Today, Dan and Jordan finish catching up by taking in Alex's very serious warning to Trump that he released on Christmas. Then, they take in the December 29 episode to see how many stacks (aka "stackies") Alex can get through in one show.
Yeah, I got the H.G. Wells book from that era where if you were a science fiction writer, you also had to write The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire along those lines, yeah.
This is an emergency Christmas Day warning to President Trump.
You are either completely ignorant about the so-called vaccine gene therapy that you helped ram through with Operation Warp Speed, or you're one of the most evil men who has ever lived to push this toxic poison on the public.
and to attack your constituents when they simply try to save their lives and the lives of others.
We're about to lay out the basic incontrovertible facts that what you told Candace Owens just a few days ago is nothing but a raft of dirty lies.
So the original, the last time we were talking about this, Alex was kind of responding to Trump's appearance with Bill O 'Reilly, where he admitted he got the booster and all this.
Now, by this point, Trump had done that interview with Candace Owens, where she had...
He's been implying and saying that the vaccines, people who are vaccinated are the ones who are in the hospitals and dying most.
Recently, Candace Owens attempted to confront you politely face-to-face with the fact that these so-called vaccines are causing a lot of death and illnesses.
And you doubled down, saying that nobody has been hurt by these shots when that is just a flat-out lie.
And then you tripled down on top of that and said that 90% of people in the hospitals around the world have not had the vaccine.
When the facts and the statistics show the opposite, in Germany, in the UK, in the US, in Canada, across the world, in places like Israel, the double and triple vaxxed...
are more than two times likely to become sick and to be hospitalized and or die.
In fact, a new study came out just this week.
Here it is for you to research it, President Trump.
So we've spent so much time going over specific claims when they've popped up on Alex's show in the past, so I'm not even going to get back into the weeds on the claims about vaccinated people being twice as likely to be hospitalized.
It's just an old false talking point, but I was curious about this new study, so I thought I'd check in on this.
I generally end up listening to stuff, and when something becomes necessary for me to check visually, I'll go and watch the video.
We'll get to the study in a moment, but I wanted to say something about the experience of going through Ezra's Twitter feed to try and find the link to the study.
It was actually kind of shocking.
Just scrolling through it heightened my anxiety.
It's just a barrage of memes and sensational posts making arguments that I know are flawed and dumb, but the sheer volume of them and the quickness that they come at you and the confidence with these people with shit positions, they just proffer them up.
It still had an effect on me.
It was horrifying to consider what the experience would be like for someone who didn't know that these people are all liars and con men.
So this study, like I said, hasn't been peer-reviewed, and it almost certainly will either have to be redone or retracted as soon as any review begins.
To quote Ezra's analysis of the study, it shows that, quote, This is in regards to vaccine effectiveness against the Omicron variant.
The reason that I say that this study will probably never make it past peer review is that there's a glaring methodological problem with how they prepare the data for the study.
There were three groups of people that they looked at.
Unvaccinated people, people who had gotten two doses of Moderna, and people who had gotten two doses of Pfizer.
It very well may be the fact that there is a reduced efficacy over time for these vaccines against the Omicron variant, but quite likely the reason there's a negative efficacy reflected in these numbers is that the study excluded people who had previously tested positive with the PCR test, which creates some problems for the data.
One issue is that people who tested positive previously are probably going to be a group that skews heavily towards being unvaccinated, and it's been shown that the Omicron variant can absolutely reinfect people who've previously caught COVID.
Removing this group from the data set may have an effect on the results, or at very least would be a cause for concern to trust the specifics of the numbers as being reflective of reality.
Even leaving that concern aside, the authors of the study have provided a very reasonable explanation for the numbers that make sense.
Quote, The negative estimates in the final period arguably suggest different behavior and or exposure patterns in the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts, causing an underestimation of the vaccine effectiveness.
This was likely the result of Omicron spreading rapidly initially through single super-spreading events causing many infections among young vaccinated individuals.
Super-spreading events could have occurred in places where vaccination was required to enter, and this is an issue that's particularly relevant to this study.
The subject of this study were all people in Denmark, which is actually pretty relevant.
In September, Denmark lifted all of its COVID restrictions and went back to business as usual.
It was believed that there was a high enough vaccination rate, so there was no longer any reason to be required to show proof of vaccination at bars and clubs or anywhere.
This was prior to the first identification of the Omicron variant by researchers in South Africa on November 24th.
In mid-November, it was starting to become an issue in Denmark that cases were starting to go up again, and on November 29th, the Danish health authorities reimposed public health measures, including requiring masks and not allowing people to enter many places without a corona pass.
If you look at this study, you'll see that this is the precise time frame when their data was being collected.
