All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 28, 2022 - Jimmy Dore Show
01:03:56
20221028_TJDS_20221028_Podcast_-_102722_9.27_AM
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey, we're going to see you in Denver, Palm Springs, Austin, Burbank.
That's right.
The Saturday after Thanksgiving here in Burbank and lots of dates in Los Angeles in December.
Go to JimmyDoorComedy.com for a link for all our tickets and join our premium program when you go there, too.
Hey, this is Jimmy.
Who is this?
Jimmy, this is American U.S. President Joe Biden.
Ah, Mr. President, how you feeling, buddy?
Jimmy, I'm feeling surprised as spring chicken.
Is that so?
Yes.
Clock, clock, clock.
Just a little dancing yard bird.
My campaign promise a Joe Biden in every pot.
Okay, that's probably too far.
I must say, Mr. President, those are bold words for someone about to turn 8.
What?
I know how old I am about to turn on November 20th.
So does everybody else.
No need to say it out loud.
Mr. President, it is important that we acknowledge that you are almost 8.
I can't hear you.
But only because I have my fingers in my ears, not because I'm hard of hearing.
I can still hear a pin drop a mile away.
No human has hearing that acute, Mr. President.
Well, then, what the hell was that sound, man?
Look, the point is, I am not going to pretend that my age will not be an issue in the 2024 campaign.
I'm not a fool.
But as I said in a recent interview, I will leave it up to the American people to assess my vigor and energy level and decide for themselves whether I am fit for another four years in office.
And I'm confident that they will.
Are you really sure about that?
Sure about what?
Wait, what did I just say?
Are you sure the American people will assess you as fit?
There are plenty of videos that seem to show you confused or distracted, let alone moving slowly, doddering about, and so on.
What the hell do the American people know?
I think God damn hell.
Look, here's the point.
Due to my advanced age, I get a top to bottom fiscal every year by my doctor, Dr. O'Connor.
And he gives me a detailed and clean bill of health.
Statement of a medical professional should be enough to assuage any and all concerns about my physical or cognitive abilities.
God damn it, where I is HR puffing stuff in the fucking hallway again.
Quit looking at me.
Okay, whatever you say, sir.
Yeah, that's more like it.
Look, Jack.
Today I got up at 5 a.m., exercised, took a meeting, exercised again, did my walking tour of the West Wing, checked in on staffers, held a cabinet meeting, did leg days, was on the phone with several world leaders, all before my 11:30 working lunch.
Does that sound like someone who's slowing down?
I suppose not.
If you're worried about my cognitive ability, go ahead.
Ask me anything, wise guy.
Okay, um, who is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom?
You mean England?
Yes, Great Britain.
Man, you can't say a third thing.
What the hell?
Okay, fine.
England.
Okay, that's easy.
I just spoke to her the other day.
Liz Trust.
Wrong.
What?
No, it's now Rishi Sunak.
Who the hell is that?
No, man, it's Liz Truss.
I just she just got in here a few weeks ago.
Nope, she just lost the leadership of the Conservatives, and they voted out a they voted in a former finance secretary, Rishi Sunak.
You gotta be kidding me.
There's a new prime minister already, yeah, already, yeah.
Man, I gotta sit on.
I feel dizzy.
I know everything's moving so fast.
I got it.
I gotta call this guy and get to fucking know him, too.
I suppose I just learned that other broads kids' names for nothing.
What's his name again?
Rishi Sunak.
What the hell kind of thing is that?
He's a British of Indian descent, the UK's first Hindu prime minister.
Can you imagine?
Yeah.
The world's changing so fast.
Prime ministers used to be named shit like Lord Boisenberry.
Now this my head hurts.
Are you okay, Mr. President?
Yeah, I'm fine.
I just need a nap.
During the workday, Jimmy, I take naps all the time.
I have to.
I'll level with you.
Every time earlier when I said I was exercising, that was code for nap.
When I said leg day, that's code for when Dr. Joe Biden rubs various creams on my leg for circulation.
I see.
I can't handle this shit anymore.
Too much shit.
Everything moves too fucking fast.
I'm not supposed to share the world stage with three prime ministers in two years.
It's not natural.
It's against the way of order of things.
This world, it just wasn't made for me.
You sure you aren't just too old to be president for another six years?
I told you, I'm a goddamn spring chicken, you little shit.
I'll tap dance around you so fast you won't know what hits you.
I'll chuck a bowling balls on a unique cycle.
Let the voters decide.
The voters.
I'll decide.
Jesus.
*cough*
he's asleep.
Establishment media sets of art and spiding.
So good luck bullshit we can't afford momentum.
Watch and see as a jack dog comedian speeds and jumps the medium and hits him head on.
It's the chimney door show I'm here with the hammer for the buzzsaw Aaron Mate.
Also, here's Steph Zambarano.
I'm also here with Dr. Aaron Curiatti.
Welcome back to the show.
Now, maybe you remember him.
He is a fellow and director of bioethics and American Democracy Program at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
He's also a senior fellow and director of the Health and Human Flourishing Program at the Zephyr Institute and a scholar at the Paul Ramsey Institute.
He's doing a lot of things.
But if you remember, he was stood up against the vaccine mandates and got a lot of trouble over it.
Can you tell us, first of all, welcome back to the show and tell us what was the how did that end up?
So that case is actually still in federal court.
And just to catch people up, so I spent 15 years as a professor in the School of Medicine at University of California, Irvine, where I also directed the medical ethics program.
And I challenged their vaccine mandate in federal court back in August of 2021.
And the university swiftly fired me after that.
This was a lawsuit on behalf of people like me with natural immunity.
And the latest on that is last month, the CDC finally caught up to the science and endorsed my central argument in the case, which is that we shouldn't discriminate between vaccinated and unvaccinated.
