| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This bill would effectively neuter the EPA and prevent it from using funds to issue new guidance, to regulate, to act on any type of new emerging scientific evidence that proves glycosphate or any other product. | ||
| For example, Syngenta Group is owned by the CCP. | ||
| They make Diquot, sold as Paraquat, which is quickly taking the place of glycosate in rural America. | ||
| So any product that has been reviewed, right, it would be at least that another 15 years, for example, before the EPA could expend funds to review a product again and issue new guidance on it based on that scientific evidence. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Lunar sent mirrs. | |
| Number 11. | ||
| Brianna Sagdahl is joining me now. | ||
| Welcoming back to the show at Brianna9 on XDoorToFreedom.org. | ||
| She's very tied into the agricultural community, specifically when it comes to the beef industry. | ||
| And we may get into some news on that. | ||
| But her big story right now, Congress introduces vaccine-like immunity for pesticide manufacturers. | ||
| Section 453 of the Federal House Interior Appropriations Bill has total pesticide immunity language included in it. | ||
| If passed, the EPA would effectively be frozen in time and prevented from reviewing and doing its job as it relates to pesticides, herbicides, et cetera. | ||
| You can find this and more information on her ex account, which you can see on the screen there. | ||
| Brianna, let me introduce it like this to you, and then you can kind of get into whether you want to comment on this angle of it or just get into the bill, I'll leave up to you. | ||
| But I'm somebody that kind of comes from more of the health angle here. | ||
| We've known for years about these pesticides causing cancer. | ||
| It's been such a big story that they've had to settle class action lawsuits, some of the biggest ever in the agriculture community. | ||
| It's well known even that if you live next to a golf course, your odds of getting cancer are actually significantly increased because of all the pesticides and stuff that they use just on a golf course. | ||
| So there's a pretty well-studied history of pesticides, carcinogens, and health problems. | ||
| So is that what this is about? | ||
| It's because they know it. | ||
| And so they're trying to get congressional immunity. | ||
| Thank you so much for having me on, Owen. | ||
| And I would imagine they do know it. | ||
| In fact, court documents seem to show that Bayer or excuse me, Monsanto Bayer, Monsanto before Bayer acquired it, knew that their glycosphate product was linked to cancers such as non-Hodgkin's lymphoma going back to the 1980s. | ||
| So I would imagine, yes, this is absolutely a path towards creating a new product, a class of products, really very similar to vaccines where the manufacturers are exempt from legal liability. | ||
| It started at the state level, and it certainly looks as though the German or foreign-owned agrochemical giants, Monsanto Bayer, has something of a six-pronged strategy. | ||
| And this is part of the federal reveal, or the federal level is being revealed at this point, which was, of course, found in this appropriations bill. | ||
| Now, I don't know how much stink there is right now in Congress. | ||
| You're one of the people that lobbies for the good guys on these issues. | ||
| I know that Marjorie Taylor Greene is aware of this. | ||
| She's not going to be voting for this bill. | ||
| What's the noise like on the Hill right now? | ||
| That's a really good question. | ||
| You know, it's becoming something of a political powder keg going into the midterms. | ||
| What's interesting is two days after the House Subcommittee on the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies voted to pass through the fiscal year 26 appropriations bill with this immunity rider, Senator Corey Booker introduced, which is called the, or dropped a bill, called the Pesticide Injury Accountability Act. | ||
| So what I can definitively say is that Democrats appear primed and ready to run with this issue if Republicans are not willing to fight for the Maha Alliance within MAGA. | ||
| You know, that's an interesting development. | ||
| And I think I don't even think, well, you can tell me. | ||
| I don't think the Democrats are an issue-based party necessarily, specifically on this, for this conversation. | ||
| I don't think this is an issue for them. | ||
| I think it's just anything that comes to the floor in the Trump administration, unless it's directly from a Democrat hand, they're going to vote against it. | ||
| So, you know, maybe now they feel like, oh, if this gives us a political win, then we can go all in for it. | ||