The first check-ins were on November 20th, and it ended at the earliest on December 12th, unless there was a positive test or a death that would lead.
Sure.
Here's where the context gets very important.
If you go to the Danish government site about the Corona pass, these are the groups who are eligible to get that pass.
Quote, you can get a Corona pass if you have been previously infected within the last six months, have been vaccinated or tested negative with a PCR test that is no more than 72 hours old and for rapid tests that is no more than 48 hours old.
People who are unvaccinated but who have tested positive in the past within the last six months are eligible for the pass that would allow them to be in places with potentially high concentrations of people around when Omicron was going wild and super spreading events were most likely occurring.
right.
Really something you could use this non-peer-reviewed study to back up.
So what we're kind of describing is a situation where so many people are vaccinated that the available pool of subjects is such that it's more likely to find that vaccinated people are being reinfected simply because there's so many more of them.
For all but nine days of the time that the study was taking place, unvaccinated people couldn't go on public transit or enter bars or restaurants, whereas vaccinated people could, as well as people who were not vaccinated but who had tested positive in the past.
These factors make the raw data that you may see, let's say, like in a tweet posted by a notorious Canadian propagandist, it's less than the full picture.
It'll be interesting to see exactly how much of a lowered effectiveness there is over time with Omicron, but this study alone isn't going to prove anything.
One of the nice things about science and the peer review process is that when you have a lot of people all coming to the same results, they're far more reliable than if you just have one study out of Denmark!
Wow, that makes me think that any study now should have highlighted sections where the authors are like, hey, this data could be taken out of context and used for evil purposes.
Just like big...
Giant bullet points of like, here's how propagandists might take this data.
So that when they do, you can even go to the study and be like, see, you're doing what they said you would!
That's so stupid that I don't even really know where to begin with.
I guess I would say that Alex would probably have done a second take after he said Omnicron, but we've seen him say that so much that I think he just actually thinks that's the name.
More importantly though, if the vaccines were wiping out people's immune systems, you wouldn't just be seeing an increase in cases of COVID, particularly Omicron.
You'd be seeing people dead everywhere from normal very minor things.
Without proper medical attention, people who are vaccinated would be dying or getting severely ill from bacteria that we all normally encounter on a regular basis.
Also, the figure that Alex is saying about how you're twice as likely to get infected if you get the Pfizer vaccine doesn't even match up with the misrepresentation that he's reporting from Ezra Levant's tweet.
So we talked about tranches earlier, just because it's a fun word.
We know this word is now identifiable with the FDA documents that are being released vis-a-vis their security checks and safety measures surrounding the Pfizer shot.
The big pharma takeover of humanity via the immune system.
From day one of the so-called vaccines rollout, Pfizer and the FDA have fought tooth and nail to stop any documents being released to medical whistleblower groups.
But in the last two months, federal courts have ordered the FDA to release several tranches of millions of pages of documents.
The first two data dumps show conclusively that the so-called vaccine has caused thousands and thousands of deaths and more than 160,000 adverse reactions, including spontaneous abortions and miscarriages.
Anyway, it's nice to hear that there's more tranches of documents now.
We've already gone over Alex's narrative about this dumb shit back on episode 626, so I'm not going to belabor that by going over it all again.
His talking points haven't changed at all, so I don't really believe he's seen any of the new documents that have been released.
The initial documents, the ones he lied about initially, were released on November 17th, 2021.
After that, a few PDFs were released on December 1st, another batch of documents on December 13th, and then one index file on December 22nd.
There's absolutely zero chance Alex has read any of the documents that were released on December 13th because he's already got everything he needs to make up stories from the first document that he read.
That's enough.
Why would he overcomplicate things when he can use that one document as a bedrock to build whatever bullshit he wants on top of it?
Also, Alex probably isn't interested in what's in any of these documents because they really don't help his arguments at all.
There's a 344 page analysis of efficacy trials that show very strong efficacy results.
So that doesn't really help.
There's also a 2,030-page document listing interactions with participants in the trials, like visits to get medical histories or documents showing informed consent being given.
Alex isn't going to dig through this, and no one's tweeted out anything for him to be mad about yet, so the documents in this tranche are just basically the same as the ones in the old one to him.
It's just more of the same thing, which is kind of a tell that he doesn't actually believe there's anything to be revealed in any of these documents.
If he actually believed that this was like a big smoking gun, wouldn't he be trying to squeeze Right.
And then the documents that are in it, which I'm sorry, I haven't had a chance to read them all.
I've just read the synopsis.
But thousands of more deaths, thousands of more miscarriages, bleeding out of your nose, having convulsions, becoming paralyzed, becoming blind, your ovaries basically dissolving.
Uh-oh, oh, and I've got more on that.
