March 17, 2023 - Bannon's War Room
48:44
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| Peace. | ||
| I mean, every day you're out there. | ||
| What they're doing is blowing people off. | ||
| If you continue to look the other way and shut up, then the oppressors, the authoritarians get total control and total power. | ||
| Because this is just like in Arizona. | ||
| This is just like in Georgia. It's another element that backs them into a quarter and shows their lies and misrepresentations. | ||
| This is why this audience is going to have to get engaged. | ||
| As we've told you, this is the fight. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All this nonsense, all this spin, they can't handle the truth. | |
| War Room, Battleground. | ||
| Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | ||
| A year, a year and a half ago, we're much better. | ||
| Remember, we were having about 800,000 to 900,000 infections a day and about 3,000 to 4,000 deaths per day. | ||
| We're much further down than that right now. | ||
| We're doing, comparatively speaking, But we can do better than we're doing. | ||
| We've got to get that death rate, which is around 400 or so, sometimes as high as 500, sometimes down to 300 per day. | ||
| We've really got to do better than that. | ||
| I mean, if you look at the relative percentage of people who are updated on their boosters, we have... | ||
| Less than 20 % of the eligible people have received that updated BA45 boost. | ||
| So we've got to do better than that, even though we're doing much better than we were. | ||
| It seems to me that the steady stream of disinformation keeps moving out there. | ||
| A lot of people picked up on a Cochran summary of mask studies and ran with that a couple of weeks ago and said, see, this proves, this proves masks. | ||
| Don't work. The Cochran Editor-in-Chief had to come out and say, no, no, no, you're misreading our data. | ||
| That's not what we're saying at all. | ||
| And yet, that disinformation gets out of the door and people just run with it. | ||
| Looking back... | ||
| We've learned a lot of things over the past three years. | ||
| Tell me, what are some of the major takeaways that you've learned over the last three years? | ||
| Perhaps some things before we knew exactly how COVID was going to develop. | ||
| What have you learned three years in about COVID? Well, there's a long, long list, Joe, of what we've learned, particularly if you look at the evolution of information from the very first weeks when it was felt that this was not a particularly easy virus to transmit from person to person. | ||
| Feeling that it was, you know, maybe jumped from an animal to a human and one human would infect another, but very inefficiently. | ||
| Then we soon found out that it is extremely efficient in its transmissibility. | ||
| Then we found out that unlike influenza, which is mostly droplet transmission, this is aerosol transmission, which really changed how we looked upon the need to wear a mask. | ||
| When you have aerosol transmission. | ||
| And then the other thing that we learned as the weeks went by is that this virus is transmitted predominantly 50 to 60 percent of the transmissions are from someone who has no symptoms at all, which completely smashes the paradigm of respiratory transmissibility that we're used to with other respiratory-borne diseases. | ||
| And then the big surprise of all When we expected that it would go up and then go back down and then sort of disappear and go into the background, we wound up having variant after variant and surge after surge right up to what we're having right now, which are sub-lineages of the Omicron surge, which started well over a year ago. | ||
| So this has been really a moving target. | ||
| And that's the reason why we've had... | ||
| Memphis, can you stop this? | ||
| And I want to play it back up. | ||
| I can't take any more. I can't take anymore. | ||
| And here's why. I got Dr. | ||
| Malone and Natalie. | ||
| And Natalie, let me start with you because you follow this as we did as civilians and I'll ask the pro, Dr. | ||
| Malone. And Natalie, you're an expert on information warfare and how they... | ||
| He's talking as if... | ||
| This is the first time he ever knew about this or never ever came to him. | ||
| I mean, these revelations that come to him, which have been in the late winter, early spring of 2020, he keeps talking about is that these were new events or new things. | ||
| He knew for a fact what was going on in the Wuhan lab, the emails and all the trying to hide it. | ||
| You know, extremely efficient. | ||
| Yeah, it's extremely efficient because they're building a bioweapon. | ||
| Asymptomatic. That was a surprise to him. | ||
| Aerosol. Walk me through. | ||
| Is this... | ||
| Maybe it's just me, having been here from the beginning as a civilian, but doing this show, for him to sit there and take it out of the historic timeline of when this stuff actually happened, to me, is demonic. | ||
| But maybe I'm overstating the case. | ||
| Natalie Winters. Not at all. | ||
| I think people sort of miss the forest with the trees when it comes to Anthony Fauci's involvement in obscuring the true origins of COVID because it wasn't even like he was dealing even handedly, maybe slightly favoring the natural origins theory, | ||
| though he likes to present this facade that You know, oh, I actually was very open to both ideas, and he entertains a discussion about the origins of the virus, talks about the Wuhan Institute of Virology. | ||
| Nothing could be further from the truth. | ||
| Again, watching that clip, it's like being gaslit in the sense that as someone who has followed this story sort of from its inception from the beginning, nothing that he says comports with reality. | ||