First, because natural immunity is more robust than vaccination.
And second, because these are not sterilizing vaccines.
These vaccines don't prevent infection and transmission.
So my case is actually still in the federal appellate court.
We're just waiting for a judge to be assigned and for the case to be heard.
But given that the CDC is now fully endorsing my position, I anticipate that the outcome of this case will hopefully go in my favor and set a precedent that there are limits to what the state can do in terms of mandating a novel therapy to be injected into people without informed consent.
So what do you mean by they don't have informed consent?
Well, so with a vaccine mandate, basically, if you're under a threat of losing your job, that constitutes a form of coercion.
So, you know, legally, informed consent means you have to be given accurate information about the vaccine, which was also not available in 2021 during the mass vaccination campaign.
And second, you have to be able to make that decision freely to accept or decline that medical intervention.
So even subtle forms of pressure or coercion would undermine informed consent when it comes to a research study or when it comes to consenting for a surgery or a medication.
And these vaccine mandates obviously did in end run around that basic principle of medical ethics.
The principle of informed consent is the central principle articulated in the Nuremberg Code, which was a response to Nazi atrocities, response to medicine in the Third Reich, where they experimented on people without their consent, often doing really horrifying experiments.
And the world reacted very strongly to that, you know, 50 years ago after World War II.
And somehow during the pandemic, we decided that it was okay to toss that principle, really the foundation of 20th century medical ethics.
We decided it was okay to just toss that principle overboard and mandate not just a medical intervention, but a medical intervention that, by our own federal government's definition, was still experimental, that was authorized only for emergency use.
And it was not a fully authorized product when these mandates were initiated.
So now I have to remind people that while the vaccine does not stop transmission or contraction, according to YouTube science, that it does slow the transmission and contraction.
And if I don't say that, they'll take my channel down.
So I just want to let people know I'm saying that.
And I don't want to lose my channel.
And so I have to say that.
But they did.
Now, two big things have come out.
One thing was that natural immunity was in the data from Pfizer.
Oh, yeah.
And we knew that in the fall of 2021, correct?
That Pfizer had found out that natural immunity was at least as good as the vaccine was, right?
Correct?
That's right.
And this should not have surprised anyone, Jimmy, because we've never had a vaccine that is superior to infection-induced immunity.
That's what a vaccine is trying to imitate.
You know, a vaccine, that's the gold standard.
And a vaccine is trying to get as close to infection-induced or natural immunity as it can without causing severe symptoms.
That's the whole concept behind a vaccine.
So it should not have surprised anyone that natural immunity would be at least as good and possibly superior.
And we now know that it's, in fact, superior to the immunity that you get from a vaccination.
And so wouldn't, so that would, it seems that that would be an unbelievably strong argument against mandatory vaccinations of someone who has already come to prove that they have the antibodies to the virus because then they would have natural immunity.
Now, natural immunity is a thing that has been going on since, I don't know, since the beginning of time.
Why do you think doctors, why do you think doctors during COVID forgot about it?
Like I saw Dr. Sanjay Gupta, he went on Joe Rogan's show and he advised it because Joe Rogan already had COVID.
He kicked it in 48 hours.
He tested negative for it in 48 hours.
And Dr. Sanjay Gupta told me we should go get a vaccine now.
And Joe Rogan had to explain to a doctor on television about natural immunity.
And Dr. Sanjay Gupta acted like he'd never heard of it.
Why was this?
Why did this happen during COVID?
No, it's very, it's very baffling because this is really immunology 101.
This is something that a first-year medical student should understand very clearly.
But what happened during COVID was that public health authorities and people in positions of power, people at the NIH, for example, who are responsible for funding science, basically made it clear that they wanted a needle in every arm and that any discussion of things like natural immunity or potential adverse effects of the vaccine was going to be forbidden.
It's just not something that you could talk about publicly.
So there was this, from the beginning, there was this lack of transparency and an attempt to control people's behavior by only giving information that we thought would encourage vaccination and never mentioning things, even true, basic scientific facts that might discourage vaccination.
And I mean, I talk about in my forthcoming book called The New Abnormal, I talk about this problem with transparency.
The federal agency that approves medications and vaccines, the FDA, was required on the day that they approved the Pfizer vaccine to release all the clinical trials data.
They didn't do that.
So I, along with some fellow scientists, had to file a FOIA request, a freedom of information suit against the FDA to get that data released.
The FDA came back and said, we'll give you 500 pages a month, which if you do the math, would have taken 75 years to release the data that they reviewed in 108 days.
The FDA shockingly also requested that the company, Pfizer, be allowed to redact the data before it was released.
The judge said no to both of those things and said, you've got to release it in the next eight months.
We've got a couple of months to go on that.
So basically, we're still in a position, Jimmy, where thousands of people like me lost our jobs for declining a novel injection whose safety and advocacy data still remains hidden from full public scrutiny and full independent analysis, which, you know, which should be concerning to Americans.
This goes back to that issue of informed consent.
You can't have informed consent if you're not informed, if you don't have all the information available.
So, and you know what?
A very popular phrase during COVID came up through the culture.
I'm sure it was thought up during a think tank sponsored by Big Pharma.
But the phrase is, please don't tell me you're doing your own research.
People would say that.
And I have to remind people, you know, before COVID, when they would say, doing your own research used to just be called reading.
And now they're shaming people for reading and getting informed about an experimental medical procedure.
And that doesn't set off any warning bells in anybody's heads.
Even comedians who are supposed to be the biggest skeptics in the world, they just repeat that.
They say, please don't do your own research as if that's some kind of smart thing to say.
That's actually anti-intellectual in the extreme as you wag your finger at someone else for wanting to read.
I'm sorry, I'm talking too much.
But I just want to show people.
No, absolutely, 100%.
That is such a good point because this was an example, not just of anti-intellectualism, but of the condescension that was showed to the American people.