But it's all liberal.
It's so trendy.
Major Norwegian study finds COVID-19 vaccines interfere with young women's periods and basically give you endometriosis where your uterus has got to be removed.
This President Trump is what you are now signing on to.
So, there's a recent study that looked at the possibility of a connection between the vaccines and menstrual changes, and they did find that incidents of menstrual changes did seem to rise after vaccination.
That being said, Alex is a total liar and a fabulist.
This study has nothing to do with endometriosis or people needing to have their uteruses removed.
That's just something Alex is pulling out of thin air.
The actual study had to do with self-reporting of any changes in menstrual patterns for women between the ages of 18 and 30. The specific changes they were looking for had I guess if Alex wants to play hypothetical OBGYN games and assume that any incidences of pain were secretly endometriosis, I guess he could...
Do that if he wants, but he'd just be making that up because the study does not back that up at all.
The authors of this study were very careful to point out that this data relies entirely on self-reporting, so there is a possibility that other variables could lead to participants not reporting their symptoms with complete accuracy.
Also, they do point out that their data shows that, quote, They don't have any data yet on the duration of any effects after dose 2, but it does appear that it probably will be similar to the phenomenon seen in dose 1, but that's left to be seen.
Right.
There's indications that it would probably maybe have some effect and then go back to normal.
And as somebody who is not a weird 1930s man-child, I've talked with my partner many times about her menstrual cycle, and there are many different variables that can make it early or late or heavy or light or whatever it is you want to do.
It can change.
It's an ongoing process.
It's not like, hey, it didn't happen on the 22nd, so we're all fucked, you know?
Of mRNA technology, Dr. Robert Malone has gone public for more than a year and a half, warning that his technology used to counter a cold virus would lead to serious blood clots and autoimmune disorders like ADE.
And now the hospitals are full across the Western world of double-vaxxed patients who are showing the exact signs of ADE.
So I'll wait until he provides some evidence to make a conclusion on that.
As for Robert Malone, it's definitely not a consensus opinion that he's the inventor of mRNA technology.
He's been making that claim as he makes the rounds on all the anti-vex media outlets like InfoWars and Brett Weinstein's podcast Dark Horse, but it's not really fair.
He did some work in the late 80s that involved mRNA.
But there are studies you can find that predate his work using mRNA stuff, going back to at least 1978.
People in the field seem to have the opinion that he was a part of the history of mRNA, but it's grandiose for him to call himself the inventor of the technology, as well as it being kind of disrespectful to all the other scientists that played a role in the gradual development.
It's fun, though, to call him the inventor of the technology, because then you get to play out that...
Fun, dramatic game where the guy who invented something that turned out to be deadly has to come out and try and stop the monster he created.
Like, Alex seems to be a sucker for the narrative of, like, I've gotta fix the wrongs.
Like, if you recall, back when he was around, Dr. Group claimed that he was motivated to sell health products and cleanses to undo the damage that his father did because he allegedly invented saran wrap.
His dad did not invent saran wrap, and Robert Malone didn't invent mRNA technology.
But if you want to pretend those things are true, you get to present their stories as, like, comic book shit.
So at this point, I was really confused because Alex was talking about Robert Malone, and then he starts talking about somebody else, but he doesn't say their name.
Robert Malone has now issued an emergency warning to the parents of the world to not give their children the experimental mRNA injection.
One of the most respected names in the world concerning vaccine technology and is the former chief scientist at Pfizer over vaccines.
He has looked at every angle of this rollout, not just in the U.S., but across the world, and has concluded that it is a deliberate depopulation operation targeting humanity with infertility, blood clots, heart attacks, and more.
I don't know why they would do that, though, because they'd then play a video that has Michael Yedon's name on it, so it's not like you have to censor that because he's going to sue them or something.
So Alex likes to cite Yidon as the former chief scientist at Pfizer, and typically will say that he was the chief scientist over vaccines.
This is a flagrant lie that's meant to inflate his credentials.
When Yidon was working at Pfizer, which he did, his title was Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer of the Allergy and Respiratory Unit of Pfizer.
He worked at the Pfizer plant in Kent, which was closed in 2011.
At that point, he decided not to try to find another job in the industry, but instead to forge his own path.
He convinced the higher-ups at Pfizer to allow him to work with some of their compounds, which they almost never do.
From his telling of it, quote, the key was in getting Pfizer to recognize that we could not pay cash for the assets, but we were willing to grant equity in exchange for their assignment while spinning the dream of therapeutic use in areas that at the time they had little interest in.
Essentially, we would create upside in which they'd share and they needed to do nothing but agree to our proposition, the alternative most likely being that everything would be lost.