| It's such a barrage of disinformation. | ||
| And of course, Morning Joe, they're calling people like us the ones who are spreading disinformation. | ||
| It's a perfect example of projection. | ||
| But it really, really was a calculated campaign. | ||
| And it wasn't just Anthony Fauci. | ||
| I mean, it really was information laundering through various proxies, whether it was Fauci-affiliated people at the Lancet Medical Journal. | ||
| But really, I think it goes back to your sort of central point and what we've talked about a lot on the show, which is this idea of involvement in bioweapon research. | ||
| Now, allegedly, purportedly, it was supposed to be bioweapon defense research. | ||
| But I don't quite understand the logic where you would partner with the Chinese Communist Party, the foremost threat to America, to come up with a strategy to biodefense research with the most likely entity that would wage biological warfare on the United States. | ||
| It doesn't quite make sense. | ||
| And what Morning Joe, remember, they didn't pick this story up until later. | ||
| It was around this time or slightly before that Morning Joe started covering it, because I guess today or this timeframe is the anniversary of when President Trump called for the national emergency around mid-March, I think it was March 11th. | ||
| We have been covering it, I mean, nonstop. | ||
| We actually renamed the show and focused for an hour a day at first, then two hours after a couple of days and really put impeachment on the back burner because that, as we projected, would turn out to be a nothing burger. | ||
| And we met all these fascinating people. | ||
| We had all the great consultants we had to start the show. | ||
| Then we met the guys like Dr. | ||
| Malone. Dr. Malone, I got to go to you. | ||
| You have made this point. | ||
| I think Natalie's made it too. | ||
| And you use actual information warfare intelligence operative language when you call it limited hangout. | ||
| But I didn't get a chance to see this live and I didn't get a chance to see it until we just came on air. | ||
| I mean, it is so obvious he's gaslighting us at a level of it's so almost unserious for anybody who's there at the time and remembers how this thing came up. | ||
| And he's talking to people like these were all just basic new reveals to him from the time. | ||
| Dr. Malone, and give us technically also where he's just bald-faced lying. | ||
| Well, I do think we have to concede that the man is an expert liar. | ||
| He is a practiced, skilled disinformation specialist. | ||
| And he's had decades of experience in manipulating media in this way and in also manipulating the entire scientific enterprise. | ||
| One of the things I want to start off with was Joe Scarborough's talk about bald-faced lie assertions that the editor-in-chief of the Cochrane Review and had indicated, as he had, that this paper has been misinterpreted. | ||
| The primary author of that paper has now gone on record objecting to that and said that the editor-in-chief of the Cochran Review was placed under political pressure, and that is what gave rise to this statement. | ||
| The statement has no basis in fact or merit. | ||
| It's a political statement, and it absolutely does not Demonstrate what Mr. | ||
| Scarborough is asserting. | ||
| And just to say it once again, I feel like a broken record. | ||
| There are three routes of infection for this virus. | ||
| It's nasal, oral, in other words, your nose, your mouth, and your eyes. | ||
| And these masks don't cover eyes. | ||
| There is no way that these masks are effective for the very reason that Tony Fauci talked about. | ||
| This is airborne transmission, and it infects the eyes. | ||
| Okay, so It's this whole back and forth about masking. | ||
| We have the person who originally convinced the CDC to apply this mask mandate has published a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in which she flat out says that one of the main reasons to do this is political. | ||
| It's to get people to demonstrate their commitment to virus control. | ||
| And it has nothing to do with actual virus control. | ||
| It has to do with, I'm sorry, there's no other word for it, virtue signaling, that one is committed to this cause. | ||
| So that's what the masks are about. | ||
| And I'm sorry, Mr. | ||
| Scarborough, but you're wrong. | ||
| In terms of Tony Fauci, we had this, I think Natalie covered it very well. | ||
| And keep in mind that Tony and The director of NIH and Jeremy Farrar of the Wellcome Trust all bought burner phones to discuss their strategy on the political problem that they had with this storyline that this was a laboratory leak, knowing that they had played a role in funding those laboratories to do that very research. | ||
| This is as close to admission of guilt as I can imagine. | ||
| They knew that what they were doing was wrong, and they conspired to hide it by buying burner phones. | ||
| This is in Farrar's memoirs about this period, so it's indisputable. | ||
| Mr. Fauci has misdirected, lied, engaged in these various strategies to obscure truth, and he's continuing to do so. | ||
| For instance, here in the earlier segment that you showed this morning, We had MSNBC citing the Department of Energy statements that they have low certainty. | ||
| You'll recall that previously many of these media outlets were deriding the Department of Energy for even having an opinion here, not recognizing how important DOE is in the entire biowarfare biodefense enterprise. | ||
| But they completely fail to note that the FBI disagrees and they have moderate confidence that in fact this is a lab leak. | ||
| And we had actually Mr. | ||
| Tedros, Tedros Tobias, together with the head of the Lancet Commission, Jeffrey Sachs, both saying overtly that this was a lab leak, that this was a laboratory-created virus. | ||