You are too, you all are too dumb to go find sources of information to assess sources of information and to make your own healthcare decisions for yourself and for your child.
So you just need to shut up and do what you're told to do.
And even if with your own eyes and your own experience and your own senses, you talk to people or you encounter difficulties with what we're telling you to do.
You see the harms of lockdown and school closures on the mental health of your children.
Well, you're supposed to ignore your senses and your instincts as a parent and everything that you're observing and just shut up and do what you're told.
You're not supposed to go online and see that, oh my gosh, there are studies showing that during lockdowns, rates of depression tripled, rates of anxiety disorders quadrupled, drug overdoses and alcohol-related deaths shot up by 30%.
All that information is available for those who care to look.
That information, by the way, was published in the CDC's own journal.
But no, Americans who are questioning lockdowns need to be silenced or kicked off social media or shoved off their YouTube platform because they just need to do what they're told by their superiors.
Well, I mean, this is, first of all, completely un-American.
It's totally antithetical to democracy.
It's condescending.
And, you know, to their credit, there's a lot of Americans now that are waking up, both on the left and on the right, and starting to ask questions and starting to exercise their own judgment and critical scrutiny now.
And I think that's a very good thing.
I think that's exactly what they need.
And I appreciate you and the others who have been willing to go out there publicly and sort of scratch your head and say, hey, wait a minute, I'm not sure about this.
This isn't adding up, right?
Your listeners may not be an epidemiologist.
They may not be a virologist, but they are in possession of common sense.
They're in possession of logic.
They can see a manifest contradiction.
And to shut off that part of your mind is not going to be conducive to your health.
And it's not going to be conducive to social functioning and human flourishing.
That's how people operate basically in a totalitarian society.
So when people would say that, you know, first of all, it would just break my heart that they would say, please don't do your own research.
I would see comedians say it on stage and shame people in the audience.
Please don't, please don't do your own research.
It's the cra again, it's the craziest thing and the most anti-you know, like I don't have to be a, I don't have to be a general to know Vietnam was a mistake.
I don't have to know how to put a car together or even how it runs to know if a salesman's lying to me.
I can tell if a car salesman's lying to me.
And that's what Dr. Fauci is.
And that's what Dr. Collins is at the NIH or was at the NIH.
Those people are, and that's what every goddamn corporate news host is.
They're salesmen for big pharma.
And I know when someone's lying to me.
I don't have to be a scientist or a doctor to know when I'm being lied to.
And when people are contradicting themselves, and when people are telling me not to look into something, that sets off a red flag for me.
That's the first thing I'm going to do is go look into that.
Now, I forgot to tell people at the top of this interview, you have a new book out.
This book is all about this.
It's called The New Abnormal, The Rise of the Biomedical Security State.
And I just want to just read what the publisher says about the book.
In the space of a few weeks in early 2020, Americans witnessed the imposition of previously unimagined social controls by the biomedical security state, the unelected technocrats who suddenly enjoyed nearly absolute power to incarcerate, isolate, and medicate the entire population.
In this chilling new book, a dissident scientist reveals the people and organizations that formed the biomedical security state, its role in the origin of the pandemic and shaping the government response, why it is a threat to science, public health, and individual freedom, and what can be done to confront and defeat this new leviathan.
When COVID-19 broke out, Dr. Aaron Curiatti's work put him on the front lines, realizing that the mental, physical, and economic toll of lockdowns was catastrophic.
He began to protest that the cure was worse than the disease and an intolerable heresy.
When he refused vaccination because he had natural immunity from a previous infection, the University of California Irvine Medical School fired him.
He fought back in the courts and the media and has become a reliable source of truth amid official obfuscation and censorship.
Now it's time for all of us to fight back.
The deadly and arrogant misrule of the biomedical security state must not become the new normal.
So that's fantastic.
Everybody should check out that new book.
And I wanted to ask you, I see, so people, when I went to get the vaccine, they made me stay there for 15 minutes afterwards to see if I died.
Right.
That's what they told me, right?
You have to stay here, see if you have an adverse effect for 15 minutes.
And then when people would advocate for vaccine Mandates, they would say, oh, vaccines are just like traffic lights.
And I would say, no, it's not, because when I go through a traffic light, I don't have to pull over for 15 minutes to see if I die.
So, and now we find out that the Pfizer, an executive at Pfizer just revealed to the European Parliament, European Parliament, that they never even studied if the vaccine stopped transmission.
That's right.
They never even looked into it.
The original studies were, we say not powered adequately.
They were too small to even detect whether there was any difference with transmission.
So they weren't even designed to assess that particular study endpoint.
And even though public health officials and talking heads on TV suggested and sometimes stated explicitly, if you get this vaccine, you're not only not going to get sick, you're not going to give COVID to anyone else.
That was, we now know not true.
And also at the time, they can't feign ignorance because they didn't have any data suggesting that it was true.
You mentioned the possibility of vaccine adverse effects as well.
So one of the things that our Pfizer data has revealed so far is that there is a whole series of potentially serious adverse effects that we saw in the first three months after the vaccine was rolled out on a mass scale that the company knew about and did not disclose to the public.
So, you know, you mentioned earlier that I know when a car salesman is, you know, being a car salesman, even if I'm not an auto mechanic.
Well, you also know when your car is broken down and will not run.
But there have been many cases of people who had a severe adverse reaction to this vaccine.
And, you know, there's argument and debate about how common these side effects of the vaccine are.
We don't need to get into that, but some people have had severe adverse reactions to the vaccines.
And they've been hospitalized immediately after vaccination with neurological or cardiac problems and told by their doctors in the hospital, no, you need to go get your second shot before you're discharged.
And they're just being told that, no, you should not trust your own judgment and your own common sense that this may have been tied to the vaccine.