Out of this initiative, he formed a biotech company called Ziarco, which almost entirely focused on dermatology, particularly two eczema drug candidates that they had gotten from Pfizer.
After showing a good deal of promise, largely surrounding a once-daily orally-administered eczema treatment called ZPL389, Ziarko was bought out by Novartis for an undisclosed Okay, great.
So this deal that he made was largely based around the promise of this drug, ZPL389, and the potential that it had to become super profitable for Novartis.
However, if you flash forward to July 2021, you'll learn that this story did not end well.
The drug failed to perform in Phase 2A trials, and Novartis decided to abandon it.
And in the process, they took a hit of approximately $489 million.
This is the largest thing on Yidan's resume since 2011, and even prior to that, when he was working at Pfizer, he had nothing to do with vaccines or even infectious disease.
The nature of the work that he was doing and has done is intentionally being fudged in order to lend his words an unearned credibility.
He's made a bunch of completely unfounded COVID.
conspiracy claims in the past year or so, but there's no proof for any of it other than to point to his fake former job title and assume that if he was the former chief scientist for Pfizer, then he must know what he's talking about.
And again, it's the same thing.
It's the guy who's like turned against the company.
Also, Alex claims that he's one of the most respected people in the world regarding vaccine technology, and that is an absolute lie.
Alex might respect Yidon a lot because he says what Alex wants to hear, but that doesn't mean that he has any standing on the subject in the real world.
President Trump, there's not much time left for you to turn back.
Across the world, children are being injected with dangerous gene therapies that erase their immune systems and give them chronic illness.
President Trump, you don't want this to be your legacy.
You don't want to be the person that was tricked by Fauci into launching this big pharma takeover and who later, when confronted with the facts, decided to be a coward and to double down, betting on the corporate system, betting on big pharma, betting on the UN and the Build Back Better Great Reset Agenda of Klaus Schwab.
Don't throw in your lot with Bill Gates.
Don't throw in your lot with Klaus Schwab.
Stand with the people of America and the world.
Stand with the children.
Come out and tell the public that you were lied to.
Trump or fool him into getting these vaccines made but leaving that aside if there's one thing I can't imagine ever happening it's Trump coming out and saying that someone fooled him.
He and Alex are running a pretty close race in terms of who the bigger narcissist is and Trump's ego would never allow him to look that weak in public.
That said, this is a really fun way for Alex to present his point.
He can do this blowhard shit about how time is running out for Trump to turn back and pretend that he's talking directly to Trump so when Trump inevitably does nothing, Alex can pretend that he actually directly rejected Alex's plea to stand with the people.
So at this point, this video's getting a little annoying for me because it's so obviously meant to be for the audience while pretending to be a warning to Trump.
It feels to me like this is an attempt to soft launch turning Trump into a villain on the show while doing so in a way where hopefully people in Alex's audience who still support Trump won't turn on Alex.
He's a man stuck between two extremist communities that he's helped cultivate.
The Trump idolaters and the anti-vax lunatics.
And now he's in the unenviable position of trying to thread the needle in a way that retains as much of his revenue stream as possible without alienating too much of either side.
And there's no way you're going to convince people who think that vaccines are killing everyone that it's okay for Trump to be like, vaccines are great!
The globalists have bit off more than they can chew.
And their attempt to take over the planet using this medical scare that's in the Rockefeller Foundation's own documents, Operation Lockstep, is destined to fail.
There isn't much time for you to turn back, Trump.
If you only care about yourself, then understand this.
Your legacy will be that of a monster.
Your legacy will be that of a eugenicist.
Your legacy will be that of a child killer using medical tyranny.
As we've discussed over and over again, Operation Lockstep isn't a real thing.
It's a lie about a Rockefeller document and basically just traces back to a meme.
While I was listening to this, the sense that I came away with is that Alex is trying to threaten Trump.
Essentially, what's happened is that the two of them don't agree on the issue of the vaccine, and on some level, I suspect that Alex knows that the supposed evidence he's presenting is shit, so the last option left to try to get Trump to help him expand the grift is to extort him.
Alex isn't saying that if Trump doesn't change his tune on vaccines, the natural result of that is that Trump's legacy will be that of a monstrous baby killer.
He's saying that if Trump doesn't change his tune on vaccines, Alex will start yelling about how Trump is a monstrous baby killer.
That's what's going on.
unidentified
Alex, Alex, if Congress doesn't do what I tell them to do, I know a lot of dirt.
The subtext and text of this video is that the warning Alex is giving Trump is a warning that he's going to turn his audience against Trump if he doesn't do what Alex wants him to do, and he'll do it by calling him a monstrous baby killer.
This is meaningless, and it's going to go nowhere for a couple reasons.
First, the Trump cult world doesn't really need Trump himself anymore.