| And they've been speculating that actually the United States government had a more active involvement in creation of it back here in North Carolina. | ||
| I mean, Natalie's covered it well. | ||
| This is just obscuring... | ||
| And building a cloud of disinformation around known facts so that people are confused about what the truth is. | ||
| Right. Help me. We're not going to lay him off the hook. | ||
| Just help me out here. And we're going to finish this clip we got. | ||
| I want to finish the clip that we just had and then we'll go to the next slide. | ||
| Just finish it and then roll to the next one. | ||
| Given they got the burner phones, given they had done the funding, given that they were doing this here because they were restricted for what they do in the United States, given what they knew about the program overall, is it disingenuous for him to say, you know, we learned so much about this as we went on, that the efficiency of transmittability, asymptomatic, all those things he just goes through, the litany, like he's Louis Pasteur and he's finding this out as the process. | ||
| He had to have known at least. | ||
| I mean, that's what he's playing himself up to. | ||
| He had to have known given their already involvement. | ||
| In the conversation with WHO, he had to know that this was all in the set of things that could happen, right? | ||
| He's obviously a very smart guy. | ||
| The thing he makes up that he just found these out as they went on and to protect the American people, that is also what an intelligence operative would do. | ||
| That's total misdirection and misinformation. | ||
| Am I wrong in that because I just don't understand the science going off? | ||
| Absolutely not. And you're being coy. | ||
| You know it's true, and you know that the term you applied, disingenuous, is precisely the correct terminology. | ||
| Okay. By the way, he is trained as a Jesuit. | ||
| I know that I was trained by the Benedictines. | ||
| He's changed, although I did. | ||
| And I did end up in graduate school in one of the Jesuit schools, but he's with the big lie where they're doing it for the good of humanity, and they're lying to you with a straight face. | ||
| We're going to finish the last clip and play the next set of clips, and I'll bring Natalie in. | ||
| By the way, before we move on, Natalie, anything to sum up this part of it, the introduction to the Joe Scarborough show? | ||
| I mean, I think you summed up, but I think it's worth noting just quickly, you know, you played that clip. | ||
| I feel like that's almost a segment from like a year ago in the sense that Anthony Fauci just sort of comes on the media, right? | ||
| And says the same thing, but just packages it up slightly differently to get out of whatever the current charge against him is. | ||
| He really, really, really is a skilled liar. | ||
| And I think the, like, as Dr. | ||
| Malone said, the CIA-trained component aspect Obviously I'm not saying that it is, but there really is a calculated angle to this that I think people understand. | ||
| Okay, this is just for the audience. | ||
| What she's saying is very powerful. | ||
| Remember, the way they do this is wash, rinse, repeat. | ||
| She's absolutely correct. And what shocked me today is that they made such a big deal about this this morning, Joe, because they're known for real quick interviews to get the day rolling and to have a bunch of different voices on there and all the articles in The Atlantic and Politico and everybody that they curry favor with. | ||
| This was a massive... | ||
| So they're sending a signal right there in that it's important and they need to get. | ||
| But the narrative, I mean, we could get the team in and go back and cut. | ||
| This is, you know, his lies from a year ago. | ||
| But they understand they've got to get this out there. | ||
| They got to get this front of mind because they got these committees. | ||
| They got MTG at this thing. | ||
| They got Natalie Winters. They got Malone. | ||
| All the podcasts are coming on and the books have come out and people aren't buying it anymore. | ||
| That's why it's 4 % pickup in the vaccine. | ||
| The American people have come. | ||
| They're coming to a judgment here. | ||
| When the American people's common sense flips on you and make the decision, you know, Fauci's done, and he knows that. | ||
| That's why we're in the stage here. | ||
| This is pure 1,000 % information warfare. | ||
| And so when Dr. Malone calls us a limited hangout, I laugh all the time because that's exactly what it is. | ||
| Okay, let's go ahead and play, finish the last one, and play the next clip for Natalie Winters and Dr. | ||
| Malone....change some of the things that we said and recommended. | ||
| People saying that's flip-flopping, but it isn't. | ||
| It's learning as you go along and making your recommendations according to the new data as it evolves. | ||
| A few things about the vaccines, too. | ||
| There's a very resilient virus. | ||
| It's a very durable virus, and it morphs very quickly. | ||
| So, develop a vaccine, and it still helps in a positive way, but it doesn't wipe out COVID. Can you explain what we've learned about vaccines over the last two years? | ||
| Well, there's one very, very obvious fact that is borne up by very solid data. | ||
| Joe, we know that if you compare unvaccinated people with vaccinated people with regard to hospitalizations and death, there is an overwhelming and dramatic difference of a greater likelihood of hospitalization and death among the unvaccinated. | ||
| And as the months went by, If you compare vaccinated but not up to date with boosters, with people who are totally up to date on boosters, there's still a difference in the sense of vaccinated and updated boosted people do much better with regard to severity of disease. | ||