And unfortunately, some of these people, trusting in the authority of their physician, went ahead and took a second dose, which made their problem even worse.
I mean, these are heartbreaking stories of well-meaning people that have never thought that they needed to question institutional medicine or the physicians that were caring for them.
And unfortunately, there was a climate of there's no other word for it, Jenny than propaganda.
There was such a climate of propaganda around these vaccines that many physicians did not do their homework and just parroted what the local public health authority was telling them to say.
And unfortunately, at least some people were harmed by those interventions.
The care was not individualized the way it ought to have been.
So, but I, well, I just have to remind people that the vaccines are safe and effective.
They do slow the transmission and contraction of the virus, and they will keep you from getting seriously ill or hospitalized.
So that's the, I have to tell everybody that and make sure they know that.
I have to provide context to everybody when they're listening to this, or they might get the wrong idea about what we're saying.
And I don't want people to get the wrong idea about what we're saying.
Now, what about ICU beds?
Now, another thing people would tell me that you have to get a vaccine mandate is because ICU beds.
You don't want all these people clogging.
That's how they, that's the term they use.
You don't want to be clogging up our ICU units.
And I'm like, so who, who should we, who should we take a COVID patient out of the ICU for?
Should we make room for a guy who goes drunk driving?
Should we let him go into the ICU?
How about for somebody who sat there and ate boxes of donuts until their heart explode?
Should we make room for them?
Should we kick a COVID patient out?
How about somebody who goes skydiving?
And how about somebody who's a Hangla?
How about somebody who's a rock climber?
How about a Maangla?
So should all these people who do these dangerous activities or smokers or alcoholics, are they allowed to have ICU beds?
Or is it just people who get COVID are not allowed to have ICU beds?
And the reason why there aren't enough ICU beds is because we let capitalists staff our hospitals and staff our ICU.
And the reason why there aren't more ICU beds, there isn't one more ICU bed since the beginning of this pandemic is because they're not profitable to capitalist hedge funds who freaking staff our hospitals.
And that's what people aren't screaming.
Why aren't we screaming for more ICU beds instead of rationing care in the richest country in the world?
I'll turn it over to you.
No, you're absolutely right.
The solution to that problem of supply and demand is to increase the supply.
And in fact, you know, we did increase the supply and most of that increased supply was not necessary.
So this whole specter of people not being able to get an ICU bed because COVID patients were clogging them didn't turn out to be true.
I know this because I worked on the University of California's vaccine, not vaccine mandate, but the ventilator triage policy.
So we were digging through all those worst case scenarios for months and preparing for that for months.
And fortunately, in our state, we didn't come anywhere near our ventilator capacity.
There was that hospital ship that parked in Los Angeles harbor was never used.
Not one bed on that ship was used.
Thank goodness, right?
But this points to the fact that what we did early on is we made a decision rather than protecting people, and we should have done more to protect vulnerable people, especially the aged, those over the age of 70 who are at risk of severe disease, we should have done more to protect them.
But instead of protecting people who are at risk, we decided to protect hospital beds.
We decided to protect hospitals and prioritize them.
Well, what did this lead to in New York?
This led to we need to free up ICU beds.
So we're going to send COVID patients back to nursing homes where they can infect the most vulnerable people on the planet, which basically amounted to a policy that ended in countless unnecessary deaths, all for the sake of freeing up ICU beds.
So this is backwards, right?
ICU beds are for people, not the other way around.
And if there's more people that need ICU beds, let's build more ICU beds or let's put some tents with temporary ventilators.
Let's bring in the ships to the harbor.
Let's figure it out.
So you're right.
It's the hedge fund managers running the pandemic show, you know, focused on maximizing profits rather than maximizing good health outcomes for people.
And we end up with crazy policies like sending COVID positive people to nursing homes in order to free up ICU beds.
And anybody who had a different idea, like you, anybody who had a different idea on how to address the COVID pandemic, like so, for instance, the Barrington Declaration.
was immediately discredited and slandered and smeared in corporate pharma-funded publications at the direction of Dr. Collins and Dr. Fauci.
And so when the Barrington Declaration came around, they said that we should target our protection to people who are the most vulnerable, that a six-year-old boy doesn't have the same risk to this COVID as a 94-year-old woman with four more comorbidities, and we should target our protection.
Those people were discredited and slandered and smeared.
And you were told you were a crazy person if you thought anything other than whatever Dr. Collington Fauci said, Fauci, which is he's a bona fide criminal.
We've documented it here on this show.
But how do they get the compliance of all the other doctors?
Like, so if Virology 101 is natural immunity, why did now, why didn't, how did they think they could get away with that?
And why did they get away with that for so long?
Yeah, that's a great question.
And basically what you have to understand, Jimmy, is that the funding of academic medicine, academic medical centers where medical research is done and where physicians are trained, right?
Most of the funding for those institutions comes from the National Institute of Health, the NIH, where Fauci works and where Collins directs the whole program.
Well, Fauci and Collins and a few other people at the NIH basically control the purse strings of all federal funding of biomedical research, right?
There are universities out there, I don't need to name which ones, that get more than a half a billion dollars a year in federal funding, including NIH funding for research.
There's huge money at stake.
Now, how many deans, how many researchers, what we call the principals, investigators, the people who are leading clinical trials and other NIH-funded research, how many of those people are going to go against the NIH recommendations or what Dr. Fauci is saying on television with the threat that, you know, if I push back against these preferred policies, my funding may dry up.
I may not get that research grant next year.
So this is a big problem that requires reform at the federal level.
You have a very small number of people controlling the purse strings for massive funding of most biomedical research in the United States.
That gives those individuals enormous undue power over health policy.
And that created a kind of conspiracy of silence because I'm just not going to contradict the NIH or one of the other HHS agencies like the CDC, because that could come back to bite me next year when it comes for the next round of grant funding that I need to maintain my lab or maintain my position here at the university.