It'll take some effort to build up a new demagogue for them to rally around, but the physical person of Trump isn't really that necessary.
If he goes against the pillars of the constructed dogma that they've made, then they'll have to choose whether they're more invested in Trump as a person, or the COVID conspiracies and anti-vex bullshit they've based their identities on for the last year or so.
I suspect that most would choose the latter, and you can see the similar dynamic play out in the QAnon world, where they don't even really need Trump anymore, even though their ideology was based on the idea that Trump was the anointed savior who's gonna release the swarm.
The second reason this is going nowhere is because the solution for Trump would be to give in to the demands of these people who are threatening to turn on him in an attempt to preserve his base.
That would be what Alex is kind of hoping he'll do.
This would make Trump look super weak, which in effect eliminates the thing that makes him appealing to the base in the first place.
He was their strongman who was going to fight against their imaginary evil enemies, so if he shows himself to be weak enough to take a threat like this seriously, you'd probably get Alex not to talk shit about him, but the appeal that he held as a strongman leader is essentially destroyed, rendering him more or less useless.
And he was saying that Alex had lied to him about what he had said about Sandy Hook.
In that case, Rogan backed down and gave in to Alex's demands, possibly motivated by a misguided belief that they have a meaningful friendship.
In doing so, he lost control of the narrative.
Alex now more or less owned the image of Joe Rogan for his audience, and Rogan inexorably tied his own public image to Alex's.
I don't think that the full consequences of that decision have really even befallen Joe yet, but I don't think it's going to look good in hindsight for him.
So yeah, Alex is kind of hoping Trump will do that, and he never will.
Trump is never going to see this message, and even if he did, he wouldn't give a shit about Alex's meaningless threats that are being passed off as a warning.
And we are going to continue to educate others that aren't informed.
And we are going to continue to politically and culturally and economically and spiritually mobilize to stand against this one-world government medical tyranny, cashless society, medical ID, social credit score, carbon tax system for being able to take over our lives and dominate us and convert us from once free peoples into slaves.
Regardless of what Trump does, we have already chosen to tell the truth and to take action against these tyrants.
Now Trump simply needs to decide which side he's going to be on.
Also, I think there's a real strong tell here that this isn't a message directed at Trump, and that's the fact that it ends with a three-minute commercial for Reset Wars.
Feels kind of like pretending you're talking directly to Trump that's just a pathetic marketing ploy to make your audience feel like they're listening to something important and you're putting it on the record.
But I think that that was the last thing I expected to be the follow-up to I do all this studying and a little bit of a pause, and then we're dead already.
How many times in the last 22 months, now almost 23, this is since February of two years ago, how many times have I said this is an organized collapse of civilization and the destruction of confidence in our governments, in our institutions, and in our currencies, and in our churches, and in our families?
China was the number one story, it turns out, in the world.
Not Russian troops in the U.S. threatening to attack Russia and Ukraine.
That was the number one story.
Not China threatening to invade Taiwan over the weekend.
The number one story in the world, according to Google and Yahoo, was Alex Jones' wife mixing up medication and blacking out and attacking herself, police, you name it, and having to be restrained.
Alex is a high-profile media figure, so it's not really surprising that there would be a ton of stories about his wife getting arrested for domestic violence on Christmas Eve.
This isn't an attack on the family or Christmas.
That's just the way Alex is trying to shift the conversation into being about his grandiose ideas of his own martyrdom.
While I definitely don't agree with Alex about that nonsense, I do think that people didn't do a great job with the story.
And that possibly there was a bit of schadenfreude that people were expressing at the idea of Alex being the target of domestic violence.
And I think that's not cool at all.
Making fun of victims of domestic violence is...
You know, we understand, even if they're assholes, that's not appropriate, and can easily result in the shaming, stigmatizing, and triggering of other victims.
No, without all or any of the information, because that's kind of the point of my position on the show, I tweeted out a dumb joke, and then I read about it and deleted that dumb joke.
I think that people who had far more information at their disposal made decisions that were some bad coverage.
And this puts me in a bit of a strange situation because I typically try to avoid covering things that are personal matters for Alex, but here he's really putting his business out on the streets.
Which makes me uncomfortable.
I thought about it, and I'm not going to spend time on this story unless there's some sort of a major development with it.
I just wanted to bring it up here briefly to make sure that people don't think I haven't heard about it and send me a hundred links, and to chime in publicly that I don't support a fair amount of the coverage and commentary that is going on about this story.
Also, some of the commentary that I don't support about it comes directly from Alex on his own show, and that's kind of tough for me to ignore.
If anything, it's an attempt at a persuasive essay.
We herewith present scientific evidence that calls for an immediate stop to the use of gene-based COVID-19 vaccines.
