All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 4, 2025 - Louder with Crowder
45:19
🔴 Live Reaction: RFK Faces Senate Grilling After Employees Demand His Resignation 2025-09-04 18:17
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
For people to tease through the numbers that I provided before the vote on HR1 that says that if you normalize three independent estimates across a broad spectrum, $25 billion over 10 years.
I don't need your response now.
I want somebody to destroy my estimates because to this point, the most resourced health agency in the world has only given me word-solid responses, and I need that so that we can prepare for the response.
$25 billion over 10 years is half of the rural relief fund over five years.
And so we just need to have that fact as a matter of policy so that we can go in North Carolina and absorb it.
And I know every state's different, and I'm assuming every one of my colleagues here have done the math for their states, not focused on that.
But I want you to destroy my estimates and they're in fact wrong, and I want you to acknowledge them if, in fact, they're right.
That will come into question as well.
Mr. Kennedy, you've stated multiple times in response to other measures.
We don't conduct this in a way that is productive.
Because you can't ask someone six questions and then expect them to ask them a question, let them answer, then move on to the next question.
But they don't do that.
This is grandstanding.
I would be combative.
Yes.
I would just keep interrupting them, too.
You were honest and you had research behind it.
We'll go back and figure out what scientific studies are.
Unlike you've been in some of my depositions, not scientifically viable.
And then finally, I just want to give you an opportunity.
Apparently, in the exchange with Senator Bennett, you said you agreed with Dr. Levy's statements, who said that the mRNA vaccine causes serious, cause serious harm, including death, particularly in young people.
They said you agreed with that comment.
Did you agree with that comment or not?
I think that's true, yes.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
That's it.
Thank you, Mr. Tillis.
We now have Senator Smith.
You're recognized.
You just wanted to talk.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
So, Mr. Kennedy, I have sat here for the last many minutes and listened carefully to your testimony.
For a couple minutes, I think actually I did my job.
You laid out so many of the ways that what you have said has contradicted yourself and others.
I mean, I don't even know where to start.
We'll find a place.
How about you start by giving yourself credit for sitting again?
...claiming to make America healthy again.
But in actual fact, you have led the charge in the Trump administration to destroy what is best in our health care system.
It's an accusation, not a question.
I do know.
And your lies here do not.
By the way, when you ask 15 questions, you ask no questions.
Just to be clear, if you go back and watch Change My Mind, that's a big part of our philosophy, my philosophy of the practice, is laser in and give them a chance to answer and ask a follow-up.
That's the only way you actually get to the root of the issue.
Otherwise, it's grandstanding.
They're not capable of that.
Before Congress, Secretary Kennedy, you claimed, and I quote, I have never been anti-vax.
I have never told the public to avoid a vaccination.
But in a podcast, you said the opposite.
You said I speak.
No vaccine that is safe and effective.
So that sure sounds anti-vax to me, Secretary Kennedy.
So let me ask you: when were you lying, sir?
When you told this committee that you were not anti-vax or when you told Americans that there's no safe and effective vaccine?
Both things are true.
Oh, so.
More denial, more back and forth.
I mean, here's what I know.
Here's what I know.
Can you explain why, Senator?
Actually, I want you to listen to me.
Good.
Because I've been listening to you.
I want you to listen to me because I have been sitting on this independent panel.
I am a lady.
You said that you want evidence-based science, but it seems that what you mean is evidence that supports your view, not the scientific consensus.
I mean, you dared to sit there and call my colleague from New Hampshire a liar.
She is a liar.
She presented you with facts.
Called him a liar not more than a minute ago.
Which time were you lying?
Just last week.
You mean to rewind that?
Hold on, she can sit and listen again.
My home state of Minnesota, you went on Fox News blaming school shootings on antidepressants.
You have no evidence of that because you have no evidence of a connection.
And you want to talk about saying something.
You're just making stuff up.
You know, this is what you say, right?
Secretary Cannon, when somebody presents you with information that you're talking about.
I'm sorry.
He's making a chance.
I didn't see that clip.
I'm willing to bet he was questioning the administration the increased uptake of antidepressants and wondering if there's a corporation.
I bet you didn't blame all school shootings.
No, you are.
Secretary.
Just keep going.
That's right.
You keep going.
Talk about mental health and gun violence in this country.
If you want to talk about mental health and gun violence in this country, we should be talking about that.
From the Trump harangue and you want to sell it at me, you want to have partisan politics.
I want to actually solve these problems.
Ms. Secretary Kennedy.
I'm sitting.
The Trump administration is doing right now is making it harder for people in this country to get access to mental health care.
So don't talk to me about solving the mental health care crisis when you are making it harder.
You cut Medicaid, which is the number one payer for mental health health services in this country.
You decimated the agency at Health and Human Services that focuses on mental health and substance abuse.
That's what states count on.
They're cutting their services to schools as a role.
What kind of job were they doing?
Several years ago?
You said cutting services.