But I have some news on this that I think might be of interest to you and your readers.
So there's the attorney generals of Missouri and Louisiana filed a lawsuit in federal court, Missouri v.
Biden, alleging that the federal government was basically leaning on and dictating to social media companies what to censor, right?
So you talked about your censorship on YouTube.
Well, we have a lot of evidence from this lawsuit now, and I'm one of the private plaintiffs in that lawsuit.
The two great Barrington Declaration authors from the U.S. are two of the other private plaintiffs in that lawsuit.
And what we've uncovered so far basically shows that not only were these private companies censoring information that contradicted the mainstream public health narrative, but they were doing it very often at the behest of people in the administration at HHS, including Anthony Fauci.
And the news on this case is just the other day, the judge granted permission for us to basically depose many of these people.
So Anthony Fauci, the Surgeon General, this will be the first time that Fauci will be required to answer some tough questions under oath with the threat of the penalty of perjury attached to his testimony.
So I just posted on my Substack today about this.
If your listeners are interested in reading more about it, but that case is developing in some really interesting directions.
So stay tuned for more once we get Fauci's deposition, Surgeon General Vivek Murphy.
That's a big deal.
Many other people in the administration.
It's a big deal.
I can't wait because Fauci has never done a tough interview.
He's only done softball interviews.
He won't come on this.
So he goes on everybody's YouTube show except this one because he knows we'll ask him a real question and that he can't answer.
First of all, I would be like, why did you lie?
I don't know if you noticed they changed.
So he lied about masks and then he switched it and he said he lied because he didn't want mask shortages for hospital workers.
That's why he lied.
And now if you go back and you read like a Reuters story about why he lied, they say he didn't lie.
They say that he just changed his recommendation when the CDC changed their recommendation.
So they've just like Orwell said, they completely rewrote the history and that's not what happened anymore.
It's really funny to see that happen.
So let me ask you about, is everybody now, all the faculty and staff and students, are they all vaccinated at the UC Irvine?
They are.
There's a small number of people at the University of California who were granted religious exemptions.
It's almost impossible to get a medical exemption in California because the medical board is threatening anyone who writes a medical exemption.
But there are a few religious exemptions that were granted.
But by and large, outside of that very small number of people, yes, everyone is vaccinated.
They also have a booster mandate now that they have continued to maintain to this very day.
It's really astonishing to me.
The universities are hanging on to these mandates after most other public and private institutions have relinquished them and recognized that this is not the way to go.
For some reason, probably connected to money, the universities are maintaining not only vaccine mandates, but booster mandates for students, faculty, staff.
It's really hard to understand.
Now, I know you're not a lawyer, but just to me, I would be like, boy, because we know about myocarditis and males under 40 have a higher, they have a higher rate of myocarditis from the vaccine they do from COVID.
Now, overall, people have a higher rate of myocarditis from COVID than the vacc.
But men under 40, that's not true for.
And so now if a school mandates that, that you take that.
Now, I know you can't sue big pharma, But you could certainly sue a university.
So aren't they opening themselves up for, I mean, I bet what's going to have to happen is that Congress will pass a law giving indemnity, or I don't know what the word is, immunity to colleges who did this stuff, right?
Yeah.
No, I worry that no one's going to end up being responsible for these vaccine-related injuries for exactly the reasons that you described.
They're going to hide behind the CDC recommendation.
Now that the CDC is not recommended that you discriminate between vaccinated and unvaccinated, I'm not sure what their defense is.
But if there's enough of them that are sort of going to be holding the bag on this, you know, it wouldn't surprise me if those in Congress decided to shield them from liability as well.
So you can't sue the manufacturer for any harms done.
You can't sue the institution that mandated it.
At least there have not been successful suits in that regard yet.
You can't sue the government who helped to fund the development of these vaccines.
And you're basically left with no recourse.
And look, regardless of what you think about the side effects of vaccines, are they common?
Are they not so common?
No one can deny that some people have adverse effects.
And it seems only fair as a basic matter of justice that those people would be compensated, that the medical bills at least would be paid for, particularly if they're going to be disabled long term because of this.
And any decent society would recognize that some form of compensation is necessary.
But now that the vaccines have been added to the childhood immunization schedule by the CDC, that is also going to shield the manufacturers from liability, even after the emergency use authorization.
Hey, you don't need to use vaccines.
You being an ethicist, what kind of ethics surrounds the pricing of a vaccine?
Why do they get to just make up whatever price they want?
Now, the pricing used to be $30 a vax and they made $100 billion off it.
And then a lot of people aren't taking the vax anymore.
So all of a sudden, they get them to mandate the vacc for schedules for children.
And then they jack up the price to $130 from 30.
And nobody, there's like, there's no competition.
There isn't any market force happening.
In fact, it's the opposite of how capitalism is supposed to work.
When the demand goes down, the prices both go down.
They did the exact opposite.
So they can still meet their projected money projections, even though nobody wants to take their vax anymore.
What is the ethics around that?
Yeah, I don't know.
It's backwards on every level.
I mean, a fan of the free market can't possibly defend this.
A critic of trying to level the playing field using government regulation can't possibly endorse this.
It's pure price gouging.
It's, you know, I mean, look, for all the fans of capitalism out there, and capitalism has a lot to say in its favor.
This isn't capitalism.
This isn't capitalism.
You have a market that was created through mandates, right?
Through force or some coercion.
So you have the government funding the research to develop these vaccines.
You have the government profiting off these vaccines.
Many people still are not aware that the NIH co-owns the patent on the Moderna vaccine.
And people within Fauci's division are making royalty monies off of the Moderna vaccine.
So you have taxpayers funding the development of these vaccines.
You have then the companies that are profiting indemnified from all liability and responsibility for harms.