| That's an open and shut case. | ||
| There's no doubt about doubt that vaccines work. | ||
| But there's another thing that is a bit sobering that we learned. | ||
| That this virus is so highly transmissible that when you're vaccinated, you may not necessarily get protected against infection, but clearly you get protected against severe disease. | ||
| And that's caused a lot of confusion among people because when we went from the original wild-type or ancestral strain of the virus, That was spreading in January and February of 2020. | ||
| As we evolved into different variants, including Omicron, it became much more transmissible. | ||
| Not necessarily more serious, but more transmissible. | ||
| So people who were vaccinated were getting infected. | ||
| But the critical issue that should not be lost is that the vaccination clearly prevented them, for the most part, from getting severity of disease. | ||
| Those are the kind of things, Joe, that you mentioned, that as the months and the years went by, we learned more and more. | ||
| And when you learn more and more, you've got to keep up with that information. | ||
| First, let me get Malone in here. | ||
| Dr. Malone, I first want to go to the, before the vaccine part, the finish of the first clip, the flip-flopping. | ||
| I mean, you're a doctor. | ||
| This was not the normal process of getting more information. | ||
| There were massive flip-flops with information now changing, just to go with political narrative. | ||
| Am I incorrect in that assertion, sir? | ||
| Obviously not. Once again, you're being coy. | ||
| Steve, forgive me. | ||
| I know you like to play the humble servant. | ||
| But we had well-established policy about lockdowns, travel restrictions, masking, social distancing that existed before this, and they were flipped on their heads. | ||
| And no one can forget the flip-flops on the masking and Tony Fauci. | ||
| But beyond that, he's just given us a flat, bald-faced lie. | ||
| Okay? The data are unequivocal. | ||
| The Cleveland Clinic study and data from all over the world, the people that are most highly inoculated, and it's proportional. | ||
| The more inoculations you receive, people that are most highly inoculated are the ones that are being hospitalized and dying. | ||
| In nation after nation after nation now, the data are clear. | ||
| The ones that are hospitalized and dying are a preponderance of vaccinated. | ||
| His citing the unvaccinated is also disingenuous. | ||
| There is no one left that basically has not either been vaccinated or infected, and most of those that are vaccinated have been infected. | ||
| So the only relevant thing is, what is the comparison between the vaccinated, uninfected, and those that have had natural immunity develop because of infection? | ||
| And what's the effect if you've been vaccinated and then developed natural immunity from infection? | ||
| And there are multiple studies out that document that this has created a huge problem of immune imprinting, which Tony completely disregards. | ||
| They're in major journals, and he acts as if those data don't exist. | ||
| But what he just said about the highly inoculated being protected, about the Jabs, the booster jabs protecting from the severe disease, that is a documentable lie. | ||
| It is not consistent with the data, and the contrary is true. | ||
| Furthermore, this whole issue about the boosters that he's talking about and these mass vaccinations, what he also neglects is something that Peter and Navarro and I discussed so long ago on your program, Which is this mass vaccination into an outbreak will drive selection of vaccine-resistant mutants. | ||
| And that's exactly what's happened. | ||
| Again, he completely obscures this by throwing a cloud of ambiguity around it. | ||
| But it's the policies that have driven the development of these vaccine-resistant mutants. | ||
| And they're not only vaccine-resistant, they're also monoclonal antibody-resistant. | ||
| Natalie, Doctor, I'm going to come back to you about herd immunity in a second, particularly in the early days and the concept and how that was thrown aside. | ||
| Natalie, your observations of what you just saw? | ||
| Well, Fauci has this amazing knack, I think, to both simultaneously say, you know, trust the science, follow the experts. | ||
| But then, really, his definition of what science is is basically what he agrees with, right? | ||
| And remember, he basically said, I am the science in that infamous interview. | ||
| I forget who it was with. | ||
| I believe it was maybe with Chuck Todd, where he was basically saying, if you dare to question science, you're questioning me. | ||
| And I think that whether it's when it comes to the vaccines or the origins of COVID, you see that personal bias On display, what I mean by that, there are a bunch of studies and papers that support the theory that COVID-19 escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. | ||
| To say that there isn't is totally disingenuous. | ||
| But that's still basically kind of the strapline of the mainstream media, or at least it was coming from Anthony Fauci until he totally got called out. | ||
| They do the same thing with the vaccines and the mask mandates. | ||
| There's a whole plethora of studies that indicate very, very, very contrary to what Anthony Fauci is saying in terms of the efficacy and, frankly, the safety of the vaccines, but they just act as if it doesn't even exist. | ||