Let me ask you: was the Democrat Party complicit in cutting services to schools when you were complicit in teachers not going back to teach?
And then when the exact, as predicted, mental health epidemic, and it wasn't just sort of nebulous, we talked about substance abuse, we talked about depression, we talked about isolation, we talked about people not being socially developed because they didn't interact with human beings where they sort of adapt to and pick up on social cues in these formative years.
When those chickens came home to roost, did you acknowledge that we were right?
Oh, you just mean more money, more money, more money.
Okay, I'm sorry.
I thought the primary service at a school would be the teaching.
They need to know.
You apparently have a lot of influence with President Trump.
Did you ask him not to roll back these regulations that are stopping the big corporations from dumping heavy metals and endocrine disruptors into our soil and water?
I mean, there's no evidence that you have been.
Did you do anything?
He's a walking Kermit drinking tea meeting.
All right, bring up a couple of chats because this lady is grandstanding.
But I never want to hear again about how women are better communicators.
Yeah.
I feel like he's going to look up.
Oh, I'm sorry.
You're still talking?
I was reading the sports section.
All right, a chat or two.
If there's anything that people want to draw to our attention that we missed, yes, Noodles.
All right.
First chat from MP Tiger T. Question for the crew.
Do you think RFK has the capacity long-term to sustain the changes he wants to implement?
Who would be a good successor?
I don't know who specifically would be a good successor.
It would have to be someone with the same spirit.
Does he have the ability to?
In some ways, yeah.
These things can always be overturned, right?
But if they're effective and if people like what they're seeing, that certainly goes a long way.
Let's continue and see.
Oh, are they going to someone else?
Yeah.
There's three things about transparency.
I think part of that is sharing what you know, what the CDC knows with parents so that they can make decisions.
Behind me, yeah, I know it's going to be hard to see from there.
I can barely read it.
This is the whole CDC recommendations for vaccines.
All right, let's take a few chats.
I guess we'll do.
Gosh, we have China and Russia.
We have the Patrick Bett Davidson, and we also have the Savant trailer.
But I guess we'll see you guys.
Obviously, when we do that tomorrow, let's continue with some chats as a Republican here is likely going to lob a softball.
And I'd rather pay attention when there are Democrats.
All right, next chat from Damian Knight or Damo Knight or whatever it is.
Question for Stephen.
What even is the point?
I don't know what the S was.
What even is the point of this hearing?
They can't remove RFK.
Is this simply so they can stoke the fear/slash-anger of the radical left?
Classic TDS.
Yeah, it's character assassination.
Yeah.
That's what it is.
Yeah.
It's a public trial.
It's character assassination.
That's exactly what it is.
These people are doing this, hoping for a does anyone actually believe that these people are trying to get to the truth?
Let me ask you this.
Okay.
Let's say that you find yourself in an emergency scenario and your family members, your children's lives hang in the balance.
All right.
And you have a decision to make and you know you've got a minute to make it.
What kind of questions would you ask?
And would you listen to answers before you had to make that decision?
Or would you buy up the entire minute without ever even allowing for an answer before you made your decision?
We know what it's like.
We know what a quest for truth is like.
We know what questioning looks like if you actually have an argument.
It's usually as short.
It's usually as succinct and as laser focused as possible.
When people go scattershot, now not always, because sometimes some context needs to be provided, but generally speaking, when someone goes scattershot, it means they don't want to hone in on an argument.
They don't.
That's what you're seeing.
Yeah, and I don't know what the solution is to this, but this is just theater.
Yeah.
That's all this ever is.
All the hearings are only theater.
So that's why when he gets going after these people, I get excited about it because I'm like, he realizes the game that he's playing.
So many people go in there and try to answer these questions thoughtfully and they try to get through these things and make sure they don't ruffle.
No, ruffle all the damn feathers you want.
All these people want is their moment in the sun.
That's why a Democrat Congress or senator is up there speaking for the entire five minutes and not letting him answer a question, just saying, these are the questions that I'm asking.
Maybe get back to me later on those because I want the cameras on me for the entire time.
That's what they're doing.
That's why they're not letting him answer.
And so it's just theater to me.
It's a waste of time to go in there and be nice.
Go in.
It's not for them.
F them.
It's not.
It's character assassination for them.
No, I mean, it's the theater portion of that.
They use the character assassination, the theater of it, to try to get public pressure to get rid of somebody.
That's it.
Not actual truth.
Just I'm going to make a claim, and then that's going to be clipped and put out, and all the news agencies are going to run with it as if it's fact.
The funny thing is that if you want to look at how the left character assassinates, it's quite literally, I don't know if these are the top three most used, there must be a chart, but it would be certainly extremely close to literally being the top three intellectual fallacies that are presented, usually by high schoolers.
It's the appeal to authority fallacy.
It's the, I believe it's argumentum ad populum fallacy, just saying, hey, most people agree with me, therefore.
Right.
And the third one is, I'm trying to think.
I had it in my head.
