sit there, they sit around the table, They've had this thing and they've been working on it for weeks and weeks and weeks and not months. | ||
How can he then sit there and not just talk? | ||
The buried lead is not that he said the fall of 2022, which made these people freak out, because that's where we're going to be voting in a midterm election to win our 60 seats, blow this out and get Tony Fauci in front of a congressional hearing and then referred to the Justice Department for criminal charges. | ||
That's all coming in the fall of 2022. | ||
That's what they're freaking out about, the politics of it. | ||
But what Tony Fauci is saying is something radically different. | ||
He's saying that against what the FDA approval letter says, which has conditioned precedent to use certain groups, whether pregnant women or children, there's no chance you can give this to children on this letter for FDA approval before 2023 as they lay it out. | ||
Is that correct, Dr. Maloney? | ||
The implied reveal here is they're going to jam it through under emergency use authorization for the younger pediatric cohorts. | ||
They're going to disregard these studies and they're going to jam it through using EUA. | ||
This is the con. | ||
Or if somebody at the FDA can explain this, they're using this conditional FDA approval to then later come out and use an emergency use authorization for people under 16 years old. | ||
Is that what they would have to do in order to have a doctor be able to give that vaccine to somebody? | ||
Because right now you don't have that for children, right? | ||
Correct. | ||
I really think what this document is about is giving the government cover and large business to mandate vaccines in the adults. | ||
That's why this has been pushed through in this kludgy, weird workaround way is because they felt the need to, I think that what's happened here is that the bioethics argument has prevailed and they've been outed with what they're doing in that they are, by trying to force mandates, they've come to terms, I think a lot of lawyers have forced it on them. | ||
They've had to come to terms with the fact that what they're doing is not legal in terms of the common rule and fundamental core bioethics here. | ||
And so what they've done is jammed through a work around that allows them to deploy the mandates that they clearly desperately want without having to incur the lawyer's wrath In circumventing the common rule. | ||
Well, it's the carrots. | ||
Go back to de Blasio's The Cold Open. | ||
The carrots didn't work because only 29% of African-Americans in New York City have the vaccine. | ||
You know why? | ||
They want to see some data. | ||
They want to see some facts. | ||
The rational, the logical. | ||
They're not buying it. | ||
They want to see it. | ||
The carrots haven't worked. | ||
The million-dollar giveaways, the free trucks, the influencers, the concerts, all of it hasn't worked. | ||
He said the sticks, the mandate's the stick, and they need this for the stick, Dr. Malone. | ||
So about the data, okay, so going back to, let's stay data-based here. | ||
In the authorization letter for the BioNTech product, there is a series of amazing statements in which the FDA recognizes and acknowledges the failure of their safety database system to provide useful data. | ||
They specifically state, we've determined that an analysis of, this is full of bureaucratic legalese, an analysis of spontaneous post-marketing adverse events reported under section 505k1 of the FDCA, read that as the VAERS system, will not be sufficient to assess known serious risks for myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis. | ||
Furthermore, the pharmacovigilance system that FDA is required to maintain is not sufficient to assess these serious risks. | ||
You may recall that I outed them on Tucker months ago, and it raised a bit of a kerfuffle. | ||
Right here in bureaucratic language, they're acknowledging that the system that they set up last fall with 20 different databases that they were bragging about is completely incapable of assessing serious risk associated with these vaccines. | ||
There are no data because they, by their own admission, Their system is completely inadequate. | ||
And reel back, they have the legislative authorization to have required much more rigorous safety follow-up from the vaccine manufacturers, and they elected to require them to do zero, nothing. | ||
And now they're finally coming to terms and acknowledging that what they have done is ineffective and incapable of detecting serious risks. | ||
Dr. Malone, hang on for one second. | ||
We're gonna take a short break. | ||
We would love you to stay through for one more segment. | ||
Dr. Malone talking about the FDA process, getting down to the details, data-based, evidence-based, real science-based. | ||
Next, in The War Room. | ||
unidentified
|
War Room, pandemic, with Stephen K. Bannon. | |
The epidemic is a demon, and we cannot let this demon hide. | ||
War Room, pandemic. | ||
Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
Okay, welcome back to the War Room. | ||
Go to MyPillow.com. | ||
Promo Code War Room. | ||
Take action. | ||
Agency. | ||
Towels. | ||
Done. | ||
That sale's done because they sold out. | ||
You got sheets, toppers, the total sleep system. | ||
You got the pillows. | ||
You particularly have the biblical pillow for the kids, the stories. | ||
Check it all out. | ||
Go to our Square right now. | ||
Look at all the sales. | ||
Action, action, action. | ||
Okay. | ||
Dr. Malone. | ||
I'm a simple guy. | ||
I'm confused because of what CNBC and everybody's running around with Pfizer, Pfizer, Pfizer, Pfizer. | ||
When you look at the letters the way you've broken them apart, these two letters, they've actually, and I want to go back to what you said about the data, there's really no data, but they've authorized the use of a vaccine. | ||
Does that vaccine currently exist? | ||
If I want to walk down, not that I'll do it, but if I want to walk down to the doctor and get the vaccine, can I actually get the one that has this kind of sketchy, shady FDA approval? | ||
Is that available right now, to the best of your knowledge, sir? | ||
It's absolutely not available. | ||
So the little trick that they've done here is they have issued two separate letters for two separate vaccines. | ||