| And I think that is the fundamental issue in where you really start to question what's going on, because it's not that Anthony Fauci, like I said in the beginning, is approaching this from an even-handed, you know, trust the scientific process, let's question, let's get to the The answer through actual debate and discourse, it's no, we have a theory of the case, we have a thesis, and now we're gonna cherry pick the evidence to get there. | ||
| And that sort of seems like the reverse process that people who are actually caring about public health would be about. | ||
| I think that's the calculus that you would have if you cared more about really broadening and expanding the purview of your power. | ||
| And I think that theory of the case, what I just outlined, is exactly what we saw happen. | ||
| So when you see him say statements like that, you know, don't just focus on the fact that it's the vaccines or you're talking about the origins of COVID. You're talking about the entire response, if not the birth of COVID-19, And what their true motivations were. | ||
| We've only got about a minute in this segment, Dr. | ||
| Malone, so I'm going to start here with you and then hold over and come back to you. | ||
| Natalie just laid out exactly what the predicate for my herd immunity. | ||
| Correct me if I'm wrong, because we had Hatfield on her as our consultant for the first week before he went to the White House when we started the show back in January 2020. | ||
| Herd immunity was just kind of thrown aside, and then you never heard it mentioned again by vouching these guys, and there had to be some reason for that. | ||
| Didn't the science at the time lead us to say that herd immunity would actually take place, and you should do targeted interventions where you had high comorbidities, whether people were obese, whether they were elderly? | ||
| Isn't that what the science and the public health, from the very beginning, Actually, I tell you what, what we're going to do is go to break, and we'll have Dr. | ||
| Malone think about this, because at the beginning of this, it never, because we had had to, and all these experts on the first week, and they talked about the science and public health and herd immunity and targeted interventions for therapeutics. | ||
| A vaccine, what is even on the table? | ||
| Vaccines, we're talking about, it would take 10 or 20 years. | ||
| It wasn't even a concept at that time. | ||
| We're going to take a short commercial break. | ||
| We got, and boy, I love this. | ||
| We're breaking down, it's like breaking down game film. | ||
| If you play football, it's just fantastic. | ||
| I got Natalie Winters, our executive editor, the co-host, and this top investigator. | ||
| Of course, she's been on this for a couple of years. | ||
| Of course, Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the underlying technology for the mRNA vaccine. | ||
| We're going to take a short break. | ||
| We'll be back in the worm in just a moment. | ||
| We're going to take a short break. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We'll be back in the worm in just a moment. | |
| We're going to take a short break. | ||
| We'll be back in the worm in just a moment. | ||
| We're going to take a short break. | ||
| We'll be back in just a moment. | ||
| Okay, welcome back. We're breaking down game film from this morning's Morning Joe and Tony Fauci. | ||
| We need to do it because this is going to be a, I'm telling you, a titanic battle of how this thing is sorted out. | ||
| The past, how we got here, who's responsible, who's accountable, and then going forward. | ||
| So, Dr. | ||
| Malone, help me out here. | ||
| The whole first thing, we had guys around here, they were talking about therapeutics, they were talking about herd immunity. | ||
| Vaccines weren't even conceived as a possibility given the clinical trials and everything. | ||
| I'm talking about the first hundred days of this, all the way up to April and May. | ||
| Is Natalie right? | ||
| He just doesn't even have a process of science. | ||
| It's scientism for him. | ||
| It's Tony Fauci's scientism instead of the scientific process, sir. | ||
| Well, that's always been the case. | ||
| We discuss this in length in the book, The Lies My Government Told Me. | ||
| What you were describing just before the break was the position of the Great Barrington Declaration. | ||
| And you'll recall that those three very senior full professor epidemiologists from three of the top universities in the world had all come to exactly the same conclusion that you were just laying out. | ||
| This is also the conclusion of Peter Navarro and I, for which we were attacked. | ||
| And what many of the What the community said was exactly what you just said, and this was my own threat assessment, was to focus on repurposing drugs. | ||
| We now have documentation from the TGA, for instance, in Australia and many other sources that the reason why there was suppression of these ideas and drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine is all based on the logic that the nation state should restrict the availability of these products to the general population because to make them available would drive vaccine hesitancy. | ||
| It was all predicated on the thesis that we would have a safe and effective vaccine, and they began field testing the propaganda strategies that they would deploy about protecting grandmother, etc. | ||
| in a Yale University study, Prospective Randomized clinical trial with 10 arms designed to determine the best way to get people to accept these products and to compel or entice others to accept them. | ||
| And they did this before they ever had a product. | ||
| All the way through, this is based on a bias, a cognitive bias on the part of Tony Fauci, that vaccines are the only way to handle this type of infectious disease outbreak. | ||
| And that has clearly been demonstrated to be false. | ||