I can't remember what it was.
I don't know.
The remembering fallacy.
No, yeah, it's the remembering fallacy.
It's argumentum ad populum.
And then, well, and of course, the straw man alert, which is, I guess you would, I don't know if it's qualified as an intellectual fallacy, but it is always appeal to authority fall.
Well, my experts say, well, how's that worked out?
Well, most people say, well, most people can be wrong.
There were many people at one point, there was a majority of planet Earth who thought you couldn't make fire.
They thought that the Earth was flat.
That was never, by the way, mainstream in Western Christendom, just to be clear.
That's kind of a myth.
And then what's the third one?
Oh, Strawman.
Well, they go, you want to.
Donald Trump wants to erase transgender people.
Well, that's your answer.
That's how they assassinate your character.
It's the same thing that they would do with us.
Like, well, the experts say that this is the least accurate source in news.
Well, why?
Because if we write jokes or have Photoshops, this is the only place.
This is the only place that provides all references publicly available.
If we make a factual claim, we provide it to you.
You have the ability to call us on it.
We have an admonish button.
And the argumentum ad populum.
Well, there are a lot of people who don't like them.
A lot of people who say, yeah, the ones you picked.
And then Steven Crowder wants to erase transgender people.
No, I don't.
It's what they do.
It's what they do with Donald Trump.
It's what they do with RFK.
That is their playbook.
And then they'll try to blame you of doing exactly that, which it is they're doing.
I've had this for a few minutes, but I just wanted to make sure we went back to it.
So we were talking about the people not recommending COVID vaccines for children.
So it's the STICO S-T-I-K-O, so Standing Committee on Vaccination in countries like Germany and Joint Committee on Vaccination in the UK recommend against COVID vacc for healthy kids.
Sweden, Denmark, other countries like that are basically doing the same thing where they don't recommend it for kids if they're healthy unless they have some underlying conditions.
So a ton of countries in Europe have basically gone and said, hey, if you're healthy, we're not recommending this for you anymore.
But here in the United States.
Yeah.
No, but those don't count as medical authorities.
No.
You did they would to the left.
They love Europe.
Yeah, you would think so.
UK, I don't know why I miss them.
It was the UK, I think, the one that I was thinking.
I said France.
I was thinking Germany, but then when you said France, I thought I must be wrong.
I would never remember Sticko in a million years.
No, neither would I. Well, I see London, I see France.
I've seen Gerald's underpants.
Yeah, well, we all have.
You all have because his office is glass.
I don't know why they're so tight.
Change in my office like that.
Change.
Shuts around like Xerxes most of the time.
Yes, he does.
I put on my own bald cat to see what all looks like.
My tight white will drowned out the sun.
Gold paint everywhere.
Yes.
All right.
Let's grab another chat because I know he's answering, but I think he's answering a relatively friendly Republican.
And switching to Dem.
Okay.
Chat.
Next chat from that guy, 245.
Question for the crew.
Is it crazy to think COVID happened for a reason?
For example, to show the corruption in government in big pharma.
No, it didn't happen for that.
Let's continue here.
It was lied about.
Why would they do that and lie and said that it came from a market?
Was it it did showcase it, but if it happened for a reason, if you want to believe that people got together, it would be, of course, to control the population.
I think he means more on like the esoteric level.
Oh, okay.
Oh, by God, then yes.
Let's see what this guy's saying.
New Mexico.
Give the committee a name of who you're getting briefly.
I forgot you got senators.
Successful state.
All the time by CD.
Just a name.
Dr. William Thompson's one name.
Thank you very much, sir.
Thank you.
That was always on my history.
Mr. Secretary, that's not a hard question.
You know a lot of answers.
I'm not being evasive.
And you answered it.
Let's go on.
Now, you said that you're soon going to release a study claiming to reveal the cause of autism.
Timed, unsurprisingly, with the upcoming ASIP meeting to justify taking vaccines from Americans.
Now, as you know, autism affects millions of children.
So I guess you'd have the nation's top medical experts working on this.
Mr. Kennedy, you hired the manager.
The expert's been in charge while autism has been on the rise.
Is that correct?
No.
Is Mr. David Geyer working for HHS?
He's a contractor, but he's conducting a study.
He's a contractor?
He's a contractor.
Do you know who works for you, Mr. Kennedy?
Yeah.
Do you know that Mr. Geyer is listed as an HHS on the employee directory as a senior data analyst, not a contractor?
He's a contractor.
He's not an SGE.
So is your website wrong?
He's not an SGE.
You know, I don't know what.
I'm going to pull up the website for you?
Sure.
Yeah.
You think he's the website developer, dummy?
Website says he is a senior data analyst.
Will you at least admit to the claim?
Oh, I don't know.
Contractor can be classified as a senior data analyst or not.
Yes, they can.
You can have a contractor who's a data analyst.
As a matter of fact, they often are.
We have data analysts here who are contractors.
As a matter of fact, it's the most likely position to be a contractor.