| They're probably going to wait and see what the Republicans want to do. | ||
| But this should be, where is Maha? | ||
| I'm not hearing anything from Maha on this. | ||
| I'm not, you know, people kind of have this idea where the leader or the figurehead has to know everything that's going on and comment on everything. | ||
| And that's quite difficult. | ||
| So, you know, RFK Jr. may or may not even be aware of this yet, but I'd imagine if it's something that he becomes aware of, he'll stand up against it. | ||
| But again, are you hearing anything about this? | ||
| Not publicly, certainly. | ||
| There are some rumors going on in the back channels, of course. | ||
| But, you know, ultimately, this comes down to Congress. | ||
| I mean, RFK, Brooke Rowlands, the president himself, they're all part of the executive branch. | ||
| So this really comes Down to congressional Republicans fighting for the America First agenda and whether or not they're willing to fight for the president's agenda going into the midterms. | ||
| And I'll tell you, you know, it's been a very interesting ride watching Congress act over the last few weeks, that's for sure. | ||
| And, you know, Owen, I think what's most important here, though, is to really look at the overview of how this bill operates. | ||
| Because, you know, you were talking about AI and this whole idea. | ||
| We've discussed kind of this concept of regulations and how certain industries are selected and protected from regulations. | ||
| This bill would effectively neuter the EPA and prevent it from using funds to issue new guidance, to regulate, to act on any type of new emerging scientific evidence that proves glycosphate or any other product. | ||
| For example, Syngenta Group is owned by the CCP. | ||
| They make Diequot, sold as Paraquat, which is quickly taking the place of glycosate in rural America. | ||
| So any product that has been reviewed, right, it would be at least that another 15 years, for example, before the EPA could expend funds to review a product again and issue new guidance on it based on that scientific evidence. | ||
| Well, I'm somebody, you know, shut down the EPA, right? | ||
| So, okay, so if we're small government people, does this just fall on Congress then to say we need to do independent studies or the manufacturers of these products, they need to present independent studies? | ||
| Where does this lie if it's not with the EPA? | ||
| Yeah, so that's a great question. | ||
| And I think honestly, one of the biggest issues is the fact that these manufacturers are allowed to present their own safety data. | ||
| And it's done on this question. | ||
| So it's not even third party. | ||
| It just comes from themselves. | ||
| Correct, right? | ||
| Like Mike Tyson. | ||
| Hey, I don't have a right hook. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Don't worry about my right hook, y'all. | |
| Right. | ||
| Well, and I think, you know, that is potentially one of the issues here is that not only do we have lobbyists that are directly appointed to oversee the policies of these federal regulatory agencies, but then the manufacturers themselves are able to present the empirical evidence on how safe their products really are. | ||
| Look, if we're going to prevent the EPA from doing its job by polling funds, then I would say, you know, at least decentralize that body of authority back to the state. | ||
| The problem is that when we have a federal law that's been enacted by Congress, federal laws preempt state rights due to the supremacy clause of the Constitution, which there's been some case precedents essentially that has extended that to administrative agencies and the rules that they make. | ||
| So if, for example, Congress were to pass this, it would effectively stop any failure to warn claims moving forward at the state level because the states would not have the ability to warn, to label, to issue guidance right outside what the EPA has determined. | ||
| And for example, glycosphate was last reviewed in 2020. | ||
| So, and that review came back showing no risk of human health concern. | ||
| So if this bill were to pass as currently written, it would freeze that finding of no risk of human health concern for at least the next decade, preventing the EPA from issuing any type of new regulatory guidance or labeling or even a warning label that says, hey, look, we have new scientific evidence and juries have found that this product may potentially lead to cancer. | ||
| And frankly, you know, that's really unacceptable. | ||
| This is not an America-first agenda, Owen. | ||
| Well, they do now put that on some of the glyphosate products, though, right? | ||
