Tony Lyons details the suppression of his book The Real Anthony Fauci, alleging government censorship and corporate greed within the CDC, FDA, and EPA. He critiques $200 billion in foreign aid to Ukraine while domestic benefits are cut, arguing that geopolitical interests override humanitarian needs. Lyons highlights reckless policies like untested puberty blockers and GMOs, championing RFK Jr.'s potential presidency as a necessary shift toward honesty, regulation, and ending the military-industrial complex's dominance over public health. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
Selling a Million Copies00:08:52
How did you get into this world of publishing books?
Yeah, so I was a lawyer for a couple of years first, and then I joined my father's little publishing company, worked with him for about seven years.
Then we sold the company, and then I started Skyhorse.
Is this book right here the book that kind of like really set everything off for you guys?
Is that like your biggest selling book?
Yeah, this is definitely the best selling book that we've ever had.
And hold it up next to your face so people can see.
Yeah, and it's just a great story.
So I'd love to tell this story.
Yeah, but.
Yeah, the real Anthony Fauci.
I don't know where to start.
How many books did you sell of that book?
So we wound up selling more than a million copies of it, which is kind of an incredible thing when you think about the fact that there were just clearly so many people who didn't want anybody to read this book.
And they were just doing everything they could do to make sure that the book was hard to find, that it wasn't carried in bookstores, wasn't in libraries, it didn't get a single review in any major newspaper in the country.
Really?
Nobody would interview Bobby Kennedy to talk about it.
I mean, they were scared to death that this was a book that was claiming that the whole government narrative of everything Dr. Fauci was saying day after day on television was just all corruption and it was all just a process of trying to make more money and have more control over people.
And it was never about public health.
So the idea that a book comes out.
By somebody like Bobby Kennedy, who's a well known guy.
It's got 2,194 citations.
It's got blurbs from doctors and lawyers, from a Nobel Prize winning scientist.
I mean, it should have been a really big event and it should have made senators, congresspeople question it and want to sit down with Dr. Fauci, interview him, interrogate him, and find out whether this is true.
Because this is somebody who's risking their whole career.
You know, somebody who could have had an easy life.
He's a Kennedy, standing up, speaking out, and saying that he doesn't care what happens to him.
There's no benefit to him, which makes him perfectly trustworthy.
And he's coming out and he's risking everything to tell the world that Dr. Fauci is corrupt and that the government is corrupt and that they're trying to hurt people.
And what happened was they just tried to silence him.
Every conceivable way.
So you couldn't even place ads on, you know, in newspapers.
The New York Times turned down an ad.
Usually they're chasing me down to get more ads.
They turned down an ad.
They turned down an ad, yeah.
And, you know, they had no reason for it.
So I asked them why.
And they said that they wouldn't take an ad of any kind.
So they have this division called standards management where they look at ads and they try to figure out if there's something in it that isn't true.
So basically, they're saying they don't care whether a book makes claims that are untrue.
All that they're looking at is whether the ad itself makes claims that are untrue.
Okay.
So they would not tell us anything.
They would not ask, you know, they didn't ask us to change anything.
They just said they wouldn't accept an ad in any way, shape, or form with any language for this book.
So they changed their whole policy that they had described to me clearly beforehand.
And just would not place it.
So they were obviously getting pressure from the government not to be involved in any way.
So, the only thing that all the major newspapers were willing to do at the time was to run hit pieces against Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just to say everything bad they could possibly say, to try to discredit him, to try to claim that his books and his speeches and everything that he was putting out was misinformation.
It was misleading the public and it was harmful.
But they wouldn't say why.
So, they wouldn't debate him.
I mean, Dr. Fauci could have come out.
They're coming after us right now.
You hear them?
Yeah.
The black helicopters.
Yeah, definitely.
They are here, and I don't care, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. doesn't care.
So, you know, here's the thing Dr. Fauci at the time was probably the most powerful person in the world, right?
He was making all the rules that told everybody on the planet what they could do and what they couldn't do.
So he could have gone on any show and trooped in any expert that he wanted.
So, why was he so afraid?
I mean, why wasn't he willing just to meet with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.?
On a network TV show and debate him to the end.
So, if you're really worried that there's not going to be trust in government, the best way to do that isn't through censorship, it's through dialogue, it's through proving that what he's saying isn't true.
So, the way that people actually become more powerful in many cases is by being censored.
Right.
Because people wonder, why are you doing that?
What's the point of it?
I mean, if you really have claims, go through some of those 2,194 citations and tell us which ones of those are wrong.
Make a real argument.
So, we were discussing on the phone a little bit yesterday, like with all the censorship that's going on on the internet with him and like some of his interviews and his videos getting taken off YouTube.
That seems to do more harm to the people that are censoring them, harm if you want to call it that.
But what it does is it just rallies that base, the people that kind of question this stuff and the people that want to look deeper into it.
Because when they like, People like me, when I see something that's censored off of YouTube or censored off the New York Times, it makes me want to look into it more and figure out what's going on and what are they actually saying.
Right.
So it seems like that probably helped a lot with some of the book sales with this.
Well, I think what happened is, you know, we got this whole team of people and I was part of it.
And I just went on to every show that would have me on, every radio show.
I mean, I was doing it all day long, just dawn to dusk, going on to small shows, big shows, anybody who would have me.
And there was a whole group of other people doing that.
And I think that with us all doing that and Bobby Kennedy doing that, it just sort of caught fire.
But it was not because people were hearing about it from the mainstream media.
So the idea there was they were just going to ignore him and hope that he went away.
You know, because he was doing something that's hard to do.
I mean, he was standing up to the most powerful people on the planet.
You know, to the most powerful government on the planet, the most powerful public officials probably in history.
And he was telling the American public that they were all lying.
And that's a pretty gutsy thing to do.
Yeah.
I mean, these are the most.
So if you believe this book, these are the most corrupt public officials in history.
These are the most corrupt companies in history.
You know, these are the biggest, most powerful people.
Biggest, most powerful companies.
And he's standing up and saying they're liars, they're corrupt, they're stealing from the public, they're ruining your health.
You know, that these are really dangerous people.
And it was difficult for them, I think, to know what to do about it.
And I think they probably sat around thinking if we engage in dialogue, we're going to lose here because we don't really have anything.
Right.
Right.
So we're telling the world what to do.
We're forcing them to do it.
We're threatening them if they don't do exactly what we tell them to do, they're going to have consequences.
They're not going to be able to work.
They're not going to be able to go to a restaurant, to a movie.
They're not going to have a life.
Unless they do exactly what they're told.
And he was telling them not to do that.
Have you ever been contacted by intelligence?
Maybe after this show.
I would just imagine that there would be some sort of something going on, that there might be like intimidation or something, them trying to like talk to you or influence you in some way, like, hey, man, cool it.
Yeah, I don't know, you know, how that all works.
The Anti-Vaxxer Label00:15:01
I mean, I know that there's something like 17,000 doctors.
Who stood up and kind of disagreed all around the world?
No, no, no, sort of stood up and disagreed with the mainstream narrative, with Dr. Fauci's narrative.
So, you know, that's a lot of doctors.
I mean, it's not a lot of doctors in the sense that there are, you know, tens of thousands of them, but it's a lot of brave people standing up.
And they did go after a lot of those people.
So they went after their medical licenses, they tried to discredit them in every way that they could.
So it was the same kind of playbook.
But there were a lot of other people in the background just not willing to accept it.
What was it like?
Like, did he try to get this book published by any other publishers before coming to you?
Or what was that process like?
And did this book sort of open your eyes to everything that's been going on?
Yeah.
So I had known Bobby Kennedy for a while.
We had published his book called Thymaerosol Let the Science Beak, which I think was in about 2014.
And when that book came out, it was the same sort of story.
I mean, it was a much smaller story.
Issue at the time, meaning that it didn't involve every person on the planet.
But it was still a big story because thym aerosol, which is a form of mercury, is in certain vaccines now.
In the past, it was in many more.
It's in many, many vaccines that are sold all around the world in poor countries.
And thym aerosol does have really bad side effects.
And so he came out with a book that went through.
Hundreds and hundreds of peer reviewed studies.
And while the CDC was saying that it was perfectly safe, they said that they took it out of certain early childhood vaccines basically because they were just being really cautious.
So they basically said, it's really safe.
We didn't do anything wrong, but we're taking it out anyway.
But then they refused to take it out of all the vaccines that they send to Africa or to South America.
To any poor country, they get the vaccines with full mercury in them.
So, you know, the depravity of something like that when all of these studies, I mean, this was just an incredible research project.
And once again, they didn't respond to any of it.
So they didn't say, you know, some of these peer reviewed stories have been proven to be incorrect.
Nothing, not a word.
So the book came out once again, you know.
He's claiming that tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of children's lives are being ruined by something that's in a vaccine that's being given to them, and all the families are being told that it's perfectly safe.
So it's the same kind of story.
And this book comes out, and there's no research, there are no investigative journalists looking at it, not a single one.
Nobody in the country.
I'm only about halfway through the book so far, but one of the things that kind of blew my mind was he mentioned.
That Google owns two of the vaccine companies?
Yeah, there's a lot of sort of mixing up of the ownership and the boards of all of these different companies, and they're all corrupted.
Even when you look at the CDC and the FDA, you find that people working for the government can own a piece of a patent.
Right.
So they're supposed to be regulating one of the pharmaceutical companies, for example.
And yet, if they Approve something, if they approve a drug or a vaccine, they can actually earn royalties on it.
So the entire public health system is just riddled with these conflicts of interest.
And once again, nobody is investigating it.
Nobody is, you know, there's no sort of watchdog group that's looking at each vaccine or each drug really, really carefully.
There's nobody protecting the American public.