Did you know that he got caught in Maryland and was charged for practicing medicine without a medical license?
He was charged by a medical board.
He sued the medical board, and the medical board was found to have acted in actual malice and was fined $2.6 million by a judge.
He settled up.
He set a lot.
See, so you choose to know a lot when you want to know a lot.
It's incredible.
He knew all about it.
You want to define ridiculous.
So that's the question.
You brought him up.
I think there's no question of it.
I told you he's not doing a study.
Is he participating in the study?
No.
Is he doing any analysis in regards to this?
No.
What he's doing is getting access to the vaccine safety data link, which is the biggest repository for vaccine information that your friend will not give us for seven months.
For seven months, let me ask you this question.
Keep going.
Just to keep going.
Do you know the answer?
What is Mr. Dyer doing?
He just told you.
He is one because Congress ordered CDC to open up the VSD to him in 2002.
He's the only outsider who's ever seen it.
So because think about that.
They can't say, oh, all the experts, because they said, do you know that this guy was charged with?
And he sued the medical board.
And again, these are important.
Someone can look it up.
If they were proven to have acted in malice and he was awarded $2.00 million, what happened to being for the little guy?
It sounds to me like you're certainly in the pocket of big medical and big pharma if you're literally supporting a board that was found guilty, I guess.
It would seem like they were guilty, liable against one individual.
That's David Goliath.
David won.
Why are you stomping on David?
And we should have waited for an answer then.
Let's not.
I don't even know what you're talking about.
Mr. Secretary, let me see.
turn into mr t can you understand me Yes.
Appreciate that.
Mr. Secretary, yes or no?
Did you hire Mr. Dyer to do this study?
No.
No.
He's already answered that four times.
Mr. Chairman.
Well, let me ask.
Maybe we'll just go ahead and do that.
I'm going to read on this paper.
So.
Mr. Secretary.
This is a man with no plan B. Commit to sharing the protocols used for the autism study with Congress and to the public?
They're public.
Will you commit to getting to this committee by the end of the week?
I know this one.
You don't even know what you're talking about.
Mr. Secretary, will you commit to sharing the protocols for this study by the end of the month?
We already have a lot of people.
You just said it's public.
We put out the notice of funding opportunities, and then the scientists went all over the world.
You're not understanding me.
Let me see.
No, you're not understanding how the war works.
Do you understand what they are?
The scientists who are doing the studies submit the protocol.
Okay, so you know what they are.
That's not coming from us.
So will you commit to sharing those protocols with this committee?
Well, anybody can get a hold of the protocol.
It's published with the study.
Mr. Chairman, what I'd like to ask is for your commitment to the students.
And these people want to tell you, he's not a medical expert.
Well, he certainly seems like more of one than you.
He's like, you don't understand.
And he's going straight to daddy.
Mr. Chairman, will you please make him do the thing that I don't want to do myself?
I need Aquaphor in my bum bum.
It's public.
So you're denying us access?
No.
It's public.
It's with the study.
Will you give it to us?
You can get it yourself.
Will you personally print it and hand it to me?
Eat my ass.
That's a perfect summary.
Amazing.
I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman.
Look at the lady.
She's still making eyes behind him.
Told you.
People just want to know the truth.
Oh, do you?
I don't think so.
Mr. Secretary, we don't think you did.
I hope everyone recording that got that because there is your soundbite tenure here.
Look, he's saying that about you.
You're so unaware of what's going on.
You're trying to say that RFK was like they didn't want the, oh my God, these people are children.
You're questioning today.
I don't think you deserve it.
It'll be on CNN.
Oh, look, headlines.
Here's his soundback.
Remember, every one of us can make a difference, sir, to something as small as a starfish on a beach that you throw it back in the ocean.
You might not save them all, but you can save one.
Yeah, but Weiski's brown.
I'm sorry that you're not worthy of this.
Nice little pin, sir, is a nice reminder.
I'm going to pray for you, Secretary Kennedy.
I hope we do better.
I want you to do better.
He brought that today, Washington.
Watch and prayers weren't enough.
Take that starfish and pin it on your app.
I love that he brought props.
Less than a month ago, we received the heartbreaking news that a gunman opened fire at the CDC campus in Atlanta, Georgia.
This obviously is my neck of the woods.
This is heart-wrenching for all Americans, but for those of us especially who live in that area, the county police officer, David, it's going to be about CDC studying gun violence.
Watch.
The shots hit buildings on campus in at least 180 places, narrowly missing the CDC's daycare center.
Law enforcement recovered nearly 500 shell casings.
Jeez.
Clearly, he came to do a lot of damage.
They did say somebody was killed.
He said a police officer, I think.
He was killed.
He was in the Central Atlanta and state law enforcement.
More people were not killed.
The Georgia Bureau of Investigation announced that prior to the attack, the gunmen, the gunmen, expressed discontent with the COVID vaccine and, quote, wanted to make the public aware of his.