| What we've had is basically three years of suffering as an unnecessary loss of life as a consequence of Tony Fauci's cognitive bias towards the vaccine industry and vaccine. | ||
| Before I go to the next thing, why does he have a cognitive bias? | ||
| Because, correct me if you're wrong, the thing he's most known for is AIDS. They've never come up with a vaccine for that. | ||
| Isn't the cocktail of drugs still therapeutics? | ||
| In the biggest effort, maybe I don't know the science well enough, It's not like Tony Fauci's been at the cutting edge of coming up with vaccines that have solved a lot of things, right? | ||
| Why would he have a cognitive affiliation? | ||
| So you're asking me to get inside his head, and I'm not a psychologist or a psychiatrist. | ||
| I will observe that he has repeatedly promised the American people and Congress and received billions of dollars in exchange to develop vaccines, none of which have been forthcoming. | ||
| So it's not only the AIDS vaccine that's been a failure. | ||
| He's now at the end of his career, and there are virtually no successful vaccines that he's created, despite the promises, despite the billions of dollars, despite all of his spin and hype. | ||
| And he has this Vaccine Research Institute. | ||
| It has been at the forefront of his efforts since the early days in AIDS. And I suspect that there's another angle to this. | ||
| I referred to this in my prior broadcast with Natalie. | ||
| There is an ancient feud between Bob Gallo and Tony Fauci. | ||
| And Bob Gallo was the one that was driving the vaccine initiative. | ||
| And Tony Fauci came in and scooped it up and kicked Bob out. | ||
| You'll recall when Heckler went on the tube and said we were going to have a vaccine in two years, it wasn't Tony Fauci standing beside her. | ||
| It was Bob Gallo. | ||
| Tony has made all kinds of promises about vaccines all through his career and has been a complete faceplant on that topic. | ||
| He's a complete failure, and this was his last chance to grab the brass ring. | ||
| And he seemed to have just been obsessed with trying to get a coronavaccine developed and licensed and pushed into the public based on this new technology that he basically had grabbed onto and thrown other prior technologies out the window. | ||
| And the story goes, for instance, that the reason in part why Rick Wright was kicked out was because he unilaterally issued the contract for the adenovirus vaccine with J&J, and he didn't get Tony's approval. | ||
| Tony didn't want the adenovirus tech advanced. | ||
| He wanted the Moderna tech advanced. | ||
| And as I sent a clip over to Cameron earlier, We have from Tony's diary that he met with Boncel from Moderna. | ||
| I think it's January 27th of 2020. | ||
| Tony was advancing the development of this vaccine before there was any official recognition that we even had an issue here. | ||
| I want to make sure, because I follow this pretty closely, as you know, that's the first time. | ||
| So, Tony, Rick Bright, by the way, is the head of FDA. Of BARDA. He was the head of BARDA. Barter, I'm sorry, Barter. | ||
| Bright was a key member here. | ||
| I didn't realize this. | ||
| Tony was always, Fauci was always in a vaccine, always wanted to push the mRNA or the Moderna alternative, correct? | ||
| Yeah, all the way through this, he seems to be obsessed with advancing this tech as the way to finally validate the huge investment that had been made in his team For the Vaccine Research Center, you may or may not recall those various staged video clips where he showed his vaccine team. | ||
| This is when he was speaking about the role of African-American woman in developing the vaccine. | ||
| There was a whole bunch of white coat PR about the Vaccine Research Center that was circulated early on. | ||
| I remember. So the cognitive bias is because he's never successful, has really never successfully brought a vaccine to fruition. | ||
| That's my theory of the case. | ||
| He's made promises to Congress. | ||
| It's fascinating. You can go back in C-SPAN and find the old Tony Fauci testimonies for West Nile virus and also for the Zika virus. | ||
| They're almost superimposable. | ||
| He makes the same argument. | ||
| He makes the same pitch. | ||
| He asked for the same amount of money. | ||
| He makes the same promises. | ||
| And then he's never held accountable. | ||
| But this is a cycle that he does every two to three years. | ||
| I've talked about this. | ||
| It's basically the same business model that the biotech pump and dump experts use. | ||
| He hypes up a threat, goes to Congress, promises to ease their pain if they only send him, you know, You know, a billion or 10 billion or whatever the number is. | ||
| They send him the money. He goes away. | ||
| It gets filtered out into his network. | ||
| Nothing ever comes of it. | ||
| He never gets held accountable. | ||
| And it's wash, rinse and repeat. | ||
| Let's go ahead and pretty shocking. | ||
| Let's go ahead and play. We have another clip from Morning Joe. | ||
| Let's play the clips and then we'll bring in Natalie. | ||
| I just want to underline really quickly what Dr. | ||
| Fauci said because it is so important because there's so much disinformation going on out there, especially about the vaccines. | ||
| The thing is, the vaccines help curb the severity for the overwhelming majority of people that get the vaccines. | ||
| Of course, some elderly people obviously will still have challenges. | ||
| Others will still have challenges. | ||
| But the data is just so clear. | ||
| And I know there are people out there that spread this information daily. | ||
| But because it's not black and white, it seems that they move to this more radically. | ||
| But the fact is, it makes, for most Americans, the reaction less severe. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, well, that leads to the question, Joe, and would like the answer from you, Dr. | |