Bobby Kennedy sometimes says, That the only people standing in front of real harm to children in this country are mothers.
You know, the mothers know their own children.
They know what their weaknesses are.
They know that if they had a prior vaccine and had a bad reaction to it, maybe they're more likely to with another one.
But the whole idea of public health now is just to give the exact same thing to everybody.
Yes.
And so the reason there is that it's all about the money because if you.
We're not concerned with just maximizing your return on investment.
You would look at all the subtleties.
You would say, well, do we want to give the same dosage to a kid who weighs 200 pounds that we give to a kid who weighs, you know, 50 pounds?
Right.
But they don't do any of that.
They have no concern for public health.
They just want to help their pharmaceutical partners make as much money as they can at the expense of, you know, Millions and millions of people's health.
So, how did the relationship with you and Bobby begin?
Was it when he wanted to publish that first book?
Yeah, so I had listened to him giving speeches at various places, something like, I don't know, maybe 12, 14 years ago.
And he had given some speeches in New York City, where I lived, or where I still live.
And in those speeches, he had just been really convincing that there was this.
Growing corruption in public health.
And so I was really happy to publish that book.
And then I stayed in touch with him.
And when this book was ready, you know, I was all in to hear the whole story, to learn about it.
I was part of the entire process.
Oh, really?
Of writing it?
No, no, no, not of writing it, but I read it several times.
And I was in close touch with all of his team.
And his team.
Was just this incredible team of fact checkers.
And they were so meticulous.
And I could see that Bobby was working on this book 16 hours a day, seven days a week for something like 10 months.
I mean, he was just at it and he was, you know, so incredibly invested in it for one reason only.
Not that he was going to make a penny.
He doesn't even get royalties on the book.
So there was nothing in it for him.
He doesn't make any money off of it?
Not a penny.
Wow.
It all goes to Children's Health Defense, which is this nonprofit here.
Okay.
So his only concern was to protect people's health.
You know, primarily children.
And he was so dedicated to that.
And that's why, you know, that's why I think he would make such a great president, because I don't think we've had a president in recent history where the person is just really dedicated to make the world better, to solve problems, you know, not just public health problems, but any problem.
And so, you know, part of the reason that we published this other book, which is The Real RFK Jr. Is, I mean, it's the same kind of title.
Yeah, same kind of title.
But the idea was that many people have an idea of who they think Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is.
And they have that idea because of an incredible sort of a psyop of control over what the media does and also over what people think.
So when you have.
Just incredible censorship on the one hand.
Then you have incredible propaganda, and the whole media is sort of helping with that propaganda, almost like they're reading, you know, from the same press release that's given to them from Dr. Fauci or somebody working with Dr. Fauci.
So, how are you ever going to know who a candidate is if that candidate is censored so incredibly?
I mean, even when he went on to ABC News, they Taped him for, I don't know, something like an hour.
Then they cut it down.
Then they weren't even happy with cutting it down.
So they cut out some of the things that they didn't like and tailored it to a presentation that they were happy with.
But even that, they decided to kind of bookend it with disclaimers saying that it was misinformation or that Bobby Kennedy shouldn't be trusted.
And then they added in that many of the claims.
Had been debunked by serious scientists.
So that is so incredibly improper in a democracy to do that.
I mean, this is a candidate, a serious candidate.
He's polling at 20 to 30 percent of the Democratic Party.
At the very least, they should bring in people who disagree with him then and give him the opportunity to respond.
But to let him speak and then dissect it.
Put the disclaimers in there, call him names, call it misinformation, and not give him a chance to respond to any of those counterclaims.
Yeah.
I saw something recently where someone combined all of the recent articles that have been published about him in big publications.
And every single one of them was like 10 headlines that all started the headline with anti vaxxer Robert Kennedy Jr.
Right.
And it's bonkers, man.
They use that to just like discredit him as an anti vaxxer.
What, and my apologies if I haven't done the research, but what does he say can be done if he was to become president as far as kind of reforming public health in the country and fixing some of the issues that he talks about in the book?
Yeah, so I think one of the first things he would do, you know, what he says time after time is that the people running the agencies of the U.S. government, the FDA, the CDC, the EPA, Many of those people, many of the top people are corrupt, but most of the people working there are honest, sincere, hardworking people who really care, who studied for years and years, who did all kinds of research.
And he believes firmly that they really want to do the right thing.
But the problem is that the most corrupt and the most greedy people rise to the top.
That this is a country that's just based on money.
And you have to find a way to kind of decouple.
Money from public health or from any of the other agencies.
So you can't have this sort of system where time after time people work for the government, then they go work for Pfizer or some other big company, and they all know that their whole life is tied to green lighting certain products.
So when people say that Robert F. Kennedy is an anti vaxxer, you know, that's a ridiculous statement in the sense that what he said all along.
Is that he wants to look at the safety of vaccines.
He wants to look at what's put in the vaccines and what those things are doing to people.
So that doesn't make you an anti vaxxer.
It doesn't make you anti anything.
That's just a word that they come up with to confuse people in the same way that they use words like misinformation or disinformation or malinformation or even domestic terrorist.
They just come up with all of these terms conspiracy theorist.
When they don't have a real argument to disprove it.
Because if they believed in dialogue and debate, then you wouldn't have to call people names.
I mean, people should not be against vaccines or for vaccines any more than they're for a pill.
So you look at a pill, nobody would say pills are safe, right?
So the question is, what pill is it?
What's in it?
What does it do to you, right?
Let's research it, let's figure it out.
What is a vaccine?
It's a delivery mechanism for things that are in it.
So, if you put cyanide in a vaccine, I think we could agree that that wouldn't be a good thing, right?
Right.
So, if you're putting mercury in a vaccine and mercury is toxic to a child's brain, clearly that's not a good thing.
Right.
If you're putting aluminum in there, is that safe?
What's the research say?
Perfectly fine for serious people to question what's being put into their children's bodies.
Yeah.
I mean, it's insane for them not to question that.
It seems like if he's anti anything, he's anti pharmaceutical companies.
Well, I don't see that he's really anti anything other than the greed and corruption that have taken over this country.
I mean, you know, if you look at some of the research that's been done on vegetables and berries, you know, which we would all think, oh, vegetables, salad, blueberries, raspberries, they're all great for you, right?
But, you know, even there, you have to think about, well, what's on them?
Are these just doused with, drenched with pesticides?
And if they are, they could be the most toxic foods out there.
I mean, you might be better off eating a candy bar than having broccoli that has pesticides in it.
So it's not about what the delivery mechanism is.
So if it's organic broccoli that's really good, healthy, clean broccoli or good, healthy, clean meat, that's probably really good for you.
Power and National Security00:03:32
But you want to know.
So you could see two pieces of steak and one of them could be pumped up with hormones, they could look exactly the same.
You know, one of them could have all kinds of chemicals in it.
You wouldn't want to feed that to your family.
You would look at the other piece of steak and you'd have no way of knowing that that steak is, you know, fed much better foods, isn't pumped up with hormones or other drugs, is grass fed.
I mean, any of those kinds of things really matter.
And there's nothing wrong with people wanting to investigate these incredibly large.
Powerful, greedy companies and a government that is in bed with them.
So we need more people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
And I think that there are thousands and thousands of people who are seeing what he's done and seeing how he suffered in his quest to kind of make the world more accountable.
I mean, how is it that people, you know, that the New York Times or the Washington Post, that they don't question the fact that We're the richest, most powerful country on the planet, and our children are the least healthy.
I mean, how does that happen?
So, I can tell you how that happens.
Is that the case if our children are the least healthy?
Oh, sure.
I mean, you can go to third world countries all around the world, and their infant mortality rates are lower, their rates of autism are lower, their rates of allergies are lower.
So, how is that possible?
It seems like these big publications are.
Very much co opted by intelligence and by the government.
And I had a guy in here a few months ago, Jack Murphy, who was doing a report on some spy operations, some sabotage operations that were going on in Russia, and like some railroad tracks being blown up and some factories being lit on fire.
And he was basically through all of his sources, and everyone he talked to, what he discovered was that there was a.
A NATO ally that was working with CIA to conduct some of these operations.
And he was working with one of these top three publications in the US on this story for probably six months, close to six months.
And right when they were getting ready to press the publish button on it, his editor at that publication said, We got to clear this with the deputy director of the CIA.
Gotten a quick phone call with deputy director, and he said he has an off the record agreement with this publication.
So he could basically say anything he wants, yes or no, or kill this or don't kill this.
And they have to do that, and they can't.
They have to keep it completely off the record.
So, for example, if he wanted to publish the article and the publication was going to publish it and say, This is what Jack says, but the deputy director of the CIA denies this, this, and this, and this, and this, they can't do that.
They just say, Okay, deputy director disagrees.
We're going to kill the article.
Right.
So, that's what happens with some of the biggest publications.
They're all in cahoots with.
And look, I get it.
I understand that the CIA's job is to keep covert ops off the front pages, right?
Like, To protect national security or whatever it might be.
But in this case, it just blows my fucking mind that it is literally affecting the health and the lives of kids in our own country and they're still getting away with it.
Censorship in Big Media00:03:47
Well, that's what happens when people get too much power.
So, you know, there was a Rachel Maddow clip that I saw yesterday, which was Rachel Maddow talking to Chuck Schumer.
And they were discussing some claims that Trump had made, where he was coming down hard on the CIA and the FBI.
And, you know, this is, I don't know, six years ago.
And, Chuck Schumer said with a smirk on his face that Trump will learn what happens when you go against the intelligence agencies in this country.
And he seemed to, in some way, be proud of that.
And that was a scary moment, but it's easy to find.
And it's real.
It's very real.
And he obviously knows that they have an incredible amount of power, too much power.
And it's the same kind of thing.
I mean, Robert F. Kennedy.