Are we going to skim past the other shooting where far more people were killed?
Secretary of the United States.
The radical transgender ideologues who wanted to kill Donald Trump's disturbing reports of the gunmen's motives?
Yes.
So you know those people.
I understand that some people may have concerns about new medical breakthroughs, but those people don't have the world's top medical experts working under them.
You've been over HHS for seven months now.
Have you ever been briefed by CDC's career immunization officials to discuss your concerns?
And by the way, every member of this panel has criticized President Trump.
I only have three of them.
Have you ever been briefed?
I've been complicit in the assassination attempts on President Trump.
So I'm asking the questions.
You are the witness.
It's a simple yes or no question.
Have you ever been briefed by CDC's career immunization officials to discuss their concerns?
Yes, I asked.
What was the answer?
Yes.
You have been briefed by CDC officials, career immunization officials.
Career immunization.
Have you ever been to the CDC as secretary before the shooting on August 8th?
Have I ever been there as secretary?
Have you been there as secretary before the shooting?
Okay.
Let's return to the shooting in the aftermath.
Secretary Kennedy, I'm about to ask you a series of yes or no questions about the events of the past month.
And I would appreciate just a yes or no response.
Go screw yourself.
You called Dr. Menares to your office on August 25th for a meeting.
Is that correct?
Yes or no?
It could be.
I just got another date.
I'd have to check my calendar.
Was Jim O'Neill, the man you just appointed as acting director of CDC, in the room on whatever date you met with him since you can't recall.
Was he in the room when you met with Dr. Menares?
In that meeting, did you criticize Dr. Manares for her statements to CDC following the shooting where she said, quote, misinformation can be dangerous?
I don't believe so.
I have no record.
You don't believe you criticized her?
Oh, I criticized her.
Did you criticize her?
Not for that.
Did you criticize her?
I don't even.
Did you criticize her for her statements to CDC workers following the shooting?
Did you demand that she fire career scientists or public experts at the CDC?
Yes.
Did you demand that she accept the recommendations of your hand-picked vaccine advisory panel without further review by career CDC scientists?
No, I did not.
You didn't ask for her commitment ahead of time that she would accept the recommendations from the advisory panel.
You're denying that.
What I asked her about is she had made a statement that she was going to not sign on, and I wanted clarification about that.
That's relevant.
You're her boss.
Did you tell her to accept the advisory panel's recommendations?
I told her I didn't want her to have a rule that she's not going to sign on to it.
Did you say that the CDC was, quote, the most corrupt federal agency in the history of the world?
Not the history of the world, but definitely HHS.
Did you say that?
By the way, this is the least evasive witness I've ever seen.
Even his body, he's not sitting there.
Thank you for your question.
He's just police staff.
No, quote, I said this.
Go screw yourself.
He cares.
My favorite is.
Did you say that they're killing children and they don't care?
No.
Okay, I think that we all have a history of listening to you and these answers.
No, you don't.
But you're on the record for a number of these statements.
Despite your lack of credentials and expertise, clearly you have an agenda.
Yours too, sir.
It is a threat to the public health of the American people.
It's clear that you are carrying out your extremist beliefs, which is why you attempted to fire Dr. Milares.
Sir, I'm not, I'm on earth.
I'm speaking.
Keep on hired.
Secretary Kennedy, for the first time, we're seeing deaths from children from measles.
We haven't seen that in two decades.
We're seeing that under your watch.
We can fact-check that right now to the health of the others.
By the way, also, how often will we say for the first time with a lot of these?
Oh, that's right.
It usually involves immigration from third world countries where they haven't solved it.
Or it's communities of people that just say, I don't want to get vaccinated at all.
And sometimes that happens.
They don't have that right.
It's the first time in two decades.
Should fire you.
Thank you so much.
Senator Welch.
And now run away.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
I want to sum up.
Welch is a wiener.
I want to make three points.
First, we have a health care affordability crisis in this country.
Oh, we do.
Second, Secretary Kennedy's policies is making that affordability crisis worse, not better.
Not do the Affordable Care Act.
And third, Mr. Chairman, the United States Senate is not doing its job.
Hey, we agree.
Health care.
Is that you?
Common ground.
Wow.
Citizens of the United States and our employers.
Our taxpayers and our families pay the most and get the least.
That has been persistent and chronic, and it's not being addressed.
It's being aggravated.
Let me be specific.
In Vermont, a family of four that makes $82,000 in income with premium support on Obamacare now pays $6,970 for their health care premium.
That is going to increase $23,000.
You made a good point.
I thought the affordable care solved that.
We talked about it.
Yeah.
You got your way.
It was the cure.
That we're talking about Vermont.
How did it not work?
35,000 families lose health care.
That is going to be a hammer blow to our hospitals because those folks who lose health care don't get a guarantee they won't get sick and they're going to show up at our community hospitals.
Our community hospitals are going to treat them and they aren't going to be compensated.