The Pfizer vaccine, which is what is currently available, is still under emergency use authorization, and it still has the liability shield. | ||
Once again, the mainstream media has lied to you. | ||
I'm sorry to say that. | ||
I know it's a shock to this room. | ||
But the product that's licensed is the BioNTech product, which is substantially similar, but not necessarily identical. | ||
It's called Comirnaty. | ||
I think that's how it's pronounced. | ||
And it's not yet available. | ||
They haven't started manufacturing it or labeling it. | ||
And that's the one that the liability waiver will no longer apply to. | ||
So the one that's actually licensed is not yet available. | ||
And when it does become available, it will no longer have the liability shield. | ||
In the interim, the one that does have the liability shield is the Pfizer product, and that's what's currently available, and it's still under emergency use authorization. | ||
So that's no change. | ||
The press has just not done their work and figured out what's actually going on here. | ||
Fine, but that's why we have geniuses like you. | ||
I just want to make sure something's clear to the audience. | ||
And look, we're trying to be fair to the FDA in this whole process, this CCP virus. | ||
The Emergency Use Authorization as it currently stands by the FDA for Pfizer does not allow its use for children under 16. | ||
Is that correct? | ||
Correct. | ||
Okay. | ||
The overall blanket approval for the other one, for BioNTech or whatever it's called, the one that's not fully done yet, does that include, is the way you read it, that does not include a full FDA authorization until at least 2023 or 2024 when these other studies are completed, correct? | ||
That's the way I read it. | ||
That seems to be the way it's written. | ||
And by the way, in terms of the timelines, I just wanted to go back to that. | ||
There's a statement that the BLA acknowledges, so that's the license for the BioNTech product. | ||
Here's the language. | ||
The BLA acknowledges long-term myocardial issues with a five-year follow-up, which is consistent with the lower range of long-term follow-up for gene therapy products. | ||
It appears that banging on them that they haven't applied the gene therapy checklist may have succeeded, and they appear to now, without acknowledging it, starting to apply the requirements that are applied for gene therapy products. | ||
But in terms of the cardiac issues, they acknowledge that the myocardial issues will require a five-year follow-up. | ||
But once this is in place, the FDA would then have to come back and issue an emergency use authorization for the second one for children, correct? | ||
That's clearly not done right now, is that correct? | ||
I would imagine that what they will do is an emergency use authorization for the pediatric population for Pfizer. | ||
So that will keep Pfizer indemnified, because that's something that Pfizer has been seeking in all of their worldwide contracts with other governments, is full indemnification. | ||
They will not sell you vaccine unless you waive liability, if you're a government, head of state, or whatever. | ||
So that's the Pfizer position, is we don't want to own the liability here. | ||
And, you know, that raises the question, what is it they're so scared about? | ||
If these are fully safe vaccines, why does Pfizer believe that it has to have liability protection? | ||
Okay, this coming Saturday, we're going to have Dr. Peter Navarro. | ||
Dr. Peter Navarro has been on a leave. | ||
I know you haven't seen him on The War Room lately. | ||
He's going to start coming back on the show here in the next couple of days. | ||
He'll be explaining a big announcement of Dr. Peter Navarro, and you'll see that in the next couple of days this Saturday. | ||
We're going to do a special. | ||
Dr. Malone, Peter Navarro, and others. | ||
We're going to really pursue this idea of putting together this independent advisory committee like the FDA has, but did not, in their own letter, they did not take it to the advisory committee because they said, well, we didn't see any problems. | ||
We thought all the data said it was fine to us. | ||
We'll have the Independent Advisory Committee, and we'll then set up, through our website and others, that people can make public comment, just like the process should be run. | ||
What we want to do is make sure the process is run like the process should be run. | ||
Dr. Malone, we've got about a minute and a half. | ||
Any other closing comments, observations, people to think of? | ||
We look forward to having you back next couple days. | ||
You've become a real, you know, a real anchor to WynWard here, to our audience. | ||
And any following observations on what people should do? | ||
Nice metaphor. | ||
I still would love to be able to bend the dialogue towards what Peter and I rolled out in the Washington Times a couple weeks ago, and there was two publications out from Cell Press, one from an extremely high-profile immunologist, Michael Diamond, and vaccinologist at Washington University in St. | ||
Louis, that basically validate the key points that Peter and I were making That by forcing everybody to take vaccine, we're setting up a situation in which we will be selecting for a uniform immune response across the entire human population, which is akin to the logic of monocrop agriculture. | ||
Wherein, if you have something that can exploit that now, if the virus evolves to escape that highly-tuned immune response, it's just going to rip through all of us. | ||
And we're no longer going to have the protection for the elderly and the high-risk that the vaccines do afford. | ||
So stay tuned, and I look forward to Saturday's session. | ||
Oh, finally, all this document and all these analyses are available on the Twitter site at rwmalonemd, and they're also available on our website at rwmalonemd.com. | ||
Okay, sir. | ||
Thank you. | ||
We're going to put it in the live chat across all the platforms. | ||
We're going to push this out hard. | ||
We want everybody to be a force multiplier today. | ||
Let's get the word out because we're data-based, evidence-based, science-based. | ||
Dr. Malone, thank you very much. | ||
Appreciate it. | ||
Short commercial break. | ||
We're going to go back into the war zone. |