You know, Bobby's father was a corruption fighter and he was saying the same kinds of things.
And JFK was saying the same kinds of things.
And, you know, they were likely shut down for saying those things.
They were likely killed for saying those kinds of things.
So it is very serious.
And, like I said, it's very real.
And, you know, it's hard to imagine.
I think it's hard for a lot of people to imagine that there could be people.
Out there, who would give children something that isn't safe?
So, I think that's one of the reasons why people often don't believe it because they don't think that there could be this many powerful people.
It's sort of like the general theory that if the conspiracy is too big, then it can't be real.
People are willing to imagine a conspiracy where there are five or 10 really bad people get together, but how can it be thousands and thousands of people?
Right.
But you look at something like the opioid crisis.
And you see the same kind of thing.
I mean, there were years where I think 200,000 people died unnecessarily from that.
And that's not long ago.
And I don't think that's just the Sackler family.
I mean, they were sort of like the face of it.
But it was pretty clear that many of the other big pharmaceutical companies were doing exactly the same thing.
And then people all the way down the chain were just sort of following it from the government to the doctors to the pharmacists.
And.
You know, they were all taking part in it.
So if you see that and you see that there were hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people killed unnecessarily, why is it such a leap to think that maybe they would approve and sell and force you to take and give exemptions for safety to,
you know, all of these big companies who are creating a COVID vaccine that maybe doesn't work and maybe harms?
Millions and millions of people.
So that shouldn't be such a leap of faith.
That should be a real sincere fear after what we saw with the opioid crisis and what we saw with mercury in early childhood vaccines and what we saw with Bioxx and what we've seen just time after time after time.
So nobody should be shocked by that.
But it is hard to go up against these just incredibly powerful forces.
Fighting Powerful Forces00:12:17
When it comes to the presidential race, Which is, it's kind of premature right now, but it seems like he is the only one that is like openly talking about it and being interviewed about it.
I don't see Trump.
Trump's doing a little bit, I guess, but it's not really covered.
I don't see much of it.
I know there's, he does, he's doing like rallies and he's doing these big talks.
I don't think Biden's saying anything about it.
Who is there besides Biden that has a chance, do you think, on the Democratic side?
Well, so let's go back to the first thing that you said, that nobody else really seems to be running now.
And I think that's a great point because I don't think Biden, I don't even think Biden really ran for president in 2020, but he's certainly not running for president now.
And You know, because all of his handlers, all of the people on his team, they want him to say as little as possible.
They would never let him debate Bobby Kennedy.
They would never let him debate anybody that he didn't absolutely have to.
So Bobby Kennedy, on the other hand, is flying all around the country talking to anybody who will talk to him on every show, big shows, little shows.
I mean, he is going full throttle 24 7 because he knows that he has to break through this censorship.
So, you know, he went down to the border, I think it was last week or possibly the week before.
And, you know, who else has gone down to the border?
So he actually created breaking news.
So the mainstream media didn't really cover it.
So you didn't see a big New York Times front page story.
But, you know, he pointed out, he interviewed something like 150 people and he found people from all around the world who were coming across the southern border.
With nobody stopping them, with no system, no plan.
And they were from Africa, they were from China, they were from South America.
I mean, they were from everywhere on the planet.
So, you know, that's a real problem.
And that's not xenophobic, that's not racist.
It's a problem that we have to have a plan.
So, you know, and the plan could take a lot of different forms, but he has said that he would make the southern border impervious.
And I think, you know, that's a great statement.
I mean, what major power in this world just lets people walk across their border?
I mean, why would you do that?
We clearly need people to do certain kinds of jobs in this country, and we have shortages of all kinds of workers.
So, but we could easily come up with a process where we say, hey, the country is short of carpenters.
Let's bring in carpenters from all around the world.
And they can have paperwork, they can be processed correctly.
You know, there's no reason for this to be so.
And there's nothing wrong with having a real plan.
And I think so.
One of the things that clearly Bobby Kennedy would do is he would have a plan, which doesn't mean even that so many fewer people would come.
It means that the immigrants coming into this country would do so in an organized fashion.
We would know who they are.
We would have some kind of balance of where they're from, what their skills are.
I mean, that's just good planning.
Everybody should want that.
That's something Trump ran on too, though, right?
Like he ran on the border wall and building that wall, but I don't think he did much, or I don't think much got done.
It seems like when people run on these kind of grandiose ideas, and again, I don't hear him touting it the way Trump was touting it.
Right.
But, you know, there's this thing that seems to happen throughout history when people will run on these things.
And once they get into office, it's like there's some guys that will come in in suits and say, this is going to happen, this is not going to happen.
Yeah.
And I'm sure he's got to be aware of that with his family history.
But I think part of the reason that Trump wasn't able to get anything done in that area and in some other areas is that so many people hated him so much and vilified him so much that they had this idea that anything Trump said, even if it was just accidentally correct, anything at all that Trump said, they just wanted to do the opposite.
And I think that that's where Biden got into trouble with the border, that he then told the whole world that we were going to have sort of like this.
Kinder and gentler border where we were going to treat people better.
So, what is that telling people?
Right?
So, he's not going to have any plan.
He's not going to have any real border.
And he's telling people that they should come, that they're not going to be processed, that they're not going to have to have paperwork.
We're not going to have to know anything about who they are or where they're from.
And of course, that was going to result in a lot more people coming.
And the border getting less and less organized.
So I think that, you know, Alan Dershowitz's book that I have here too, which is called Get Trump.
And The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law by Alan Dershowitz.
So the idea there is that so many people just wanted to get Trump, wanted to get rid of Trump, wanted to, you know, discredit Trump, that they did not care at all whether he had a good idea in one specific area or whether it was a bad policy.
So the whole point.
Was just get Trump at any way you can.
And part of that may well have come.
Chuck Schumer may have been right that he went up against the intelligence agencies and they were going to find a way to get him back.
And in that clip, Chuck Schumer with a smile on his face says, they will find a way to get you back.
They always do.
Right.
So I think that's a great point that Alan Dershowitz makes and that.
Bobby's made many, many times too is that when you give up rights, it's not so easy to get them back.
So people say, well, we want to, you know, get rid of COVID so we can force people to do all kinds of things.
We can censor them.
We can, you know, make them stay home.
We can do everything that we want just as long as we have this goal to end this crisis.
Or we can try to get rid of Trump and Just say it's okay to do anything.
Take away all of our constitutional rights.
Let's just get rid of Trump.
Let's get rid of COVID.
Let's end the war on drugs and the war on anything.
I mean, there's always a war on something.
So there's always a reason now for people to give up their constitutional rights because we're in this constant state of war.
But the problem is that once you give up rights, it's not so easy to get them back.
You know, once you give them up, you might never see those rights.
Yeah, that's very true.
And it's clear throughout history.
Alan Dershowitz, he's an interesting one.
Was he in a similar boat to Bobby Kennedy, where he was having issues with censorship and getting his stuff published?
He was having a lot of censorship.
And my view of him is that he stands for the rule of law.
So he's a real lawyer in the sense that he believes in the constitutional right to have a sincere, hardworking lawyer defend you.
And that you can't be guilty in this country till you're proven in a court of law to be guilty.
And then we get into the whole question of cancel culture.
And so he was right in the middle of that, wrote a book for us called Cancel Culture.
But we've gotten in this country to the point where.
And one of his books was called Guilt by Accusation.
And the idea there is that you can accuse somebody of something and then they have all the consequences, or at least many of the consequences, that they would have as if they had gotten their day in court and were found guilty.
Right.
And especially when you have.
These mainstream publications that have so much trust by a lot of the people in the country, like the New York Times posting things, and people take it seriously because they're posting stuff when they have, throughout history, clearly been wrong about stuff and they've gone back and fixed stuff.
But they fix stuff, you know, on page 22, right?
You know, so they run their big stories.
You know, the Biden laptop, right, was Russian disinformation.
I think they ran seven stories on that.
And they ran a whole bunch of stories that, you know, Bobby Kennedy was one of the disinformation dozen.
I never heard that one before.
You know, that whole story of the disinformation dozen that came out right at the right time was that they're these dangerous people who are going to tell you things that aren't true.
We don't have to disprove them, we don't have to have any real discussion.
Even though we say it's a democracy, we can just tell you that they're part of the disinformation dozen.
Nobody even knows where that comes from.
So it comes from this very little nonprofit that's very well funded from a bunch of kind of shadowy groups that didn't exist before.
So it's this entity which has no gravitas.
I mean, no history, no scientists working there who have researched things.
So, how do they decide who the disinformation doesn't is?
And it's obvious how they decided.
They were told who to put on that list.
Because that was a government operation to control the narrative.
And they had to create these villains.
And they had to say that everything that they said was wrong.
Even in many cases where it's so clear that what they said was right.
And even if at the time many people thought it was wrong, now it's sort of mainstream knowledge that you can still get COVID if you're vaccinated, you can still spread COVID.
If you're vaccinated, you can still get heart problems.
If you weren't at no risk from COVID, you can get heart problems and you can die of those heart problems.
So, all of those claims, which were considered to be disinformation by all of the major newspapers, you take somebody like Dr. Mercola, who's a sort of a well known natural health doctor.
Has a big, you know, has a podcast and a daily newsletter.
And, you know, he was called part of the disinformation dozen, too.
The New York Times wrote a big hit piece on him.
Then they did a video on him, which was at a very high level.
So they were really going after him on all these different kind of platforms in the same way that they went after Bobby.
And so the fact that Dr. Mercola and Bobby Kennedy and so many other doctors and scientists.
We're actually, you know, even by the mainstream now, they've been proven to be right.
Nobody has apologized to any of them.
Nobody's taken them off the list of the disinformation doesn't.
Nobody's taken down.