All right, let's grab a couple of chats because this guy's full of shit.
All right, next chat from Warman.
I'd just like to say that Senator from Georgia is an assistant.
He picked Will.
He did?
I didn't see her.
Yeah, she walked out behind him.
Oh, I see.
I'm sure it was a happy coincidence.
Yeah, I'm sure.
I'm happy.
Next.
All right, next chat.
She's peachy like Georgia.
That's right.
Going through the country, going to eat me a lot of peach.
Oh, okay.
Because look at that old can.
Georgia.
And I feel like a man.
Chat.
Chat.
All right, Warman.
They were having fun over here.
Chat.
That's right.
I got diabetes because I have to hear your shit every day.
And don't forget heart disease.
Heart disease.
And the shit.
Missing a foot because you told a joke about me walking into a bar.
Next chat.
It's true.
All right, Warman 10 asks, as a parent of autistic twins, if RFK proves government mandated vaccines cause autism, should the government be financially responsible for their care or face some type of repercussions?
Well, I don't think that's going to happen, so I wouldn't be holding my hope for that.
And also, I'm not fully on board, very little on board with this idea that vaccines cause mass autism and that there's no use for vaccines.
I don't even know necessarily that that's his position.
If I'm not mistaken, didn't they just, there might be a new change where they are specifically prohibited from including mercury in the vaccine.
I don't know if that, in any vaccines, I don't know if that's more recent.
Again, I had read about that.
That could be fake news.
I know at one point they use it, the amounts were supposed to be so little that they were supposed to not really have an effect.
I know I've seen some people say that vaccines increase autism, and they've pointed to some studies that say it's not just because of increased diagnoses, but including when they've had adults go through these vaccines, that it's increased it, I believe.
That's what they've used as kind of a control.
It's difficult to prove.
I do think that there is something to be said for the huge amount of vaccines in a very short period of time because your body's immune system is only so robust.
And I am not a doctor, to be clear.
I am not a medical professional.
But a lot of the claims that are made by the McCarthy types have been proven to not be accurate.
It doesn't mean that there is no correlation, but this idea that the causation is irrefutably proved, that's a problem, and I wouldn't want to walk out on that limb.
I do.
I do think that people who want vaccines should have access to them.
And I do think that many vaccines make sense.
I think the crazy schedule of a super, I mean, an amount that frankly defies reason in a short period of time is certainly something that should be within the realm of question.
Yes, and there's no reason.
Right.
Most people don't know this.
So parents, let me just give you a bit of advice right now.
You control the schedule, not doctors.
Right.
Not your pediatrics, whoever you go to, right?
Or a pediatrician.
You can say, hey, there are eight shots.
Can I split these up over three visits, two visits?
Can we space them out?
Yeah.
Absolutely.
100%.
They don't have to be given at the same time.
Some stuff is on a schedule, but most stuff is not.
So you're just like, at this point, you're here.
And then you go home and you have a sick kid.
Yeah.
Right.
So obviously the body is reacting to oversaturation of something.
It may not have long-term effects or anything like that.
But why not just go, hey, I want to space it out just a little bit?
Yeah.
I'm not talking get rid of them.
Just space it out.
Totally fine.
Why not do that?
Yeah.
I think the approach of the, I think the most responsible approach at this point would be the necessary, the bare necessary vaccines for life-threatening diseases spaced out as much as you can would be the best approach.
And then the rest on a take them on a case-by-case basis.
The left doesn't want that.
They want your six-year-old to be getting HPV vaccines and you to have no say in it.
This guy's still talking.
Next chat.
All right.
Well, research sent in that on June 26th, let's see, a CDC panel voted to remove what is it?
Thimerosol.
Thimerosol, which contains a form of mercury called ethylmercury.
Ethyl.
So, yeah, they say that it's a fair effort to shine a light on the anti-vaccine trope.
Yeah, well, listen, I understand why parents are afraid.
I mean, there's so many stories out there of people saying my child was totally fine one day and not the next kind of stuff that it scares you because you don't really know what to believe.
And there is a lot of distrust in these institutions, rightfully so.
And so I think right now to repair that, if RFK's study comes out and it's verified by independent agencies and the protocols, like he said, you can go through the protocols and the protocols were developed by these independent organizations that did the studies, then at least we can start to have some transparency.
And if it comes out that there is some kind of a linkage here that has been covered up, but you're going to need a smoking gun, not just proof that it is.
You're going to need proof where they knew it and lied about it.
And that's going to be much harder to get.
It might be much harder, but as far as the end result of mistrust in the institutions, everyone knows that they tarred and feathered anyone who questioned them.
And so people will never trust them again.
As far as you getting some kind of restitution, I mean, you're talking.
Be hard.
That would be hard.
And by the way, I don't have a final opinion on it yet.
I think that there are people who are rapidly anti-vax in every capacity, and I don't agree with them.
I think that's unwise.
Yeah, I think it's unwise.
And I think there are people who believe that you should do whatever the government says.