We first lay out why the agents cannot protect against viral infection.
If this were actually a legitimate study about whether or not deaths that occurred after vaccination were caused by the vaccination, this wouldn't necessarily be a topic that was germane to the paper.
This is anti-vax advocacy, which isn't surprising because it was written by an anti-vax advocate and being pushed on another anti-vax advocate substack.
So what this completely unverified paper did was it looked at 15 deaths, and it claims to have done histopathological analysis on their organs, but weirdly, there's literally no data provided.
Even so, we're to take their word that they proved that the vaccines caused these people to have heart attacks.
Honestly, I'm just guessing that that's the point because the causes of death for these people aren't even listed.
Just that 14 out of the 15 had hearts that were affected in some way that they deemed to be proof of their predetermined conclusion.
The closest you get to data is a list of some demographic information about the people whose organs they allegedly analyzed.
One of them was a 95-year-old woman who died 68 days after getting the vaccine.
She was almost 100 years old and there's over two months in between.
And my first thought is this seems a little thin.
Similarly, there's another patient who is an 89-year-old woman who died six months after getting the vaccine.
Two of the people in their subject pool died an unknown number of days after vaccination.
This would never pass any kind of critical review.
There are other doctors and researchers doing histological examinations on people who have died after vaccination, and they aren't coming up with anything close to this kind of result, and generally those papers actually have data and aren't just like, Come on!
So this was a story, this stack, this piece of the stack.
He doesn't actually really get into the actual article in any greater detail than he just did there.
And this is a story that was taken from the AFP Newswire, but I can tell that Alex is reading this headline from when it was posted on NDTV.com, which is a news site primarily about India.
Anyway, the underlying article doesn't say anything about needing tons of funding or that the UN should take over and invade healthcare systems.
It's just kind of a sad list of things that countries are trying to do to limit the spread of infection as the looming threat of hospitals being completely overwhelmed happens.
Like Germany's shutting down nightclubs and Greece banned music in bars and restaurants until January.
This headline was itself actually written by NDTV, which is clearly stated on their website.
Quote, except the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.
All Alex operates off is headlines, because the stuff that he's saying never really has anything to do with the body of the articles he covers.
So actually, in reality, what he's doing is basically creating an entire narrative based on the editorial decisions of an Indian news website that he probably doesn't even know exists.
Because a six-month-old clip of them saying, take away people's social security that don't take the injections, they say it as clear as day.
Reuters, run by Pfizer, literally, said it's not real.
Again, we all know they've been all over TV saying, "Don't let you leave your house.
Take your kids away." It's really pretty amazing to me that Alex somehow thinks that if he's able to read off all the headlines in his stacks that his interns have printed out for him, that's going to be an accomplishment, or that he will have proven anything.
Most of the headlines are going to be about the same story from different websites, like how the NDTV article was just an AFP story with an in-house headline.
Another thing, too, is it's a dangerous precedent for Alex to be fucking around with, where he believes that a journalist asking a question is the same thing as them advancing a position, because I would like to point to his entire career.
So, also, Alex is just making up that Pfizer owns Reuters because it seems like something that makes his argument sound more convincing and like it's something he could probably slip past the audience.
Reuters is owned by Thompson Reuters Corporation, which is majority owned by the Woodbridge Company.
Pfizer is its own company and it has nothing to do with these other entities.
I mean, when you have so many parent companies and subsidiaries and this guy's on the board of this and on the board of that and all of this stuff, you can tell somebody, oh, this is owned by some company and there's like, I can't look into it.
Alright, so we had three headlines into this, and no time spent on any of these stories whatsoever, and here's the breakdown.
One headline is about dropping of vaccine mandates in New York, which Alex should be in favor of, and kind of undercut some of his own main narratives about how they're going to force everyone to get vaccinated.
Yeah, specifically he said that they were going to force everyone to get the vaccine, and this example is of people not forcing people to get the vaccine.
So Alex is just misreporting this story because he just read the headline.
This is a story that was making the rounds recently, but it's actually about a program that was called Societal Implications of Astrobiology, which ran from 2015 to 2018.
The idea was that there was a bunch of religious scholars, and they'd meet up at the Center for Theological Inquiry at Princeton University and discuss how religious communities would respond to the discovery of alien life, should that ever happen.
The reason that there were headlines about this recently is because one of the theologians who took part, Reverend Andrew Davison, he's publishing a book about his experience.
I don't think it was the Pope, but someone high up in the Vatican made a similar comment a number of years back about, you know, there are ways that you can incorporate...
There are complications, but apparently, I mean, I wasn't there at the Center for Theological Inquiry, and these people are obviously experts in their fields.
Sure.
If the takeaway for this dude who was there is that, hey, we can handle this.