You know, the Times hasn't run articles saying, hey, we're really sorry that we said these things about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
We're really sorry that we said all these bad things with so many people.
You know, just hundreds and hundreds of people vilified, have their lives ruined.
Wall Street Conflicts of Interest00:15:43
Right.
And they were right.
And it isn't even clear now, in many cases, how right they actually were.
Yeah.
And when it comes to presidential candidates, it seems like the ones that the quote unquote deep state, whatever you want to call it, that one of the best terms that Trump came up with, my favorite one was the drain the swamp.
I think he was right on point with that.
It is a fucking swamp.
But like the people that they're worried about the most are the people that can't be controlled via Wall Street.
The ones that Wall Street, they don't need the funding from Wall Street, Trump being one of them.
I don't know Bobby's situation with that, but it seems like some of the people who are most controlled by Wall Street are the ones that are easily controlled.
Most easily controlled, period.
I mean, Bobby Kennedy can't be controlled by anybody because he's not in it for the money, he's not in it for the power, doesn't want to go to Washington and be a politician for the rest of his life.
He believes that we're at this kind of turning point in history and that we're at this point where the future of mankind is at serious risk.
So I think he wants to be president to kind of set it right.
To put people in at the heads of all these agencies who will actually change them, who will decouple them from Wall Street, from the big pharmaceutical companies, from the big agribusiness companies, and set the world in a better direction and then go home.
And with the FDA specifically, too, when you're talking about some of the big pharmaceutical companies, but FDA, the Food and Drug Administration, food is like, they don't pay attention to food at all.
I just had a guy in here who was a former executive at the FDA who's on.
On in charge of the supplement branch of the right, I forget the exact title he had, but he was saying that I think it's upwards of 90% of their budget comes from pharmaceutical companies, and like less than 5% of their focus is on actual food.
And food is a huge problem in the country, yeah, with over processed foods and and you know the amount of people that are unhealthy and overweight, yeah, that's that's a major part of it, yeah, yeah.
And then there are all these, you know, well, so I mean, I mean, the.
The first point is a great point.
And there was a, you know, to the New York Times' credit, they ran a good story on how something like 75% of the FDA's budget comes from the companies that they're supposed to be regulating.
So it's just so clear that that kind of system won't work.
It just can't work.
It's just much too much of a conflict of interest.
And the idea of it was that they would get good products, products that would help people to market quicker.
So that's how they sold it to the government.
You know, that they said, look, we're willing to pay for the CDC.
We're willing to pay for the FDA.
We're willing to pay for the EPA.
And all that we want is a much quicker process.
But the problem is that with a lot of these things, you don't want a quick process.
You don't want a quick process with something that you're going to put into the arms or the stomachs, you know, of billions of people on this planet.
You know, you want, Real caution and real research, and you want to listen to dissenting voices.
Right.
So, you don't want to, you know, like I said before, weaponize all these terms misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theory, you know, as a way to just get an outcome that you want.
And, you know, the outcome is really just more money and power.
It's not health, it's not progress, it's not speed to market of life saving drugs.
I mean, that they could have done at any time.
It's a process by which everything is controlled by the most powerful people.
So, you know, Bobby often talks about how the middle class has been gutted in the last few years, that there was a new billionaire, I think, every day during COVID.
Right, right.
And so the middle class got poorer and poorer, and a really small number of billionaires got richer and richer and more and more powerful.
And You know, so when you look at that, you know, there's a system in place now which isn't good for anybody.
And it's so clear.
I mean, even the mainstream newspapers run stories like this one.
And Bobby quotes this one from time to time.
And that story is about how 53% of the people in this country don't have $1,000 that they could spend on an unexpected charge, like a medical charge that came in.
So, the richest country in the world, you know, with more billionaires than any other country, more powerful corporations than any other country.
And yet, the country itself is suffering.
So, we're not only, you know, extracting money from countries all around the world, but we're, you know, we're not happy with that.
We're not happy with our sort of empire that we're extracting money and bringing it back to the people of this country.
But we want to also extract the money from most of the actual people who live in this country so that, like I said, there's worse health care here than in third world countries.
They're worth health outcomes here than in third world countries.
Yeah, we're like below Costa Rica when it comes to health outcomes here, I think.
I think I actually heard Bobby say that.
Yeah.
So that I think is really what Bobby is fighting.
It's not about vaccines.
It's about corruption.
And it's about corruption in all areas corruption at the border, corruption in our foreign policy, corruption with our funding of other countries, and corruption with pharmaceutical companies and agribusiness companies.
And it's just a whole system that is sort of like a system of funneling money from the people who do the work to a very small number of people.
And with no regard whatsoever to, like you said, the health outcomes of millions and millions of people all around the world or their lives or trying to actually make their lives better.
Yeah.
I mean, there's so much focus in our government on different countries around the world, overseas, with like the military industrial complex.
And there's so little focus on what's actually happening to the people inside our own country, like inside the walls of the United States.
And when it comes to how much we pay for health care or how much.
Like these inner cities that are dealing with this poverty, like figuring out a better way to educate people.
Right.
To make your country better, you want to have smarter people.
You want people to have an opportunity or at least a shot, if they're interested, to get a higher education and become something.
They should at least get that shot.
Yeah.
Right.
Like, and that's something that has always been overlooked in my lifetime, at least I feel like.
Yeah.
And then there's, you know, there's all this sort of crazy stuff going on where we're sending, you know, something like $200 billion to Ukraine and we're funding that by cutting people's benefits here.
Right.
So we're sort of saying, screw you to the middle class here.
And we're getting involved in some war there.
And we're actually pretty clear on what our.
Objective is it's not to save Ukraine, it's not to make people's lives better, even in Ukraine.
I mean, it's clearly making people's lives worse here because we can't do any domestic projects here, we can't deal with homelessness here, we can't give people, you know, decent benefits here.
Um, but it's all about weakening Russia, it's all about this sort of chessboard of the world, right?
And so You know, people have to recognize that this whole period where everybody had a Ukrainian flag, you know, in the back of their car, you know, in their front lawn, hanging from their window.
That's funny.
You said a Ukrainian restaurant just opened down the street from here.
I've never heard of a Ukrainian restaurant before.
Right.
I've never had anyone say to me, hey, you want to go get some Ukraine food?
Yeah.
Never.
But when you think about it now, you know, in the same way that people think that maybe Bobby Kennedy is crazy and they think that.
Because they've been told to think that by the most powerful, most well funded people on the planet who are running these disinformation campaigns and these propaganda campaigns.
So they don't want you to know who the real RFK Jr. is, which is why we did this book.
But at the same time, they're telling people it's all about Ukraine.
We're going to make our stand in Ukraine.
Nobody even knows what they're fighting for or who they're fighting for or what the plan is.
So they've forgotten all about Afghanistan.
Because they've been told to forget about Afghanistan.
But they shouldn't, because Afghanistan is a big problem.
I mean, there are millions and millions of people there who believed in us, who believed the things that we told them, who believed that our adventure there wasn't about politics.
It was about actually wanting to help people in this country.
So we went there.
We spent, I don't know, a trillion dollars, some huge amount of money that's inconceivable to anybody listening and is.
Inconceivable to me.
Right.
And we spent it there and we got nothing for it.
Nothing.
I mean, the people there are no better off now.
And to some extent, they're probably worse off because it's possible that certain countries have kind of a development that takes time and that there's sort of steady progress that they could make.
And then it would be legitimate and long lasting.
So we went there and we promised that we were going to give them a shortcut.
To real lasting change, where people were going to have rights that they never had before.
The idea was that they would have rights like we have here, but they didn't get that.
And so they got the taste of what it's like, but then they got the incredible disillusionment that they had been lied to, too.
So the same government that's been lying to the people in this country has lied to people all around the world.
In the promises that they've made, that they really are looking out for their welfare.
And you have to kind of wonder you know, why did we go to Iraq?
Why did we go into Syria?
Why did we go to Afghanistan?
And why is there no kind of reconciliation of that whole story?
Like, we changed the world there.
I mean, there were millions of refugees who flooded the entire planet.
We had no objective.
We didn't succeed in anything that anybody can point to.
Yet, you know, because we have so much power, we didn't commit any war crimes.
Said to be committing war crimes all the time.
And for all I know, they actually are.
But it's inconceivable that in this, you know, almost 20 year period of us fighting wars in all these countries, bombing people all around the world when we say we care about the environment, where we say we care about gun control or something like that.
But why were we really doing all of this?
And the idea is that it's the same kinds of issues that are raised in the real Anthony Fauci, that it's all about money and power.
And if it's not really all about money and power, then I say, you know, explain to me what it was about.
Right.
I don't think anyone's denying it wasn't all about money and power.
What are his specific ideas when it comes to foreign policy?
Because that's something I haven't heard him really talk about.
Yeah.
So he says that he wants to bring the troops home from all around the world and.
You know, try to have the kind of peace that his uncle described.
That his uncle didn't want to go to Vietnam at the end.
He was getting closer to real negotiations with Russia.
He was an incredibly well loved U.S. president in Russia.
There were people, you know, put up posters of him in Russia, but all around the world, people put up posters of John F. Kennedy because they believed.
That he stood for peace, that he wanted to envision a world where we could peacefully coexist with people.
And so I think that that is Bobby's view.
Now, you know, clearly there are times when you have to have some kind of armed response and it has to be decisive.
But I think that it's clear that so much of it for us now is just once again about making money.
It's about making weapons that we're never going to use.
It's about selling weapons to countries all around the world.
It's a game, but real people die in these games and real people's lives are ruined permanently, just as in the COVID vaccine game and in many other of these kinds of things.
What, I mean, it seems like you've become like the publisher of dissidents.
Did that start with the Anthony Fauci book or was that sort of the truth?