And I think that's unwise.
What I really do want is for the first time, my eyes have been open to the fact that we actually haven't put some of these through the kind of robust clinical trials that should be required and replicated.
And I hope that we get some answers.
I hope that we get really clear answers.
And I reserve the right to change my opinion depending on the data that comes in.
The fact is, right now, we don't really have it, and it's been incredibly politicized.
But I certainly wouldn't say don't get your child vaccinated against some kind of serious, like life-threatening diseases.
Let's grab another chat.
All right.
And real quick, they also said RFK endorsed the MMR vaccine in April.
So there's that.
Okay.
Next chat from Blue, Green, Gold, Informant.
Question for Crowder and Gerald.
Is RFK Jr., sorry, Josh, being called to resign an effort to get rid of people to protect not only the deep state, but any parties doing business with the deep state?
Of course.
I don't think they would think of it that way, but it's, hey, these people are coming in and they're disrupting the way we do things.
They don't, one thing that's pretty damn clear, they do not want transparency.
No.
They never want transparency.
They don't want transparency in crime data.
They don't want transparency in health data.
They don't want transparency in almost anything.
They want mandates.
We want transparency.
They want mandates.
That's a very, it's a fundamental difference in world.
Yes.
And it's a misunderstanding of human nature, too, because if consulting companies that go into just normal companies around the world to help them kind of figure out their business encounter stiff resistance every single time they do it.
People don't want to be held accountable for their actions.
They don't want to lose control over what they have control over.
They don't want to lose benefits that they have as far as power.
Why do you think that's not going to exist in government organizations and institutions where that's really the only clout is the power that you have?
You're not getting paid exorbitant salaries most of the time.
Sometimes you are.
But that's going to happen as well.
So of course he's going to go in and ruffle feathers because it's all about power and control.
And this is at the federal government level.
It doesn't get bigger.
Yeah.
You want someone, look, you want someone in a position of authority as it relates to government jobs who doesn't even want that job.
That's really what you want.
You want someone who goes, I don't have a vested interest in this.
I just want the best results possible.
And I don't think that a good portion of these jobs should even necessarily exist.
I'm starting off with the baseline.
What do you bring to the table?
CDC, only one in 10 are epidemiologists.
How many of you are practicing doctors?
We're going to change that.
We're going to change that ratio.
Practicing doctors and epidemiologists.
And we're actually going to include more people.
Here's what, you know, to give you an idea how they determine, I always wonder why they don't do this.
I mean, they should, but shot droopings when people will sort of measure the accuracy of firearms.
They'll typically fire like anywhere from, I don't know the number, it could be five shots, it could be 10 shots.
And they'll take out the two outliers because those can be flyers, you know, sometimes where maybe you jerk the gun or maybe you have a round that was keyholing because the rest of them tend to group pretty consistently.
So why don't we do that?
Why don't we do that with our experts where we have people of differing opinions?
Get rid of the couple extreme outliers if you're going to do that.
But instead, you've had one party in power.
And I do mean that, regardless of who's president, the bureaucracy, when you're referring to the swamp, these are people who have a vested interest in career stability.
So they are overwhelmingly going to be Democrats because Democrats have never met a government program that they don't like or a job that shouldn't exist in perpetuity.
How about we include more voices so that you can have robust discussions?
Sure, get rid of the crazy outliers, just like a shot dripping.
Okay, these probably aren't to be included because there's no one else that would corroborate this or it seems to be in line.
But you should have a lot of people.
You should have people who think that maybe the vaccine schedule is too aggressive.
And you should have people who think that, no, it's necessary.
You should have people who believe that there are alternative healthcare methods that can maybe make us healthier by approaching our actual lifestyle here in the United States.
And you should have people who believe in only westernized medicine and treating the symptom.
Having that would make it more robust.
We have not had that in our healthcare services for a very long time.
Yeah.
All right.
Next chat.
Sorry, unless someone else, they're doing reruns here in the CNN.
All right.
Next chat from Monognok.
I've noticed these leftists only believe what they're told.
Do you think they can be redirected to conservative values if it's blue-branded?
No, that won't work because unfortunately, you'll never be able to brand it blue more effectively than the people who are actually blue telling them to do what they're told.
You're right.
You are right.
I mean, this is why you see, and we had a whole segment on this.
We'll do it tomorrow, Patrick Bette David, people supporting communism and saying, no, no, no, not that kind of communism.
They want ultimately for there to be one singular authority because then they can absolve themselves of responsibility.
It must be really easy to go, well, I don't have to do any of my own due diligence.
I don't have to do any of my own research.
I'm just going to take what that person says.
Well, why are you taking what that person says?
Because the person I voted for says that I should take what they say.
And I also understand you have to have wise counsel and advisors.
I'm not saying that you should make every decision.
Yeah, of course it does.
Of course it does.
But you're right.
That is the worldview of the left.
Otherwise, you could never have the communist manifesto.