It's a little bit like, and I know they would find it very sacrilegious for me to describe it as such, but it's a little bit like a writer's room for how are we going to deal with this.
A bunch of them being like, they're all tossing out ideas, like, how do we feel about this?
Right, and so you go based on the headline, that's the way you could report the story.
If you read into what is actually going on, it's not preparing for alien discovery, it's inquiry into societal implications.
Also, Project Bluebeam isn't a real thing.
It was a wacky conspiracy theory a dude named Serge Monest popularized back in the 90s, which he probably cribbed from some stories written by Gene Roddenberry.
This is an interesting story, and it's definitely a headline Alex can use to riff out all sorts of nonsense, but it's actually not as nightmarish as the headline might suggest.
So there's this AI program in China that's been trained using over 17,000 cases to be able to take a description of a particular case and determine if it fits the requirements of a specific crime.
Currently, it's only able to recognize the eight most common crimes that occur in Shanghai, but obviously over time, as technology progresses, you'd expect that number to go up.
The project's lead scientist, Professor Shi Yong, was clear that the AI doesn't take part in any of the actual decision-making about whether or not to file charges or come up with sentences.
That's all done by humans, because that process goes into those sorts of determinations is far more complicated than they have the capability to do.
There are reasons to be concerned about the possible ways this could go wrong, but Alex's coverage is...
Way off base.
And it's generous for me to even call this coverage, because he doesn't go into any detail about this.
So I'm at least reading the top article out of each stack.
Let's continue here.
With today's show headline, that's on Infowars.com.
WHO warns of global healthcare collapse that they triggered with COVID hysteria.
Meanwhile, Bill Gates and fellow Blue Blood, Anderson Cooper, promote taking Social Security from Americans who refuse the deadly gene therapy injections.
Tune in to this must-see broadcast when Alex Jones and leading computer scientist and investigative journalist Steve Kirsch as they expose the latest COVID tyranny developments, including the fact that 93% of people who died after being vaccinated were killed by the vaccine.
I began to cogitate, to reflect, to really assess during the break what is most important out of everything I've got here in front of me to say, because you don't want to miss the forest for the trees.
But he knows now this is a deadly gene therapy and killing people.
And he's still not attacking the shot.
He's just saying, hey, instead of saying the shot...
People really need vitamin C and vitamin D and zinc and iodine.
And he's out saying that.
He's in an interview saying, you know, obsessing on the vaccine that isn't really 100% kind of killing people.
You need to be healthy.
That's what Joe Rogan's saying.
But Joe's going all the way saying the shot's hurting people.
Rand Paul's not doing that.
And so I was thinking about this this morning when I woke up about 5 a.m.
I was like, am I right to be really going after Trump?
And I'm like, yeah, you are right to be going after him.
He knows what's going on.
Then I thought, Rand Paul's a medical doctor, and he's super smart.
And I've known the guy for 28 years.
And he knows damn well what's going on.
So, let me say this.
If I said Trump's either super ignorant or one of the most evil men to ever live to do this to his own people, and obviously I meant that to get Trump's attention.
I don't think he's ignorant.
I don't think he wants to be evil.
I just think he's lying to himself and rationalizing.
But regardless, we're still in the position we are.
Trump could come out against this, and we'd end this very quickly.
But what about Rand Paul, huh?
No, I don't want to break his ribs.
I don't want to shoot at him like a Democrat does.
In fact, I want to support him and campaign for him, and I hope he becomes president someday.
Whatever math is going on in his head of why he's not coming out against this thing all the way when the numbers and the facts are 100% clear is a big problem.
Bullying the politicians, or getting these politicians to fight the globalists for him, is similar to when he was a kid and someone stole his bike, his dad going over to talk to that kid's dad.
Do we focus on Bill Gates, which we've already done?
Do we attack the people behind it all?
Or do we go after, politically, peacefully, the people that say they represent us?
It'd be like if I was six, seven years old, and some bully from down the street who was like 14 took my bike away, kicked me off of it, and my dad didn't start a big fight with the guy's dad down the street.
Whereas he describes our elected leaders similar to a father.
I see our elected leaders as being a bunch of petulant children with a lot of money arguing with each other about stuff that doesn't matter while they watch us die.
It's so people can know how pathetic he is when you think he's playing 4-D chess going to save you, and he's not.
He's not a bad guy.
But he doesn't know what he's doing, and he's surrounded by bad advisors.
He's got that multi-billion dollar social media network based on Mastodon that they said's an original program and doesn't even work, and there's all these SEC criminal investigations of it right now, and it's all falling apart.
I think a great way to move on from Trump would be to reveal all of the shit that you've already known about him for the years that you've been lying about.