That happened way before this?
Yeah, I don't remember a specific turning point, but we're the biggest publisher of JFK assassination books.
I think we published something like 60 of them, many of the real classics.
But I think that there's been this period since World War II where there's been more and more corruption and a more and more powerful government.
So I don't know when that turning point was for me, but.
But there's just been case after case of it, and it's grown to be a bigger and bigger part of what I think about all day long.
Yeah.
And now, talking to John, too, John Keriakou, he's an interesting one, too.
Like you were talking about earlier, how the government uses and they try to throw blame on some of the worst things that they've done, like enhanced interrogation, throwing it on John Kiriakou, where he was really trying to stop it.
Right, right.
And there's just this incredible bureaucratic force that is just unstoppable, which is clearly the case in his situation being sent to prison.
Fear of Speaking Truth00:02:23
Right.
So if you disagree and if you push back and you don't kind of toe the line, you suffer consequences.
And John Kiriakou is an incredible.
Example of that, you know, as is somebody like Snowden.
Right.
What sort of blowback have you received in your life, like personally, since doing this kind of stuff?
And do you have, or do you try to get discredited personally for publishing some of this stuff, or what's it like for you?
Yeah, some of the time people ask me whether I'm afraid of the consequences.
And I think that's a good question, you know, because a lot of people have suffered really bad consequences.
But I think for me personally, I'm more afraid of the consequences of not publishing the books that I want to publish or that I think are important for people to read and not personally just coming out and saying what I believe.
So, if they're going to be consequences, I think that the consequences of saying what you honestly believe and fighting for freedom of speech so far outweighs anything that anybody could ever do to me.
You know, that I want to be able to be proud of things that I've done in my life.
When I'm laying on my deathbed, and hopefully when I'm 120, I want to think through, not that I backed down or that I complied or that I was, you know, afraid to publish something or to say something or to do something or to make a choice that I believed in.
And I think, you know, one of the great things that's happening in this country now is that I think.
COVID brought that out in a lot of people.
So I think that, you know, five years ago, there were a lot fewer people who questioned their government, who questioned public health choices, who, you know, there were many, many more people who just believed what they read or what they heard and did what they were told and then bragged about how much freedom they had, you know, versus other countries.
But I think that during COVID, We've had this incredible force of people just saying no.
Questioning Government Authority00:09:29
People just saying, I don't believe this.
You know, that the government isn't telling me the truth.
The New York Times isn't telling me the truth.
I can't believe that the books on the New York Times bestseller list are actually the ones selling better.
I can't believe that I really need to be protected from Bobby Kennedy or the disinformation dozen.
And so those people have led to this kind of show and so many other shows where, you know, Hundreds of millions of people all around the world are hearing information that isn't censored and that isn't controlled.
And that I think has never been true before.
So, you know, I don't know where that leads, but I think one of the ways that you see that is you see that with a campaign like Donald Trump's campaign, you know, where 35% of the people who are going to vote for Bernie Sanders voted for Donald Trump.
And they were just voting for an outsider.
They were voting for somebody who they thought couldn't be controlled.
And I think that if Bobby Kennedy was allowed to actually speak to the American public, and if Biden started actually running against him and they debated, and people were able to kind of honestly look in their newspapers and on their TV shows at two different visions of what's going on in the world, Biden telling you, That the government's honest,
that everything that they do is for your benefit, and Bobby Kennedy saying that that isn't true.
I think the American public would not vote for Biden, that they would not want Biden to be their president.
And it's pretty clear that they don't want him to be their president, but they're not allowed to see that there's a really strong alternative.
It's become clear that the generation of people who, which is getting older and older, The generation who consumes content, podcast content specifically, people have more of a trust for that kind of stuff.
This because it's long form discussions that are unedited, not curated and on television.
It's stuff that, like, you know, everyone has their own favorite podcaster that they trust.
And there's more of this growing sort of like organic movement online with podcasters.
And Bobby has been on some of the biggest podcasts recently.
Yeah.
I think he was on, I think even his podcast with Theo Vaughn got shut down or deleted.
Theo Vaughn's a big comedian.
Yeah.
I was just listening to it like two weeks ago.
It had like two, three million views or something like that.
And I went back to it the other day to sort of like finish watching the last 30 minutes of it and it was completely gone.
Yeah.
So, yeah, that's a great point.
So, there's been some focus on there being less censorship now than there was during sort of like the height of COVID.
But you see time after time now, That there's a lot of censorship right now.
Right.
And it's sort of quieter, but, you know, there are things being taken down, you know, shows that Bobby Kennedy did that were up on YouTube that you can't find there now.
Right.
So they just sort of take them down.
They don't even tell you that they take them down, they just quietly take things down.
So I think it's probably a little bit like Twitter that they're probably people who are embedded there.
Oh, yeah.
And that those people are acting for, you know, Government agencies to kind of curate things and just try to sort of spin it towards Biden.
That Biden doesn't have to run.
Biden doesn't have to talk.
He's just going to be handed the presidency.
Yeah, but here's where I question that.
Personally, when I see one or two or three or four podcasts get shut down by Bobby Kennedy, but then he's on Jordan Peterson with no censorship, not even demonetized, getting millions of views, he's going on some of these.
Biggest podcast breaking points with millions of views.
They're not shutting those down.
Those are important podcasts.
And a lot of people pay attention to those podcasts.
So when I see some of those other podcasts get shut down, they're doing it almost just enough to get people's attention.
They're censoring just enough to show people, look, we're going to censor him.
But we're still going to let it go on some of these bigger platforms.
So it's like enough to get his message out, enough to show what he's talking about.
But look, he's being censored at the same time.
So it's almost like they're riling people up.
It's like lighting a fire under their ass even more.
So I always wonder where is the, is there any reverse psychology going on here?
Because it doesn't seem like it's hurting him at all, right?
It seems like it's helping him.
And I don't think these people are dumb.
Yeah.
So, you know, I always like to think about those kinds of things too.
You know, what are the plans?
And, you know, Biden is a tough one, you know.
So if you really want Biden to be president for four more years, you know, it's hard to imagine that anybody would really want that other than just as a figurehead.
He's been president.
Maybe it's just an easy road.
Yeah.
But I don't, I mean, I think that Bobby's able to break through and get on all of these shows, and these shows are harder to shut down.
So if you try to shut down Jordan Peterson or, you know, Tucker Carlson, so, you know, Tucker Carlson, it's a strange story what happened in the last couple of weeks where there were people writing stories that his new project on Twitter was failing.
Even when it was just starting.
But if you look up his first show, it's got more than 120 million views now.
When has there ever been a show that's gotten 120 million views?
I mean, he was getting 3.5 million viewers when he was at Fox.
Right.
So how can anybody call that a failure?
You know, when Bobby Kennedy posted on Twitter his take on what had happened to Tucker Carlson.
He got something like 12 million views for that.
What did he say about it?
He just said that he believed that it was a sign of corruption, that it was him going against really powerful people.
It was him in the prior week.
He had had Bobby Kennedy on where Bobby was talking all about the Ukraine war.
Oh, yes.
This was right before he left.
Yeah.
He got fired.
Yeah.
It was like three or four days before.
So, Bobby was just saying that he believed that.
It was a sign of the same kind of censorship, the same kind of corruption that he's been calling out in all areas of the government.
And that clearly resonated with millions and millions of people.
But then, once again, like you don't see the New York Times running a front page story on Bobby Kennedy's tweet getting, you know, 12 or 14 million views or Tucker Carlson's first new show getting 120 million views.
I mean, you would think that would be a big story.
Right.
You know, why aren't there front page stories saying that?
And, you know, so all of it, I mean, even with the indictment of Trump, and whether you love Trump or not, as Alan Dershowitz says in Get Trump, you know, you have to believe in constitutional rights or not believe in them.
So you can't say, we're going to leave Hunter Biden.
And not indict him and not really follow that story wherever it leads.
But we're going to try to take down Trump and still really have a constitution.
Didn't Bobby say that he was actually good friends with the head of Fox at one point when he was talking about he would go on there all the time to talk about the environment and some of the environmental issues he was getting behind?
But as soon as he wanted to talk about these pharmaceutical companies, he was like, I will never have you on Fox.
And if any of my anchors ever do get you on independently, they'll be fired.
Yeah.
So I think that that story, or at least the way that I heard it, was that he met him at a restaurant and he kind of asked him, you know, why he wouldn't let him talk about these kinds of things or why he wouldn't have him on to, you know, to talk about the kinds of things that he really wanted to talk about and that he thought were newsworthy.
And the guy from Fox said 70%.
Actually, I don't think the guy was from Fox.
It wasn't from Fox?
But it was from some big network.
And he said 70% of our advertising comes from pharmaceutical companies.
So we just can't do it.
We would fall apart if we didn't do it.
Science Funding Bias00:15:30
So you see that on all sides that the companies are funding all of the media, they're funding the universities that are doing all the research, that people are afraid to come up with.
With science that disproves the people who fund it.
There was something on, somebody posted something on Twitter that I thought was kind of funny, which was that 90% or no, 97% of the science that's done in this country agrees with the people who are funding it.
And the other 3%, they get censored and deplatformed.
That's heavy.
I mean, I have no idea if that's true, but I believe that it is the vast majority of the science that actually gets peer reviewed and makes it all the way through and is taken seriously is science that is just helpful to the people who are funding it.
Right.
What now in the real Anthony Fauci book, the sort of subtitle is Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the War on Democracy.
What specifically?
Was Bill Gates, what was his biggest role in this whole thing that he talks about in the book?
Yeah, so one of the big roles is that, you know, Bill Gates was a big proponent of vaccines, of the COVID vaccine.
He was, you know, invested, you know, up to his eyeballs in vaccines.
And if you listen to him.