You could never have the belief in socialism because it's a consolidation of power.
Someone tells you what to do.
I don't think that what would be effective is branding it blue.
I think what's more effective is reaching the people who you can, as we're seeing with Gen Z males, with the truth and then having more voices that kind of tip the scales.
I don't think that sort of bait and switch will work.
We're in a good place with that too, because we basically got Democrats supporting crime, supporting illegal immigration and people that are doing that and also supporting drug runners now.
So literally during the show, it broke that D.C. is suing Trump over having the National Guard in D.C. So the place that he's helped clean up?
Yeah.
They're now suing him.
So fantastic.
Just progressivism needs to die.
Everybody that believes in it, everybody that understands that that's the way to get power in government right now, they need to be gone.
I don't mean killed.
I just mean gone.
They can go do something and fail in their own private jobs somewhere.
This idea, this ideology needs to die, and it feels like we're close to that.
I think the reason that we're close.
I was talking about this today.
Look, we live at, at least I would say throughout most of my life, you live at the greatest point in human history.
That's mostly true, where more technology, more access to information, more creature comforts, more freedom, more of a life that simply isn't focused entirely on subsistence than ever.
But then you go, but do we?
Because progressivism truly is a violation of natural law and the human condition.
We talked about that today.
Like, sure, I have an iPhone and refrigeration, but I can go to jail for protecting my family?
And I definitely am sort of just gauging the temperature here.
I don't necessarily know that there are polls that could reflect this, but I think there are enough people out there going, wait a second.
That doesn't seem right.
When they hear a story like that, wait, it's even a possibility that you can be charged for protecting your home in your own home.
The left has pushed so far that they are in direct opposition to everything that human nature has taught us to be true.
It is.
It's an eight.
It's in us to protect your own.
Wait, wait a second.
They can take your kids away if you don't transition them.
A lot of the rules or sort of the guardrails that we have in Western Christendom, I mean, they were created in response to what was, you can refer to as natural law.
For example, even look at medicine, the Hippocratic Oath.
First, do no harm.
Right?
Because it's like, well, wait a second.
I don't want to put something in my body.
I don't want to go through an invasive procedure unless we know it's going to work.
Well, we violated that.
What's the science on kids being put on hormones and puberty blockers?
We don't know.
Why don't you know?
Well, because we don't have those numbers in yet, but we should do it now.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
But this violates the natural human code of conduct where first, do no harm.
We don't want to harm our children.
Again, it's a reflection of the CASEL doctrine, the ability to protect your home, your family.
That was created because of something we all knew to be true.
Of course, this is my family.
If you come in violently and you invade my space, it's a necessity for human survival.
I'm going to protect them violently if need be.
So we created laws that recognize that.
And the left goes, no, no, we're going to do it the opposite.
Why?
Because we've progressed beyond that.
So what are we progressing toward?
Oh, criminals being allowed to do it.
Criminals being allowed to take my key fob that I put up the front of the door in the name of progress, right, in order to avoid a violent conflict.
And I got lucky.
He didn't actually want any person.
He didn't rape anybody.
He didn't kill anybody.
And then it's the job of the police who you defunded.
So, we are seeing, I think, the cratering of progressivism as it has been for the last several decades.
It's accelerating rapidly.
And I think the real difference is it used to appeal to human beings' selfish nature, right?
Greed, while accusing you of being greedy for wanting to keep what you've earned and absolving themselves of the greed of taking what you've earned.
So, it used to appeal to human nature, sinful nature, greed, slothfulness.
Yeah, I don't want to work, but I want the money.
But now, they've gone so far that even the people who may be greedy and slothful still innately recognize, oh, wait a second, no, that's not natural that I can't protect my family.
They really have overreached to the point of it being in flagrant violation of natural human, not even civil, human rights.
And that's pretty hard for them to socially engineer because they would have to effectively socially re-engineer the entire human race, every society since ever.
These are pretty universal truths.
Final chat.
All right, final chat from, let's see, Red Gen 26.
If you could ask RFK one question during this hearing to really stick it to the leftists, what would you ask?
I know exactly what I would ask.
Hey, Mr. Kennedy, question for you, because obviously you've talked about being more liberal for a long period of time, more independent-minded, obviously come from the Kennedy family, the dynasty, and ran for president against Donald Trump and disagreed with him on quite a bit, though you're always respectful.
Let me ask you: today, you've experienced the grilling, right, from all of these senators, but a seemingly different vitriolic disdain for you from one side of the aisle.
Let me ask you, RFK Jr.: When did you realize these people were never your friends?
And how has that changed you?
Because I guarantee you there's an honest answer.
And I would love to hear it.
Maybe we'll get them on the show.
Let's see if we can get them on the show and ask him.
People change.
They're no longer going to cocktail parties with these communists.
I never went to cocktail parties with them because I don't like cocktails.
I'm a beard guy.
We'll see you tomorrow.
Do we have it in here?
That's what I know.
▲
Export Selection