Then you have the government creating a market through mandates.
And then you have the government adding this to the vaccines that children are supposed to get.
And like you pointed out, the next day, Pfizer jacks its price up, you know, triples or quadruples or whatever it was.
You know, this is not market competition at work.
This is an industry that has completely captured the agencies that were meant to regulate it.
And it's the American taxpayer that ends up putting money in the pockets of shareholders and also having to deal with the consequences of any of these decisions that may turn out to be harmful.
It's just, it's a terrible setup from beginning to end.
So do you feel people like you, the people, the authors of the Barrington Declaration, YouTube hosts like myself who've spoken out about this and been labeled anti-vax, do you think we'll ever have our day?
Do you think we'll be vindicated?
You know, I think eventually the truth will come out.
I think there's a lot of people that are still sleepwalking.
I mean, it's a hard sell to try to tell people that those years of lockdowns and all the things you missed out on were probably not necessary.
In fact, they probably did more harm than good overall for people's health.
It's a really hard sell, you know, for someone who just was trying to be a good citizen and trying to do my part and do well for protecting the elderly who got vaccinated and boosted.
That, gosh, the efficacy of these vaccines is very short-lived.
And the side effects might be worse than you were initially told.
And if you're harmed by these, you're not going to have any recourse.
That's a tough sell.
So I think there's just a lot of psychological obstacles to, you know, and people just want to put this behind them and not think about it anymore.
But, you know, in my book, one of the things I'm trying to point out is this is not about doing a retrospective on the pandemic.
This is about looking at what are the things that were rolled out during the pandemic and how are they going to be used in the future?
Because the kind of militarization of public health and the welding of public health, the police powers of the state and digital technologies of surveillance and control, the sort of vaccine passport QR code model of controlling populations, that's not going away.
I know.
That's waiting for the next declared public health emergency.
And so we have to understand what happened to us over the last three years.
We have to take stock.
Otherwise, we're going to be facing the same kind of things with the next declared crisis because that seems to have become our new sort of model of governance.
That new digital ID passport thing that came up during COVID, they made it look like it's a medical.
That's all about medicine.
This is coming from the bankers.
This is coming from the oligarchs.
They want this to control you, just Like they controlled the trucker convoy up in Canada when they didn't like their protests.
They just shut off their economic funds so they couldn't travel.
They couldn't put gas in their trucks.
They couldn't fly.
They couldn't buy anything.
They couldn't pay their own mortgage.
They couldn't pay their own heating bills.
They couldn't do anything.
And that's how you stop a protest.
And that's the control of the oligarchy.
And that's, and they're using the guise of a medical emergency to institute this system.
And it's all about control.
That's exactly right.
That's the central theme of my book.
And you just summarized it in two sentences there.
I think that's exactly right.
Well, I want to remind everybody: the book is The New Abnormal: The Rise of the Biomedical Security State.
And everybody, check out your Substack.
It's Aaron Cariati at Substack, correct?
Yeah, aaroncariati.substack.com.
That's right.
I hope to have you on.
I really appreciate you making time for us today.
And I'd love to have you back on because there's lots more stuff to talk about.
And I hope you had fun, and I hope you'll come back.
Will do, Jimmy.
I look forward to coming back.
We could talk more about the lawsuit as there's new developments in that.
I would love to.
Would love to hear about that.
That's going to be exciting to see DeFauci be deposed.
That'll be fantastic.
Okay, Dr. Curiatti, thank you very much.
We'll see you next time.
Let's go to a card.
So our favorite guy, Jeffrey Sachs, right?
So this guy tells the truth.
He told the truth about the Syrian war on MSNBC, the only time that happened.
He's told the truth about the gain of function and funding it.
He's told the truth about where the virus came from, COVID-19.
He's told the truth about the Nord Stream pipeline that got him in trouble.
So here he is.
He's back and he's on some kind of conference.
It's the Athens Democracy Forum and it looks like it's sponsored by the New York Times.
And watch what he starts saying.
And the moderator actually stops him from telling the truth about this.
Watch.
The most violent country in the world in the 19th century, by far, was perhaps the most democratic or second most democratic, and that was Britain.
You can be democratic at home and ruthlessly imperial abroad.
The most violent country in the world since 1950 has been the United States.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
Let's enough.
Okay, I'm done.
Thank you.
So that's at a thing called a democracy forum.
Jeffrey Sachs started to tell the truth about the United States imperialism, and the guy from the New York Times shut him down right away.
Want to watch it again without me stopping it?
Here we go.
The most violent country in the world in the 19th century, by far, was perhaps the most democratic or second most democratic, and that was Britain.
You can be democratic at home and ruthlessly imperial abroad.
The most violent country in the world since 1950 has been the United States.
Jeffrey is stopped.
Jeff Free, I'm your moderator, and it's enough.
Okay, enough.
Jeff Free, I'm being paid by the oligarchy, and I have been for my whole career, and I plan on going out in style.
Now, would you please shut up?
We're here to pretend we give a shit about the world and democracy and liberty, okay?
If you're not willing to pretend, then shut up.
That's what that is, right?
That's exactly what that is.
That guy is Stephen Erlinger, who is the chief diplomatic correspondent of the New York Times.
So it's his job.
It's his job to basically go out every day and write articles portraying the U.S. as this glorious country that rules the world with generosity and spreads democracy and freedom.
And so here's Jeffrey Sachs to his face inconveniencing that narrative that he's paid to spread.
And so he has that freak out as a result.
Can't hear it.
And the people in the crowds hear it.
They see what's going on.
But again, it's worth that guy being humiliated publicly like that.
And there's a better term for it.
What he's doing to himself is he's debasing himself.
That guy.
What's his name?
Stephen Erlinger?
Yeah, Steven Erlinger.