| Don't they have those warnings on some of the product labels now? | ||
| Well, so that's interesting you bring that up. | ||
| California, for example, passed Proposition 65, if I'm not mistaken. | ||
| And so there is some inconsistencies there. | ||
| And certainly Monsanto Bear has tried to exploit that within the court system and has asked the Supreme Court, which is also one part of their six-prong strategy, to intervene and to effectively consolidate these rulings on their behalf, naturally. | ||
| Well, yeah. | ||
| And, you know, people always make the comparison with the demonization of cigarettes. | ||
| And, you know, you can't put a cigarette ad on TV. | ||
| They have to have all the warning labels on the cigarettes. | ||
| And yet you have other products that have been known to lead to cancer too, and they don't get that same treatment. | ||
| And so you have to ask yourself why. | ||
| And it does come down to the lobbyists. | ||
| And so here's kind of what I've noticed just in this administration. | ||
| And I have a feeling this is going to go the same way. | ||
| You know, they come out and they talk about mass deportations. | ||
| The big agriculture, big, big farming communities say, hey, we're going to lose 20% of our workforce. | ||
| We're going to lose 20% of our capabilities to put food into the grocery stores. | ||
| So they say, well, okay, I guess we have to make an exception for this. | ||
| People were noticing, you know, RFK Jr. says we're taking these toxic food dyes out of children's food products. | ||
| They're carcinogenic. | ||
| So people said, well, if we knew they were carcinogenic, then why didn't we have warning labels on the food box? | ||
| Like, why wouldn't they have that warning label just like a cigarette has to have on it? | ||
| So that's, again, it comes down to the lobbyists. | ||
| But it also sounds like there's this, I don't know if fear is the right word or hesitation where it's like, hey, look, if these people knew the truth about their environment, if these people knew the truth about the world that they lived in, it'd cause a panic. | ||
| We can't put this product may cause cancer on a box of cereal. | ||
| We can't put this product may cause cancer on an agricultural product to get the most yield out of a product. | ||
| But at the end of the day, that's the truth. | ||
| So do you think that's kind of the lobbying wedge right now is to say, hey, look, if you demonize these products, people are going to be afraid farmers are going to have all this legalese to go through and it's going to hurt the production? | ||
| No, not at all. | ||
| There's not a world in which farmers are going to stop using herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, or rodenticides for that matter, right? | ||
| The only difference here is that this type of legislation prevents our ability to seek remedy through the court. | ||
| So it's not a matter of just having a warning label. | ||
| I mean, sure, on the surface, that seems to be what this law is about. | ||
| But the nuances of the law are actually very specific to failure to warn and when states, essentially, an individual's constitutional rights are preempted, excuse me, by federal law. | ||
| And so what it ultimately comes down to is the ability to seek remedy in the court. | ||
| Sorry, I live on a farm. | ||
| It's a mess here. | ||
| There's flies. | ||
| So the problem here is that we just, there's no reason why we should be giving foreign-owned agrochemical giants the liability immunity from the American, liability immunity from the American people. | ||
| It just doesn't make any sense, right? | ||
| That's certainly not an America-first position. | ||
| All right. | ||
| So bottom line, and then I'll kind of ask you my final questions here. | ||
| Bottom line is they want immunity so that what? | ||
| When their pesticides cause these health problems, there's no remedy for the individual. | ||
| That's correct. | ||
| That's essentially the strategy here is to prevent the individual from suing at the state level and exercising their constitutional right to due process and remedy through the court system by effectively implementing administrative law or using administrative law to preempt constitutional rights. | ||
| Okay, now on same general issue, but I'm curious how this applies to, you know, they've done all these different tricks to get around the organic labels, right? | ||
| And so there's different things. | ||
| There's USDA organic, and then there's private things like Project Non-GMO. | ||