Wasn't it right before the pandemic kicked off?
I believe so.
So I think that the story there, to some extent, and he's involved in a lot of different things, but the story just when it came to vaccines, which I find.
Kind of fascinating now is that there are a lot of clips out that show him saying clearly that, you know, the COVID vaccine is incredibly safe and incredibly effective.
And then the story is that he sold some of the shares in the companies that he owned shares in.
And then his view of the success.
Of the COVID vaccines changed drastically.
So he played it perfectly where he was sort of a marketing guy for it, then made all the money, and then tried to join the other side when it was convenient to do that, when he didn't have to risk any money and where he could kind of take credit for being somebody who's more nuanced.
But he was only willing to do that when it wasn't going to cost him any money.
Right.
Yeah, he's one of the weird ones.
Has he ever debated Bobby?
Or has he ever talked to Bobby?
Has Bobby ever spoken with him about this?
I don't believe so.
I mean, Bobby hasn't been sued, has he?
No.
That's a great thing, you know, that Bobby said about the real Anthony Fauci when it first came out.
You know, he said, This is an alarming book that if you read about the financial entanglements that have gone into our public health since the AIDS crisis, you know, you will be shocked by it.
And if you think that it isn't true, ask yourself, you know, why hasn't Fauci debated me on any of it?
Why doesn't Gates debate me on any of it?
Or why haven't I gotten sued?
So he said that time after time.
And no, nobody has sued us.
For any information in the book being incorrect.
Really?
Yeah.
Are lawsuits a big thing to deal with when you're running a publishing company?
You know, lawsuits cost a lot of money, and most of the books don't have any kind of potential lawsuits that would lead to making lots of money.
But you would think that if people really thought that they could shut Bobby down by suing over things that were in the book, That they would have done that.
Right.
I think what they believed was that the best way to handle it would be to vilify him and to run hit pieces and to try to make everybody in the country think that he's anti science, that he's crazy, you know, that, you know, all of the bad things that they've said about him.
But it's so clear that there's been this sort of attack on science.
And the attack isn't coming from Bobby Kennedy and the disinformation dozen.
It's coming from.
This fake science that's taken over the world.
That's what the real anti science is.
It's science where you're not allowed to disagree with it.
Because anybody knows, I mean, any scientist knows that real science has to stand up to disagreement.
You know, that's what the scientific process is that people disagree and they fight it out to the end.
You know, it's like the fight club of science, you know, that people bring their very best arguments and their best data and they disprove somebody else.
And that's how we make progress.
As a species on this planet, you know, versus just saying the only science that you can hear is the science that will make us more money.
And they are shutting down a lot of conversations.
Aren't they?
I don't even think they're doing debates, are they this year or for the next election?
For the primaries, they don't want to do it.
They don't want to do debates.
Yeah.
But I think that people, well, look at Biden.
I mean, Biden can't have a debate with anybody.
That's obvious.
Like, you could pick anybody in.
You know, any restaurant in the country and just, you know, bring them outside and say, Here, you know, have a debate with Joe Biden on this.
And I think almost anybody would out debate Joe Biden.
Yes.
Yes.
So think about Bobby Kennedy, who's really going into the details of each issue.
I mean, I'm fascinated by his way of sort of, you know, there's so many different things that maybe he's not an expert in.
So even as a candidate, you have to, Make outreach to people who are experts and to hear kind of both sides and really think it through.
When is the last time we had a candidate doing that?
You know, who was really kind of open to any argument.
Right.
Right.
And that's the thing, too, with politics, right?
Like, there's these presidents, they run on all these issues, but they don't really have hands on experience with these issues.
Yeah.
They sort of like have this okay, we're going to run on this, this, this, and this.
We're going to, these are our talking points for this.
But this guy's.
What he's litigated himself many lawsuits, 500 lawsuits or something like that.
Done all the research, read all the reviews and the studies.
Like, the amount of time and effort he's put into reading this stuff and writing this stuff is like no other president has spent that much time on anything.
And I mean, he's a scholar, he's a reader, he's a serious thinker.
And, you know, when he brought each of these lawsuits, he was reading science for them.
Right.
Because you had to learn it, right?
You can't, you know, go up against Monsanto and fight about glyphosate in Roundup.
I mean, that is a massive.
And it's a massive issue that is poisoning people all around the country and all around the world.
You can't go into a battle like that with a multi billion dollar company without comprehending the science, without really being careful in your reading of it and consulting so many different experts in it so that you can go up against the most powerful people on the planet and actually beat them.
So he was able to win a $70 million judgment.
Against Monsanto, which then, you know, to some extent led to the 13,000 or so pending lawsuits that they have.
So he has, he took part in taking down, you know, one of these most powerful companies out there.
So I think, you know, it's possible that one person can do that and that one person can inspire millions of people to help do that so that we could then.
Have a country where we don't allow products to be sold or things to be injected into young children that are not well researched, and that we don't call those people anti vaxxers, we don't call them conspiracy theorists, we call those people folk heroes, you know, or freedom fighters, or you know, people who really are working day and night who've dedicated their lives to trying to help other people.
So the idea that everything's sort of flipped on its head.
And that the people who really want to do good things are called the villains.
You know, like the victors always make the, you know, write history.
Right.
They rewrite history.
You know, right now, you know, Fauci got to write the story to some extent.
But I think that it's important not to let him go.
And it's important to keep fighting it, even though the crisis period is over, because the problem and the danger is that.
You know, even though he's just one person, there are more and more people.
It's like a many headed monster.
Yeah.
And there's just going to be somebody else.
And the same kinds of things are going to happen time after time after time if we don't get to the bottom of what happened and make sure that everybody in the world knows what happened and that it was a product of greed and corruption, not about some hero trying to protect us from a virus.
Now, running for president is not cheap.
How is he going to fund all this?
And these big pharmaceutical companies are notorious for sponsoring presidents and some of these, you know, some of the biggest industries in the country that are responsible for the environment or for public health.
Those are sort of like the biggest proponents for funding these campaigns.
But how is he going to do it?
Yeah.
So I think that, you know, he's going out there on all these podcasts and, you know, he's been saying that this might be the first presidential election that's won on radio shows and podcasts, you know, that.
And if you look at the actual data, so you look at what are the main TV shows now pulling in, you know, maybe it's two or three million viewers, and that's maybe the top two or three.
But Joe Rogan is pulling in 11 million, maybe 12 million.
Tucker pulled in 120 million, and the second one, I think, was 50 million, and the third one was something around there.
Elon, put this thumb on the scale, though.
Right.
Well, you know, kind of hard to tell what the numbers always mean.
Maybe they're two or three people, you know, View it at different times.
But even if you dissect that 120 million views, you have to dissect it a lot of times for it to get anywhere near as low as mainstream media is.
So when you have Biden, who isn't going on any podcasts, Biden might go on to some network TV shows and read some canned message that somebody else wrote for 45 seconds and hope not to fall down or to.
Misspeak and say that Russia is our partners and we're fighting somebody else.
All of these kind of misstatements that he always makes.
But to have a candidate who's going on a show that maybe 120 million people watch and then asking them to help, to send in $25 or $50, I think there's a good chance that the American public is waking up.
To what's happened.
Like I said before, you know, that there, I think three years ago, five years ago, there was a small fraction of the number of people in this country who really believed that it was possible that a bunch of big companies were colluding with the government and public health officials and, you know, other kinds of government officials and doing things that were, that even they knew were not good for the public.
But now I think you probably have half the country thinking that.
Mm hmm.
And, you know, I think some Democrats think that's all Republicans.
And I don't think that's true at all.
Even when Tucker was still on Fox, something like 35% of his viewers were Democrats because there were a lot of people who would watch Tucker and they would disagree with a lot of things that he said.
But they felt sincerely that there were a lot of topics that he covered where they couldn't get the information anywhere else.
You know, maybe they could get it on a bunch of smaller shows, they could get it on Joe Rogan.
But they couldn't get it from the newspaper that they've been reading for the last 10 years or from the network TV show that they've been watching for the last 10 years.
Right.
So I think that that power, the power of speaking directly to huge numbers of people in this country, is a very powerful tool.
And if Bobby keeps doing that and keeps talking day after day on these really big shows, But, you know, there are so many other forces.
So, you know, there's the, some of the polls have come out and they don't even mention Bobby.
So there's the Harvard Harris poll came out.
It's one of the prominent polls.
And they listed something like 15 Democrats going down to 1% of the vote, including a whole list of people who have already said they're definitely not running, like Bernie Sanders.
And they just left Bobby out.
So, you know, that I think is another piece of the kind of DNC kind of saying, hey, we've decided we can call up pollsters, tell them not to include Bobby.
We can call up our friend at the New York Times and, you know, tell them to do a roundup of Democratic candidates and leave Bobby out or say he's a crackpot or, you know, just kind of chip away at the corners of his popularity.
Right.
What are some of the other most controversial things that you've published besides, you know, some of the stuff that Bobby's talked about with public health, right?
You got Pierre Corey on there.
Yeah.
Pierre Corey's book, I think, is a very important piece of the puzzle because it, on the one hand, seems really clear.
Patents and Human Health00:09:01
And there are a lot of peer reviewed studies saying that ivermectin helps prevent COVID.
Helps lessen the effects of COVID.
And so, if Pierre Corey was allowed to speak and was allowed to show his studies and make the argument on national television at the time that the COVID vaccines were approved, arguably they couldn't have been because they had to get a waiver of the proper study.
And the only way that you can get that kind of waiver.
If you show that there's no viable alternative to this product that you're offering.
Yes.
And so the whole reason for coming out and having Dr. Fauci and so many other people go on to a hundred different TV shows, and I've seen sort of these things that people post on various sites, Instagram, though, there are some where they have.