He's debasing himself and he doesn't care because he'd rather keep his position in society and that job than keep his dignity or integrity, right?
So he's willing to throw his integrity and dignity and debase himself for money.
And that's all that is.
And he's not used to the experience of being confronted with truth.
Right.
Because he lives in this glass house, in this bubble, where anyone like Jeffrey Sachs is just kept out.
So you can't even hear that kind of perspective.
So when he does come face to face with it, he has this visceral reaction where he can't control actually how he responds and just has to shut it down.
And I just can't believe that.
So it was nice that the people in the audience applauded, but then they probably just sat there for the rest of the fucking thing.
And I guarantee you they did.
Why?
Because if they didn't, we would see video of it.
This wouldn't be the video I'm playing.
It would be the video of people yelling at that piece of shit from the New York Times and calling him out for being the oppressive oligarch tool that he is and the anti-democracy piece of shit that he is.
Wow.
That's what it looks like.
So like there's nothing more cringy than what that New York Times guy just did.
I loved it.
Yeah.
You want to watch it again?
I do.
The most violent country in the world in the 19th century, by far, was perhaps the most democratic or second most democratic, and that was Britain.
You can be democratic at home and ruthlessly imperial abroad.
The most violent country in the world since 1950 has been the United States.
All right.
All right.
Stop.
Jeffrey.
Enough truth.
Jeffrey, I'm your moderator, and it's enough.
Okay, enough.
What's enough?
What's enough?
Like, Jeffree Sachs doesn't even go, what's enough?
What do you mean, what's enough?
What's wrong with what I'm saying?
Like, he should have kept going.
Absolutely.
He should have kept going.
Yeah, absolutely.
It's enough truth for Erlinger to handle.
Is there something I'm saying that's incorrect?
What's not correct what I'm saying?
That's what Jeffree Sachs should have said back.
Maybe that's why Jeffree Sachs won't come on the show because he's afraid that I'll just ground him right into the ground.
Maybe that's what I don't know.
I wish he would come on the show.
We're trying to get a hold of him.
I know he's a big fan of yours.
Yeah, I'll put the word in.
Listen, you have your journalism printed with words.
He's a very busy guy.
He goes to all these fancy conferences like this and gets shouted out by media hacks.
So, you know, he has a lot on his plate, but I will put the word in.
And, You know, look, what he's saying there is just a simple fact, and this guy can't not allow it even to be articulated.
He has to shut it down.
And it's at a democracy forum.
It's called democracy.
It's at this thing.
The Athens Democracy Forum, an association with the New York Times, is an international conference pretending to give a shit about democracy, culture, and foundations.
It is held annually in September or October and has taken place in Athens, Greece, since 2013.
The forum brings together international business leaders, academics, policymakers, and experts to discuss and focus on new solutions to the most pressing issues.
That's enough, Jimmy.
That's enough.
The aim of the Athens Democracy Forum, what is the aim?
The aim is to serve as the North Star.
Oh, boy.
These people are so full of themselves.
It's amazing.
The North Star on which democracy and society can orient themselves.
It seeks to make democracy work, but without all the messy facts and truths about our horrible imperialism and hegemony.
Without that, that gets in the way.
Can we do it and not?
Let's see.
Do you have any civilians in post-9-11 in Iraq or Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, and Pakistan?
The U.S. has taken a tremendous human toll on those countries.
As of September 2021, an estimated 387,072 civilians in these countries have died violent deaths as a result of the wars.
And I'm going to tell you something.
It's higher than that.
It's almost a million people just in Iraq alone.
So I don't know.
These numbers are not right.
Civilian deaths have also resulted from U.S. post-9/11 military operations in Somalia and other countries.
Yeah, you think?
Remember the last time Jeffrey Sachs showed him on the show?
He was telling the truth about us trying to start a war with Russia.
The destruction of the Nord Street pipeline, which I would bet was a U.S. action, perhaps U.S. and Poland.
This is quite a statement as well.
Why do you feel that that was a U.S. action?
What evidence do you have of that?
Well, first of all, there's direct radar evidence that U.S. helicopters, military helicopters that are normally based in Ganask were circling over this area.
We also had the threats from the United States earlier in this year that one way or another, we are going to end Nord Stream.
We also have a remarkable statement by Secretary Blinken last Friday in a press conference that he says this is also a tremendous opportunity.
It's a strange way to talk.
Sorry, it's a strange way to talk if you're worried about the piracy on international infrastructure of vital significance.
So I know this runs counter to our narrative.
It runs, you're not allowed to say these things in the West.
But the fact of the matter is, all over the world, when I talk to people, they think the U.S. did it.
And by the way, even reporters on our papers that are involved tell me privately, well, of course, it doesn't show up in our media.
Professor, I don't want to get into the tip for time about what did it.
We don't want to get into what actually happened, okay?
That's it for that.
You with what happened, us with obfuscating.
Well, look, he's proven to be exactly right by what's come out since he said that.
A member of parliament in Germany says the German government was refusing to share any details about their investigation into the sabotage of Nordstream because it would jeopardize state secrets.
And that was a reference to the fact that it would jeopardize intelligence sharing with other countries.
And that's a suggestion that other intelligence services might have been involved in the sabotage of Nordstream.
And Sweden, I think it was Sweden or one of those governments did their own investigation and wouldn't share it with the other countries because, again, it would compromise state secrets.
So all that points to that they don't want to embarrass an intelligence service that was involved in sabotaging Nordstream too, because of course the idea that Russia would sabotage their own pipeline, their own form of leverage over Europe, is just ridiculous.
And everybody else had the motive and the open intent to blow up NordStream 2.
They were saying that for a long time that they would stop it as you played the clips of Joe Biden promising that he would.
Zach Weed wants us to remind everybody the U.S. is illegally invading Haiti right now, and no one is suggesting sanctions or an embargo.