| Fauci, who you're the pride of Holy Cross College, and I don't believe you were in medical school with Ted Cruz or Jim Jordan, but how many booster shots do you think we will be getting? | ||
| There's one available now, but how long in the future will we be getting booster shots? | ||
| You know, we don't know definitively the answer to that, but it is likely that this thing is not going to disappear. | ||
| It's not going to be eradicated and it's not going to be eliminated. | ||
| So it's going to be around, you know, for the foreseeable future. | ||
| So it is likely that we will require an intermittent, likely at the same time as we get a flu vaccine, At least once a year, very similar to what we do to keep updated on our immunity against influenza, it is very likely that the similar situation we'll be experiencing with COVID, namely getting a booster shot once a year, probably at the same time as we get an influenza shot. | ||
| Questions that remain as to the origin of COVID. The U.S. Department of Energy about two weeks ago put out an assessment saying that they have, with low confidence, that there's a possibility that this emerged from a lab. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right now, where do you think COVID came from? | |
| Yeah. Well, first of all, we don't know. | ||
| And I think that's where a lot of the accusations and confusion about who says what. | ||
| We don't know the definitive answer to that. | ||
| Obviously, there are two possibilities that are being entertained. | ||
| And I think we need to keep a completely open mind until we have definitive proof. | ||
| However, having said that, if you look at the information, because something might be possible one or the other, That doesn't mean one is more probable than the other. | ||
| And if you look historically, as well as information that has recently been published by a considerably large group of highly respected international evolutionary virologists, although it isn't definitive, they published in the peer-reviewed literature, | ||
| when you look at epidemiological Virological and Geospatial Information from Wuhan, they feel and have published this that it is more likely, not definitive, but more likely that it's a natural occurrence from an animal reservoir to a human. | ||
| Having said that, Since it isn't definitive, all of us must keep a completely open mind that it could be one or the other. | ||
| So rather than fighting about it, we should try and absolutely find out which it is. | ||
| But in the meantime, do whatever you can to prevent either option from happening again. | ||
| If it's a lab leak, make the labs much more safe, get good regulations about what you can do so that in the future the possibility of this is diminished. | ||
| If it is a natural evolution from an animal reservoir, take a really good look at the animal-human interface and the fact that animals from the wild are being brought into wet markets which exposes them to the human population. | ||
| We can, right now, even without knowing definitively what the origin is, we can work on both of those possibilities. | ||
| Dr. Fauci, of course, in the past you had said you believed that it was transmission from an animal, a natural origin. | ||
| It sounds like you're still leaning that way, but caveating that we can't say for certain. | ||
| So please characterize that for me. | ||
| Absolutely. Okay. And then lastly, though, on that point, How difficult is it to determine its origin with such lack of cooperation from your colleagues in China? | ||
| It's going to be very difficult to do that. | ||
| We've got to be able to do with surveillance in China. | ||
| We've got to look at the animals there. | ||
| We've got to get serial surveillance. | ||
| And we've got to take a look at what's going on in the laboratory there. | ||
| If we don't have cooperation, we're not going to get the answer. | ||
| Your colleagues in China, he is so monstrous. | ||
| I don't even know if I'm going to toss it to you, Natalie. | ||
| He is truly monstrous. | ||
| That's why he's got to do this under oath, under the penalty of perjury, because he's demonic. | ||
| I'll let you take it. | ||
| Start wherever you want, ma'am. | ||
| Yeah, I love the euphemism of cooperation with the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| That's what we need to get out of this mess and uncover the origins of COVID. But frankly, he admits it right there that he has colleagues in China and sure he's just answering the guy's question. | ||
| But that shows that there is this intimate relationship, the sense that Anthony Fauci through the National Institutes of Health was funding scientific research, not just at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but at a host of Chinese Communist Party controlled labs. | ||
| And it really is funny. I've actually never once seen Anthony Fauci pressed on the rationale for sending even one penny of taxpayer funds to a lab that is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, right? | ||
| They sort of just say, oh, the Wuhan lab, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, they act like it's just some lab that happens to be in China. | ||
| Why don't they ever mention that it's part of the People's Liberation Army, that it was placed under their control in the early days of the outbreak, that A lot of the blood samples that the studies that Anthony Fauci was funding, that they were conducting them and doing the research with, were given to them by the Chinese military. | ||
| I think those are convenient facts that they always leave out that gives Fauci just enough room to sort of play the card of, oh, well, international collaboration is so great for science. | ||