Alex is referring to Biden's dog, Champ, there, who died back in June.
I think Alex might need to substantiate the claim that Biden killed his dog, particularly considering the Champ was 12 years old, which is typically on the high end of normal dog lifespans.
Also, in terms of fear, pictures of Biden wearing a mask don't rank anywhere near what Alex does every day.
Plus, you have to understand how this is a rigged game.
Biden wears the mask and Alex can say it's a dishonest photo op meant to spread fear.
Biden doesn't wear the mask and Alex can say it's a perfect example of liberal hypocrisy.
How you have to wear the mask, but Lord Biden doesn't.
And now the U.S. to mandate, you mean the globalists.
For all border crossers in January, not the illegals coming in, not the migrants, but anybody trucking stuff in, vice versa, including U.S. citizens, now to cross the border, you've got to have a shot.
Ah, see, the illegal aliens don't, but everybody else does, you see.
This is a great example of how stupid Alex is and how his laziness translates into lies.
If you just read the headline of this article, you might come away with some of the conclusions Alex comes to.
You'd need to be a super xenophobic bigot, and you'd still have to make up a few details, but this is within the realm of imagination if you don't actually look at the policy or the article at all.
From a U.S. News and World Report article on the policy, quote, The rules pertain to non-US nationals.
American citizens and permanent residents may still enter the US regardless of their vaccination status.
Alex legitimately and literally lied by making up that U.S. citizens need to be vaccinated to cross the border because doing so helps him create a feeling of animosity in his audience towards immigrants.
It becomes even more flagrant as an instance of misreporting when you realize that this is a month-old story.
He's had plenty of time to hear about it, look into it, get the details down, particularly considering how he does about 10 hours of research a day.
Also, beginning in October 2021, the CDC and the State Department announced new guidelines that require all immigrant visa applicants to receive a full COVID-19 vaccine series as part of their medical exam prior to being issued a visa.
The guidelines specifically say that if a visa applicant refuses to get vaccinated, they are inadmissible to the United States.
And even if there were like mostly folks sneaking into the country, a rule that they needed to be vaccinated would be totally meaningless and unenforceable.
What's being expressed here is Alex's laziness, willingness to lie and his blanket hatred of immigrants.
Now, I saw this article yesterday, and I spent about an hour and a half reading the whole thing and watching the videos that we're in, and I didn't even scratch the surface of it, but major computer science engineer saw a multi-billion dollar company he's founded and run.
Steve Kirsch is going to be joining us next segment from stevekirsch.substack.com to get into this huge, huge article that we also posted at infowars.com.
Pathology results show 93% of people who died after being vaccinated were killed by the vaccine.
So I'm flabbergasted because the underlying document here is four pages long.
And honestly, it's really more like three in terms of actual text.
The video presentation that is linked in the article is 15 minutes long, so I have no idea what was taking Alex an hour and a half to get through this.
Also, because it's funny, I want to point out that the first sentence in the video presentation that's linked to this non-study is, quote, I want to say, first of all, that we must not quibble about details.
Yeah, we're very excited that, you know, it's kind of like when one door closes, when he gets removed from Twitter, another door opens, which is that he's going to be on Rogan.
This is a great instance of Rogan getting deeper and deeper into the world of anti-vex propaganda, which will ultimately lead to a ton of people in his audience being hurt and possibly dying.
It's just a tragedy to see how irresponsible he's being with his platform if Malone is going to be on, which it does appear that he is, and if he ends up having Robert Kennedy Jr. on, holy shit.
As to Steve's claim that he was instrumental in getting Malone booked on Rogan's show.
That's probably true.
Back when Brett Weinstein was going really hard in the Ivermectin game in June of this year, he did an episode of his podcast Dark Horse titled How to Save the World in Three Easy Steps.
The guests on that episode were Steve Kirsch, And Robert Malone.
Just after they recorded that episode, Brett was a guest on Rogan's podcast along with Dr. Pierre Corey, the founder of the anti-vax and pro-ivermectin group, the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance.
It's within the realm of believability that Brett set up that booking, and given that Malone and Kirsch were guests on Brett's show, Spreading Vaccine Misinformation, I could believe that they'd be open to getting them on the larger platform, getting them up onto the big leagues with Rogan.
There's a subtle network of shitheads that are desperately trying to court Rogan to utilize his platform to spread their shit, and he seems more than...
Also, I was looking over the guest lists of Rogan for the past couple months, and man, he's had some shitheads.
We're talking Ted Nugent, Tim Pool, Blair White, Ben Shapiro, Alex Berenson, and Steven Pinker.
I would think that Alex would be really concerned with his friend Joe buddying up with someone who has such clear ties to Epstein, but I guess that's only a problem when he wants it to be.