| And these major industries or the companies within them, they try to find all different loopholes to get around that and say, oh, no, no, it is still organic when it really you wouldn't consider it organic, but they just find these different ways of an end around to still get the organic label put on there so that the people that only buy organic still buy their product. | ||
| Is this something that you could see leading to something similar where you're like, hey, I don't want to have X pesticide on my apples that I buy or, you know, I don't want to get this pesticide in my organic products, but then they just find another way where you're still getting these pesticide-laden products and they just get an end around and they still get to label it organic? | ||
| I think that's an interesting position. | ||
| You know, the laws that govern organic pesticides are a little bit different. | ||
| I think honestly, where this is heading is something closer to USDA crop insurance, for example, mandating some type of pesticide use or herbicide use in order to receive payouts for crop failure, for example. | ||
| I think that if the pesticide manufacturers were to receive this type of immunity, they would push into more areas of the law so that their product is both mandatory, being shielded from liability, | ||
| obviously, and then also, you know, essentially classifying everything, every other type of chemical as a pesticide, insecticide, fungicide, or redenticide in order to bypass the review process and the legal immunity, essentially. | ||
| I think we'll see something akin to what we have seen with the vaccine manufacturers. | ||
| Well, that's your big warning here. | ||
| And again, people can learn more about this, or if you want to call your local representative to try to stop this. | ||
| You know, I feel like if the Democrats just decide they just want to stand in the way of anything, then it should be pretty easy to get a couple Republicans on board to stop this. | ||
| You know, you'd think that'd be pretty easy. | ||
| And then I guess really the bulk of the Republicans in Congress are going to do whatever Trump tells them. | ||
| So if Trump's friends in the agriculture industry say, hey, we need this bill, then Trump will probably make a statement saying pass it. | ||
| So then you're just going to need to find, I think the number might be five or six Republicans to block this thing. | ||
| I think you'd be able to do it. | ||
| I do. | ||
| But I can see that going in that direction. | ||
| All right, quickly, though, I want to change topics to beef here. | ||
| This was a story on CNN this morning. | ||
| Beef prices are the new egg prices. | ||
| They're soaring. | ||
| Well, they're claiming beef prices are soaring. | ||
| Of course, they're using this to attack Trump. | ||
| Is this really happening? | ||
| I haven't noticed them soaring. | ||
| It seems like they've been, beef has remained expensive for about five years now. | ||
| But is there something to this? | ||
| I don't think there's anything to it other than the fact that the big four Packers and then, of course, the Livestock Feeders Association is placing immense pressure on both the Trump administration and Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rowlands, to reopen the border. | ||
| So we have New World Screw Worm that has made its way up the migrant caravan route after the biological barrier was breached in 2022. | ||
| New World Screw Worm is a flesh-eating parasite that burrows into the teeny tiniest of scratches in any type of warm-blooded animal, be it a human being, livestock, or wildlife. | ||
| And it has effectively breached that biological barrier because there were millions of new hosts. | ||
| The last time that we had to battle New World screw worm within our own borders, it cost millions, if not billions of dollars. | ||
| And this time, the U.S. Department of Agriculture knows that if we were to battle this at our border again, it would be economically devastating for farmers, ranchers, and the economy of southern border states. | ||
| So we have to push this back down south. | ||
| And indeed, there has been a ton of pressure on Secretary Rowlands from across the cattle industry to keep that border closed to live imports. | ||
| However, there is a small sector that is very powerful and very wealthy that is lobbying to open that border back up because this is where JBS, for example, or Tyson, right, they bring in their cheap imports from south of the border. | ||
| And this is how they have been effectively making beef so expensive over the last five years because they're bypassing U.S. farmers and ranchers with cheap grind from countries that do not share beef. | ||
| And bypassing the quality and all the different regulations as well. | ||