| No, no, no. And he says, yeah, we have to be so earnest. | ||
| We really have to be in the going forward about, you know, they have to be lapsed. | ||
| He knew all this at the time. | ||
| He knew all this at the time. He funded this, understanding there were no controls. | ||
| And it was completely not up to any kind of standards. | ||
| He knew all this. This was all known. | ||
| They have the emails from the State Department personnel, from the consulate and from the embassy. | ||
| in Beijing. This is why Morning Joe is just a joke. | ||
| They're either too dumb to remember it or they...so you got to take a pick. | ||
| They're either idiots, which it's 50, or they're consciously not bringing up just basic facts you'd have to ask the guy. | ||
| When he sits there goes, you know, we really have to make sure that these are...well, you knew this. | ||
| Why did you even allow this research to do this weaponization of biology, the directed evolution of weapons, Hang on a second, Natalie. | ||
| Stay right there. Dr. | ||
| Malone, your observations of—because I can only take so much of Fauci now. | ||
| He's so monstrous. Your observations on what you just heard there from Tony Fauci? | ||
| Well, first off, Steve, you made the point we need to get him under oath. | ||
| We already got him under oath, and he had a convenient lapse of memory over 160 times under sworn testimony before the state attorney generals in the lawsuit against the federal government and Google. | ||
| So we know what Tony Fauci is going to do. | ||
| He's going to pretend that he doesn't remember key facts. | ||
| Now, at a high level, just take a moment. | ||
| Let's go up to 40,000 feet. | ||
| What did he just say? He said, there is no way for you or anyone else to make a firm conclusion about the origin of this virus. | ||
| It is either A or B. He leans towards A, which is the convenient excuse for him. | ||
| He leans towards it being highly convenient for him if that's the case. | ||
| He says there's no way to resolve it unless we get the final data. | ||
| And then he springs the logic trap. | ||
| There is no way that we can get those data and we can resolve it because we cannot get cooperation of the CCP. Therefore, There is no way to resolve whether or not he's guilty of the creation of this monster that's killed millions and millions and resulted in this massive economic disruption, etc., disruption in the world order. | ||
| There's no way to resolve whether he's guilty on this. | ||
| He leans towards the convenient explanation, but because of the CCP, we just can't get to the bottom of this, despite the fact that Tedros and the director of the Lancet Commission both concluded that we have gotten to the end of it and we know where it is. | ||
| And he's conveniently failing to mention the furin cleavage site, all the paper trail about the funding, what he's done. | ||
| This is just more deflection. | ||
| As I say, it's a limited hanging. | ||
| I want to come back. We don't have time, but about how improbable the natural solution is. | ||
| A bat cave, a thousand miles, there's no infections all the way up, but it just ends up... | ||
| It's ridiculous. It's totally contrived. | ||
| It's absurd. And his argument is, well, there's a bunch of scientists that I paid that have come up with a paper that got rammed through a journal that say what I want them to say, and so therefore that's the truth. | ||
| Let's play. We got one more clip. | ||
| I want to get this in because I say we did the whole thing and then I want to have Natalie and you guys sum up and we'll come back and do this again some other time. | ||
| It's just the guy's sick. | ||
| He's monstrous. Let's go and play the last clip. | ||
| Would you characterize their efforts as being transparent in any way whatsoever? | ||
| Joe, there were two things that you just said, and I think you need to separate them. | ||
| One is trying hard to contain it, and the other one is transparent. | ||
| They shut down their country, so they did a draconian move to contain it. | ||
| Transparency is a different problem. | ||
| Right from the get-go, there was a lack of transparency about just what the nature of this virus was and its capability of spreading. | ||
| And even to this day, for reasons that are very complicated, you know, we don't have the information that we need, unfortunately. | ||
| All right. Let me have it. | ||
| By the way, by the way, by the way, a total lie. | ||
| They didn't try to contain it. | ||
| They tried to send it out all over the world. | ||
| I'm not saying they let it out of the lab purposely. | ||
| Look, we've only got a minute, 30 seconds. | ||
| And Natalie, how do people get to you? | ||
| We'll wrap this up some other time. | ||
| How do people get to you and all your writing spam? | ||
| Natalie G. Winters on all platforms. | ||
| Natalie, I don't know how you've listened to this guy. | ||
| You've done the best job of following his testimony. | ||
| He's so monstrous, I can only take so much of it. | ||
| It's my Irish in me. | ||
| I just can only take so much of this guy. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Dr. Malone, how do people, how do we get to your Substack? | |
| rwmalonemd.substack.com and at rwmalonemd on all platforms. | ||
| And also your book, The Lies of the Government. | ||
| By the way, Dr. Malone, you've been such a stand-up guy and going through all this for all these years to get down. | ||
| And by the way, Tony Fauci is going to be brought to the truth. | ||
| We have to do this as a country. | ||
| We have to do it for the good of the world, right? | ||
| And if you want to take down the CCP, this is one of the ways you start. | ||
| We'll see you back here at 10 o'clock. | ||
| I want to thank Natalie and Dr. |
Export Selection