That's right.
We're occupying Syria right now.
No one's suggesting sanctions or an embargo on us for that.
Okay.
Great work by Jeffrey Sachs.
Hopefully we'll see him on the Jimmy Dore Show soon.
*Bell rings*
Hey, this is Jimmy.
Who's this?
Jimmy, this is Concerned Citizen Vince Fall.
Double V. That's me.
Good to hear from you, Vince.
What's on your mind today, pal?
Well, I'll tell you, Jimmy, optimism.
That's what.
The future of this nation is bright, and my faith in the young people has been restored.
How's that?
Well, remember the last time I called and I was bitching about beyond meat and impossible burgers for some weird region?
Yeah.
I call them about food now.
That's what I do.
Yeah, I vividly remember that.
Well, if you recall, I was cheering the fact that these dumbass anti-American meat-attacking products were tanking and their shares were plummeting.
But today we received an even better piece of patriotic food news.
Oh, really?
What's that?
Jimmy, they did a survey of Gen Z to figure out what their favorite restaurant is.
And there was a clear winner.
Do you know what it was?
Do you know, Jimmy?
I sure don't, buddy.
Buckle the fuck up.
It was Chick-fil-A.
Chick-fil-A?
You bet your commie-ass Chick-fil-A.
What?
Why so incredulous?
Why'd you say that so incredulously?
Why wouldn't it be Chick-fil-A?
I don't know.
I guess my palate's just a little more refined than that.
Yeah, of course, you're a big Hollywood lefty liberal with fancy foodies, food pics, and whatnot.
Yes.
Well, let me tell you, true red-blooded Americans love Chick-fil-A.
Is that so?
Nothing has ever been more so, my friend.
First of all, it's delicious.
The chicken is juicy and flavorful, whether you're fucking up a sandwich, strips, or they're kick-ass nugs.
Honestly, Jimmy, when I'm in there, I can't decide.
Sometimes I can't make up my mind.
Standy, strips or nugs.
And the people behind me in line to get a little testy because I can't decide.
I got you.
Okay.
But the staff is very patient because they're polite, polite, and friendly and patient.
They just stand there with that wan Mormon smile on their face until I choose nugs.
Let's be honest, Jimmy, who is always going to be nuggets.
It's always going to be nugs.
Always going to be nugs.
Okay, fine.
You like Chick-fil-A, duly noted.
But I don't see how this is some patriotic win for America.
Because they're the least woke chain in America.
That's why.
I don't understand.
Jimmy, 10 years ago, there was a massive campaign To boycott them because they weren't woke enough.
It's not that they weren't woke enough, it's that their management, being fundamentalist Christians, were actively supporting political movements that were trying to oppose gay rights, such as gay marriage.
Okay, yeah, well, it's better for my argument to frame that by just saying not woke enough because I am in no way a Christian whatsoever, nor do I have any problem with gay marriage because I'm a libertarian.
But I am an anti-woke culture warrior, so I have to sell out my vague principles for the good of the team.
Ah, I see.
Okay.
So the symbolism of this is beautiful.
Gen Z doesn't care about the boycott bad corporations clap trap because that chicken is so juicy and delicious.
The libs tried their horseshit on the TikTok generation, and they said, Oh, yeah, suck my dick dock.
Jesus.
I'm sorry, I forgot this was a family show.
So, who followed Chick-fil-A on that poll?
Well, Jimmy, I'm glad you asked.
The good news just keeps coming.
Number two is Starbucks, which means Gen Z doesn't care about unions.
Yeah.
Number three was McDonald's, which means they don't care about the planet.
And number four was the Olive Garden, because that means they don't care about taking ethnic cuisine and turning it into absolutely unpalatable Americanized garbage.
In the words of the great Pete Townsend, the kids are all right.
Does this really matter, Vince?
Aren't you reading a little too much into this?
Gen Z are teens, Vince.
All this says when 17-year-olds, all it tells you is where 17-year-olds go when they have a $20 bill in their pocket.
Come on, man.
Don't crap all over my positive trends.
It's America, baby.
People vote with their stomachs.
These Z's have been exposed to wokecraft their entire life and they said no more.
We want nugs and unlimited breadsticks.
If you say so.
Do you eat at any of those places?
Jimmy, if you ever catch me at an olive garden, please take me out like Markil Corleone did.
One in the throat, one in the head.
I see.
So that's just for the poor.
Of course, poor who, thanks to rejecting woements, will eventually impose higher taxes for people like me.
So that's what this is all about.
Exactly.
At first glance, these young kids look like they're going to be a problem with their blue and pink hair and non-binaryism and general rejection of an understanding of human existence that makes sense to me whatsoever.
But it turns out that it's to where they eat on the weekends, they will be manipulated into voting against their own interests, just like every other dump generation.
Well, this seems like pretzel logic to me, Vince.
Oh, shit.
Auntie Ann's was number six.
What are you eating tonight, Jim Jam?
I'm eating at an Italian Oliveta.
Oh, well, hello, Mr. Fancy Fans.
Oliveta, what is that?
What do you mean?
It's an Italian restaurant that I love.
That's the name of it.
Yeah.
Oh, it's not the Olive Garden.
It's something nice and special.
That's right.
That's like where I eat.
That's at the end of the day, we're the same.
Yeah.
Anyway, I gotta go, bitch, into a steakhouse where none of these loser weirdo Gen Z kids are gonna be, and I'm gonna love it.
Okay, great to talk to you double B. Hey, become a premium member.
Go to JimmyDoorComedy.com.
Sign up.
It's the most affordable premium program in the business.
Oh, All the voices performed today are by the one and only the inimitable Mike McRae.
He can be found at MikeMcRae.com.
That's it for this week.
You be the best you can be, and I'll keep being me.
▲
Export Selection