| That's right. | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| So I think that this is just another media push to get her to open up that border. | ||
| And I would implore the Trump administration to ignore it. | ||
| Are they trying to vaccinate us through the beef? | ||
| Well, I'm glad to say that there's currently not an mRNA vaccine in our beef supply. | ||
| That isn't to say that there are not some in the pipeline, but we are not currently vaccinating cattle with mRNA type of vaccines. | ||
| The hog industry is a different story, and I'd love to talk to you about that another time. | ||
| But currently, the vaccines that we use in the cattle industry do not pass through meat. | ||
| So cows are still safe, and our beef supply, especially grown locally and by U.S. ranchers, is the healthiest in the world. | ||
| Well, you know, we have a pretty good local chain grocery store here. | ||
| Everything comes from Texas. | ||
| So we're lucky with that. | ||
| I still go to the farmer's market and like to get, you know, raw beef and stuff like that. | ||
| You can just tell the difference. | ||
| But hold on a second. | ||
| Are you telling me that they're vaccinating the hogs? | ||
| They are, yes. | ||
| So there is this liquivity platform that is widely used in the hog industry. | ||
| And I think we should definitely have a conversation about that sometime because it is quite concerning. | ||
| And so are the reports that we're hearing on the ground as producers in terms of anaphylaxis and sometimes upwards of 30% herd loss after vaccination. | ||
| Well, as if I needed another reason to not eat pork. | ||
| I quit eating pork some years ago when I started to get into the whole parasite deal and parasite cleansing. | ||
| So I rarely eat much pork since the turn of 2020. | ||
| Another reason not to eat it, I suppose. | ||
| They're vaccinating us through the pork. | ||
| So that nice, crispy, greasy bacon has a little extra surprise in it. | ||
| Brianna, thank you so much for your time today. | ||
| Where can people follow you and keep up with this bill that we're trying to stop? | ||
| Thank you so much for asking, Owen. | ||
| Yeah, people can find me on X at Brianna9. | ||
| Most importantly, I would love for people to go on and check out doortofreedom.org. | ||
| There's an FAQ policy brief that I've written myself. | ||
| Thank you very much. | ||
| On FIFRA, which is the body that governs this area of law. | ||
| So if you have any questions about how federal law preempts states' rights, check out that FAQ. | ||
| I would also direct people to Dr. Meryl Nass's Substack. | ||
| She has such a wealth of information. | ||
| And she has not only outlined the six-prong attack by Monsanto Bear, but also the corresponding court cases and what they're up to. | ||
| Lastly, Stand for Health Freedom is a wonderful organization and they have organized an email campaign. | ||
| So you can go on there and you can, it's much easier to contact the members of this committee and ask them to please vote America first. | ||
| All right, there you have it. | ||
| Thank you so much for your time trying to keep the audience up to date on all things, as much as we can, all things make America healthy again. | ||
| And so that's definitely one big issue because there's no doubt, folks, they started hitting you with the glyphosates, these pesticides, cancer rates shot right up. | ||
| It's very well done. | ||
| Very well. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Hour number two already in the books. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Wow. | |
| We enter hour number three coming up next. | ||
| I am cutting this announcement on the evening of July 21st, 2025. | ||
| That means you've got eight days until next Tuesday, the 29th, to take advantage of one of the biggest sales yet at the YellowShowstore.com on some of the most amazing supplements in the world. | ||
| We have the very best medical grade methylene blue. | ||
| You can buy one bottle of liquid or a discount and get one absolutely free. | ||
| Just go research the medical effects, medical benefits, methylene blue, and understand we have the very best out there, USP grade, medical grade. | ||
| We've given it to all our guests. | ||
| They've all had amazing varying effects. | ||
| I've given to over 500 people personally, only three or four of them have had no effect. | ||
| That means your mitochondria is in great shape if you have no effect, but most of us need it. | ||
| It has incredible benefits to save us from the amazing on our CMOS trilogy and more. | ||
| The sale goes until next Tuesday, the 29th of July, 2025, and it funds our operations. | ||
| Get yours, and it funds the InfoWar right now discounted. |
Export Selection