20 different people at various news stations, and they're all saying almost the exact same word.
I've seen that, yeah.
You know, where it's like, ivermectin is a horse medicine, it's only meant for horses, and it can kill you.
That's like something I have a nightmare watching.
Yeah, when they're all on the same screen at the same time, and they're just like, just almost the exact same word.
Most of them saying the exact same perfectly orchestrated.
And so, you look at that, and this book shows you that that isn't true.
That the truth is that millions and millions of people.
Have taken ivermectin without any side effects over the last, I believe, 20 years.
And that it's meant for humans, that they're two different kinds.
One is actually for livestock.
But it was a totally fake story that was sort of sold to the entire American public and to the world.
And it was a lie.
And even now, nobody's come back.
You know, you don't see.
ABC News or NBC News or the New York Times running front page stories saying, sorry, we were wrong about that.
If you had all taken this, the outcome would have been much different.
And so you look at what our outcome actually was.
And now it's something like 1.1 million people are said to have died of COVID.
I mean, it's kind of hard to know whether any of those numbers mean anything.
But that's more than four times the number of people who died on the whole continent of Africa.
Right.
You know, we were giving ivermectin to Africa, weren't we?
Or was it like the Southern American countries?
We were basically.
No, no, no.
Africa, it's a very common drug there that's been used for the last couple of decades.
And so, on the one hand, it's fascinating that with a 1.4 billion population and countries that are much poorer than our country, that they would have something like 1/16th of the deaths per capita.
Right.
The deaths per million were like extremely low compared to us.
Yeah.
So, you know, how is that possible?
I mean, how is it possible that?
We're so proud that we're looking up to this genius, Dr. Fauci, who gives us results that are 116th of the results that they were able to achieve in Africa.
So, part of the reason might be that a large percentage of the population there was taking ivermectin before COVID, during COVID, and still.
There was no country that was worse than us, death per million, I don't think.
I don't believe that there was either.
You know, it's such a weird thing, too, because, like, if you're going to eradicate it, if you're going to get fixed, like, how do you fix the problem?
Because it's human nature.
Like, this, this, it's sort of the worst part.
What's happening with pharmaceutical companies is like, it's the worst part of capitalism, right?
It really is.
It's like the bastardization of capitalism.
It's where these people just, they find, they like, fuck taking care of our community or our country, our, The bigger picture, and let's just focus on driving as much profit as we possibly can.
And like the patents are a big problem with this, right?
Like some of these medicines that were getting suppressed were the patents had expired and there was no money.
There was no money, right?
That combined with the revolving door of the regulatory agencies and the pharmaceutical companies, it's like if you fix that, how do you stop it from happening again in some other direction?
Right.
Right.
Because it's just, it is human nature, and there's so much money moving around.
It's just like, how do you keep a check on it?
It seems so hard for me to comprehend how that would happen.
It just seems like you need better leaders.
And we just haven't been able to come up with good leaders.
And, you know, part of that might be, you know, that it started with, you know, Robert Kennedy, Bobby's father, and JFK and so many other people getting killed during the 60s.
Um, That since then, we haven't had incredibly smart, incredibly dedicated leaders.
And then you see all of this data of, you know, senators who came into power and they had a net worth of half a million dollars.
They're in the Senate for 30 years and now they've got $120 million net worth.
Yeah.
So you see that every side of it is about money.
Yeah.
Yes.
From the lobbyists to the actual politicians, that everybody's taking money.
Right.
And lobbying is a huge thing.
So, you know, one of the things, and then corporations are people, so that you can have, you know, all of these big pharmaceutical companies being found guilty of crimes.
So you have like this incredible situation that I think people will, you know, just be fascinated with in 50 years when they look back on it and they study it in law school classes where you have.
Crimes without criminals.
So you have some of the worst crimes in the history of mankind where nobody goes to jail, where they're just criminal fines.
So, you know, Vioxx is said to have killed, I don't know, 50,000 to 100,000 people, maybe more.
There are all these documents showing that they knew about it, that they knew people were getting heart attacks, that they got letters from researchers and scientists who worked for Merck at the time.
And they just didn't do anything because they had no personal liability.
There was a lot of money in it.
They didn't have another drug to take its place.
They were worried that the share price was going to plummet.
So they just let these people die.
So when you talk about, you know, somebody lets 50,000 people die in a year, maybe, when they know what's happening and they know that they can stop it.
And then the only consequence is that there's a criminal fine, which becomes almost like a cost of doing business.
Right.
But it seems like the only people who would want to get into politics are the worst people.
Like the people that are in, even in Wall Street and finance and any sort of politician is just run up with these people who have no talent in anything else other than ass kissing and ladder climbing.
Right.
It's just this societal ladder climbing game of making more money.
And those people are not the people that you want to run the country.
They're not, you know, you want.
People that actually have like care, you know, you want people that have the right moral compass, and those kind of people have no interest in politics.
Right.
And that's a big part of the problem.
But I think people need to be inspired and they need to see a leader who's different.
Nuclear Power and Capitalism00:04:44
Yeah.
And when they do, then I think, you know, when John F. Kennedy was president, I think there were a lot of children thinking, I want to go into politics.
I want to do something good.
He might be the last guy, John F. Kennedy.
He might be like the last good human being.
That they were really thinking, not just in the United States, but all around the world.
And it's true, and it's covered in this book, that there really were, like I said before, people in Russia and in Africa and all around the world putting up posters of John F. Kennedy.
Right.
More streets named after him than any other president.
Because they really believed that here was a leader who wanted to change the world and make it better, who wanted.
World peace, so that people didn't have to worry about their whole country being blown up.
But one thing that Bobby said that I think is important for people to hear about is that one of the things that they might come after him with is say, well, if you're going to reform all of the agencies of government and if you're going to make it harder for big companies to kind of squeeze more money out of the population and out of the world.
Isn't that going to lead to some kind of economic crisis?
Right.
So the idea, though, is, and he said this many times, is that corruption, destroying the environment, all of these kinds of things that he's fighting are actually anti capitalist.
You know, these are not things that are good for real capitalism, these are things that are good for fascism.
These are things that are good for a handful of billionaires running a handful of incredibly powerful companies that want to tell the government what to do, that want to tell every person in the world what to do, what to think, what to put into their bodies.
So that isn't capitalism.
Capitalism is the 53% of the people in this country who don't have $1,000 because the fascists have destroyed capitalism.
You know, because having a good environment, having healthy people, having small businesses, you know, that were destroyed during COVID, that builds capitalism.
That's the real capitalism.
And fascism is the destruction of all of those companies and the building of bigger and bigger companies that are just.
Make it impossible for innovation, for progress, for all the kinds of things, or to build a small business.
All of the kinds of things that are the good sides of real capitalism.
Now, he's a big proponent of nuclear energy, too, right?
No, he seems to have mixed feelings there.
Oh, he's anti nuclear.
He says nuclear is bad.
My bad.
Yeah, yeah.
But my guess is there.
So, what you get with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Is you get a really sincere thinker.
So, you know, his history with sort of Three Mile Island and the New York area where, you know, nuclear power plants have a bad history.
So the idea then is the possibility that nuclear power, which is really, you know, potentially beneficial to the whole world, the idea is can you make it safe?
And so You know, if there was ever anybody who would be potentially convinced of something where they would have a view, you know, like John F. Kennedy started out as kind of like a cold warrior, but he was convinced that peace was possible.
So he had a real transformation over a relatively short period.
And I think that if there's any candidate who is open to ideas, It's Bobby Kennedy.
You know, that if you could convince him, if you could, you know, have a room full of scientists who would show studies that prove that nuclear power can be safer than it's been in the past, then I think he would be all for it.
GMOs and Public Trust00:15:24
Right.
So I think that's what you get.
And, you know, many times people look at politicians and they find one thing that they don't like.
Yeah.
And then they think, oh, I, you know, I don't like this person.
Right.
So the idea is that you're never going to have a politician.
Who you like on everything.
What you really want to know with a politician and with Bobby, you get this in spades is that you can trust him.
Is that you can trust this person to do the right thing, to not be corruptible, to not be bribeable.
And if there's anybody who's not corruptible and not bribeable in any sense, it's Bobby Kennedy, undoubtedly.
And I think he talks openly too about when it comes to energy stuff, he says, you know, he doesn't.
He hasn't read all the papers and the studies.
Right.
Like when it comes to some of the public health stuff, like he's a bona fide expert when it comes to that stuff, like legitimately.
Yeah.
But when it comes to some of these other stuff, at least he openly admits that, like, look, I'm not an expert on this.
This is what I do know.
I can easily have my mind changed with better information or better facts.
Yeah.
But to go back to the transgender question, he's made some statements there, and I could imagine that he would make more.
So one of the ones that he made was that he didn't think that transgender men ought to be allowed to compete in women's sports.
Oh, he did say that.
Okay.
And he said that because he said that he believes that that's an assault on feminism.
That sort of like there's been this progress that's been made in sports where women have really made these great breakthroughs and where the sports professionally are really viable and they're well watched.
There are all these new superstars in all these different areas.
You know, all of the various sports.
And, you know, if you allow transgender men to come and play all of those sports, that's actually anti feminist.
That you would then have all of the stars be essentially men.
Right.
And so I don't think that that's in any way transphobic.
I mean, no.
I mean, if there's going to be, you know, so let's just say that the world right now is right.
And there's this just a huge number of people born into the wrong body.
I don't believe that that's true, but let's just say that that's true.
If it's a significant part of the population, we can have a third kind of sports.
So we can have men's sports, we can have, you know, sports for women, and then we can have trans sports.
But to do it the way we've been doing it now, I don't think benefits anybody.
It isn't fair.
It's not progress.
And Bobby Kennedy has said very clearly that he's not for it.
Yeah, it makes me more.
The more I see about this stuff, it makes me feel more and more like we're just living in some sort of video game.
This whole transgender.
You see, someone was on the White House lawn yesterday, a trans man, I think, with pulled his top off and had legitimate tits.
Yeah.
That's just crazy stuff.
It's like we're living in a simulation, man.
But it's just an insult to the.
To the country, really.
I mean, I, but, but then, you know, if you take a step back and, and you see, well, what's the big product that goes along with this?
And the big product is a pharmaceutical product called a puberty blocker.
And so, you know, it, it, it looks like we're going to get to a point, if we don't change course, where there are going to be millions of children in this country taking puberty blockers.
And these are untested drugs.
Nobody has any clue what happens.
30 years down the road.
I mean, these are the kinds of decisions that can impact the future of mankind.
Right.
This is late stage empire shit.
Like, this is very scary.
But this is, you know, the carelessness and the ruthlessness of it and the desire for just another pharmaceutical product that you can sell to millions of people at a very high price.
So, you know, and that brings me to something like GMOs.
Where it's the same sort of thing, where I don't think anybody should be pro GMO or anti GMO.
It's a lot like a vaccine, is that you need to know the details and you need to do the research.
But when you're talking, you know, about having a GMO salmon or, you know, GMO mosquitoes or, you know, vaccinating bumblebees, there was a story about that in the New York Times, I think two weeks ago.
Vaccinating bumblebees?
I don't even know how you would do that, but that was the story.
For real?
For real.
You got to find this.
Yeah.
So, you know, when you're talking about doing these kinds of things, Introducing GMO species or feeding the entire planet GMO foods or vaccinating people with,
you know, genetic products, you know, you're really getting to a point where you're screwing around with the future of mankind recklessly.
Yeah.
And, you know, that I think is not something that.
You know, free people in a democracy would allow.
So, people who haven't been lied to or fooled or censored or, you know, subjected to, you know, the most powerful propaganda that, you know, I've said before and I really think it's true that the kind of censorship and propaganda tools that these powerful forces have would be the envy of any dictator in history.
You know, that they can just.
Just get to everybody.
They can blanket people with a message.
They can, you know, like we said before, they can have a hundred newscasters on a hundred different shows on the same day parroting all the same food, you know, all of the same statements, all of the same claims.
Right.
And that stuff, you know, gets through to people's brains and it does brainwash people.
But yes, go to the top of this again, Michael.
What is the title?
DA approves the first vaccine for honeybees.
Dallin Animal Health's vaccine for American foul brood, an aggressive bacterial disease, is the first of any insect in the United States.
Company in Georgia has received conditional approval from the U.S. Department of Agriculture for the first vaccine for honeybees.
A move scientists say could help pave the way for controlling a range of viruses and pests that have disseminated the global population.
It is the first vaccine approved for any insect in the United States.
What?
Yeah, so I think that, you know, it's just another product that they're selling.
And, you know, I think that any sincere person who looks at these kinds of things and who knows what's been happening in the last 20 years in this country is going to look at that and say, we should slow down.
We should do more research.
Because the impact of getting it wrong.
Is so severe.
And it's the same thing with the COVID vaccine that the impact of getting it wrong, you know, is unimaginable.
Something that you would put into the bodies of 7 billion people.
So I think that that's a lot of the reason why we need Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be president because he recognizes that we're at this.
Turning point in history.
And I don't think that's about trying to make people afraid, but I think it's about being honest.
Is that you just have stories like this every day, and you don't know whether to believe that the people who are doing this kind of thing, you know, what their motivation is.
Is it just to have another product to sell?
Is it just sort of interesting to try it?
Um, You know, are GMO salmon a good idea or a bad idea?
You know, the company that makes them wants to get them to market as quickly as possible.
So, I do think that we need some regulation in this country that's not owned, funded, you know, by the people who are going to make money off their decisions.
Right.
You know, and that's what I think you would get with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but you would also get this new group.
Of scientists who are, you know, some of them have written books for me, but they're very serious people who, like Bobby, have taken a lot of risks to say what they believe is true.
And I mean, Dr. Pierre Corey is one of them that, you know, he could have had a much easier life.
He didn't have to take this road, there was no money in it for him, there was no benefit for him.
So he didn't have to fight the disinformation campaigns that were being waged, where, you know, that we described before, you know, that people were saying that Ivermectin or any of the similar things that were available at the time.
He could have just sort of told the line and made a lot more money, probably had more friends, more connections, and a brighter future.
But there are a lot of people who have come out during this period and they're not willing to live that kind of life.
And so I think people like Pierre Quarry, people like Dr. Peter McCullough, people like Dr. Robert Malone, there are so many of these people out there who risked everything, who would make, even somebody who I really like is Dr. Joe Latipo, who is the Surgeon General of Florida.
Oh, yeah.
And he's just such a sincere guy who does real research and just sort of follows it where it goes.
And, you know, so if people like that group were running the CDC and the NIH and all of the different, you know, medical health divisions, I think that would go a long way to turning things, you know, to a point where.
Where the direction could be permanently changed.
Not that it gets perfect right away, but that you get a whole bunch of powerful people who feel that it's their mission in life to end corruption.
So you need a leader who's taken the time to get to know all of those people.
And Bobby knows all of those people well and has spent the time getting to know which of those people are really trustworthy.
So, the question is you know, it's easy to talk about.
You know, you can look at Ed Dowd's book, Cause Unknown, right?
Which is about the other side of whether vaccines worked, you know, whether they prevented COVID, whether they prevented the transmission of COVID, you know, which is pretty clear, you know, that they haven't.
The other side of it is that they've led to these, you know, massive heart attacks by, you know, thousands and thousands of young people who were at no risk from COVID, you know, who were.
At statistically zero risk.
And, you know, one of the things that this book does is it shows the actual headlines and the backstories of hundreds of young, healthy kids, mostly athletes, who died suddenly on the field, many of them actually on the field, people who had never had any health problems before.
And, you know, you kind of look at that and you say, you know, we've had these people who have lied to us.
And the, you know, they sold us a product, they gutted the middle class, they ruined businesses, they shut down schools.
I mean, we don't even know what's going to happen with a whole generation of children who missed a couple of years of school.
Right.
So we have all of these problems that are sort of the side effects of big lies.
And so the question is, you know, what kind of truth and reconciliation can we have?
To set the country straight and to get in a direction that is more hopeful, where we really would have a sense that our leaders care about us, that our doctors and our scientists and our pharmaceutical companies are actually trying to make us healthier or trying to make people live longer.
And we're far from that now, but I think that we're closer actually than we were before COVID.
You know, Bobby Kennedy is kind of the leader of a rebellion.
And it's a rebellion that's really broad based, where people are just sort of sick and tired of what they've seen.
And they're just not going to stand for it anymore.
Right.
And they're ready to join something and to fight against what they see.
They don't quite know how to do it yet.
But I think that they're primed to sort of say the world is going in the wrong direction and that we need a leader.
Who's going to turn that around?
And that we need a broad based sort of group of people who are willing to stand up and fight.
Donating to Super PACs00:03:48
And that's what they get from alternative media, from the something like 17,000 doctors who refuse to do things the way Dr. Fauci wanted them done, leaders like Bobby Kennedy, shows like this show, people who are willing to take some personal risk and Really try to turn things around.
Well, I appreciate you doing this, man.
Where can, so you said over a million books sold in the last, what, two years it's been published?
Yeah.
It's fucking incredible.
Yeah, it's crazy.
Where can people find all these books that you're publishing?
Yeah, so the company name is skyhorsepublishing.com.
My Instagram is Tony Lyons is uncertain, which is sort of like, you know, prove to me what the truth is, don't force me to do anything.
And let me think where else people can find it.
Oh, right.
So, for Bobby Kennedy's campaign, you know, I would really encourage people to go to the Kennedy campaign website and to donate money.
And then I'm part of a super PAC, which is called AmericanValues2024.org.
What's a super PAC?
I heard the term.
I kind of loosely know what it is.
Yeah.
So, a super PAC.
So, if you want to donate money to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s campaign, the most you can donate in total is $6,600.
So, $3,300 for the primary, and then $3,300 more after that, though you can do it all at once.
Okay.
So, but if you want to donate much more money and, you know, help him become president, you can donate the money to a super PAC.
And so, if you donate money to AmericanValues2024.org, we then use that money to do, you know, anything we can do.
To get the word out and to amplify Bobby Kennedy's message.
So, for example, if he's on 20 different podcasts, we would take clips of those podcasts and create talking points from them, get influencers to kind of go out and discuss those talking points, send out emails, send out text messages.
So, those are the kinds of things that all politicians do.
And they're usually really, really well funded super PACs.
And part of the reason that they're so well funded is that the politicians are corrupt.
So it becomes kind of.
What does that stand for?
PAC.
Super PAC.
Political Action Committee.
Political Action Committee.
Okay.
So.
So a super political action committee.
Right.
So there's no limit on the amount of money that you can donate.
Okay.
So if you're a pharmaceutical company and you know that you have a candidate who's going to kind of.
Give you immunity from prosecution for the products that you create, or is going to speed them through the process.
You think it's a really good idea to put as much money as possible into this super PAC to help that politician get elected.
But it's more like lobbying.
In that case, it's sort of like you're almost putting it on your PL as sort of like we're going to spend.
$10 million to get these three people elected to Congress because then we're going to have enough votes to get something passed that's going to make us $50 million.
Thank You for Listening00:00:31
You know what I mean?
So that's the kind of thinking.
And that's the kind of corruption that we have to get rid of in this country because we don't want politicians who are put into power for the sole purpose of helping big companies make more money at our expense.
Well, I appreciate everything you're doing.
Some of the most fascinating books from Robert Kennedy to John Kiriakou.