PBD Podcast Episode 244. In this episode, Patrick Bet-David is joined by Ed Dowd and Adam Sosnick and Tom Ellsworth.
FaceTime or Ask Patrick any questions on https://minnect.com/
Get Ed Dowd’s book Cause Unknown: https://bit.ly/3ITgeGJ
Want to get clear on your next 5 business moves? https://valuetainment.com/academy/
Join the channel to get exclusive access to perks: https://bit.ly/3Q9rSQL
Download the podcasts on all your favorite platforms https://bit.ly/3sFAW4N
Text: PODCAST to 310.340.1132 to get added to the distribution list
Patrick Bet-David is the founder and CEO of Valuetainment Media. He is the author of the #1 Wall Street Journal bestseller Your Next Five Moves (Simon & Schuster) and a father of 2 boys and 2 girls. He currently resides in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
Yeah, it was Maui and it was at the I remember that.
Gentlemen, we're live.
Wonderful gallery.
Well, listen, folks, we got another special guest today.
Today, we're going to talk about a very non-controversial topic.
It's going to be about COVID.
Okay, this is what we're going to be talking about today.
So let me give a couple of disclaimers before we get into our podcast today.
Our guest today is Ed Dow.
He was a former money manager where he grew his fund at BlackRock from roughly $2 billion to $14 billion in a span of 10 years.
He's done a lot of different things.
He moves to Miami, Maui.
He writes this book that just came out called Cause Unknown, The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022.
Before he hit the stage here on the podcast, Rob went on ChatGPT and he searched.
What did you Google if you want to show to the audience so they can see it?
Just put up the pictures.
There you go.
Zoom in a little bit.
Chatted.
Yeah, zoom in a little bit.
So you said what?
You said, provide me a summary of the book, Cause Unknown, The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022.
Here's what he said.
I'm sorry, but Cause Unknown is not an actual book.
It appears to be a hypothetical scenario or a work of fiction.
As an AI language model, I am not capable of providing information or summaries of events or books that have not actually occurred or been published.
If you have any other questions, please ask me.
Anyways, so Rob asked the next question.
Show the next one, which is very interesting.
Your next question is, provide me a summary of the book Alice in Wonderland.
Alice in Wonderland is a classic children's novel book written by Lewis Carroll.
Anyways, you don't need to know about Alice in Wonderland, but that's what Chat GBT thinks of our guest here today.
I do want to say this to you, that we are going to talk about the vaccine and finance and economy and insurance companies and Pfizer and Moderna stock, whether you should buy some or short it, and O'Keefe, and a recent story that came out from UK talking about when we're going to release the next virus that was written about in CNBC, in BBC.
We'll talk about the next election.
We'll talk about Christopher Wray, about Department of Energy, and maybe recession in Q2.
We'll talk about all about that stuff.
None of us today are doctors.
CDC, till today, states that COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and reduce your risk of illness.
So our guest today is going to give you the counter argument to that based on specific data.
But for you, if you do agree or not agree, make sure to see your doctor before you make any decisions on vaccines.
Having said that, Ed, thank you so much for being a guest on the podcast.
Thanks for having me on today, Patrick.
Pleasure to be here.
It's great to have you on.
It's funny because a lot of times we'll do podcasts and we'll do, and so who do you want to see on the podcast?
Ed Dow, Ed Dow, Ed Dow, Ed Dow.
How many people have been asking for Ed?
Like, it was like constant for like two months.
Yeah.
You got to have him on.
You got to have him.
You got him.
Okay.
So, oh, who's Ed Dow?
I know who he is.
I've seen interviews and I realized who you were.
And I said, great, let's invite him.
And here we are on the podcast.
If you don't mind, take a moment and share with the audience your background and how does somebody who works at BlackRock that some would call that the face of ESG, you know, how do you go from an institution like that that is pro-ESG to then wanting to expose data about COVID?
How does that happen if you don't like sharing your story?
No worries.
I left BlackRock about 10, 11 years ago.
2012 was my last year there.
And so they weren't into ESG and they weren't as big as they are today.
It was a different firm and they were heavily involved in what's called active management where portfolio managers like myself pick stocks.
Now they're mostly a passive indexing house.
Was Larry still there or was he?
Larry was there.
And, you know, I flew into private jet with Larry to go pitch business to CalPERS.
And at the time, he seemed like a fine gentleman.
But I have no idea what's going on there the last 11 years.
So whatever's happened, it wasn't on my watch or I wasn't employed.
But I started off my career after college.
I went to Notre Dame undergrad.
And then I went to HSBC, Hong Kong Shanghai Bank, where I was an institutional fixed income salesperson.
And that's where I learned the guts of the economy and money markets, interest rates, foreign exchange, mortgage asset backs, agency securities, government securities.
So I worked there.
And a lot of my customers were insurance companies and pension funds and state pension funds and banks.
So I did that for five years.
And that's when I first was introduced to the world of fraud on Wall Street.
That's when Kidd or Peabody blew up.
There was a trader that hid some bonds in the desk.
This is before trades were entered into computer systems.
You could hide bonds in the desk, I guess, back in the day.
What years were this?
This was between 1990 and 95.
Also, Orange County blew up.
I remember the best salesman in my office was in the California office.
I was in the Chicago branch, and he was selling bonds to Orange County that blew up when interest rates rose.
I remember that.
Yeah, you remember that.
Yeah, I do.
And so that was my first foray into fraud.
A young man, I went back to business school, Indiana University, got an MBA in finance.
Then went to Donaldson-Lufkin and Genrette, which was an investment bank, and it was known for equity research.
And I was an electric utility analyst, and I was there from 97 through 99.
And right down the hall from me were the internet fellows, and they were minting money.
And that was when another fraud occurred, the dot-com fraud.
And what was going on there was basically the due diligence process that investment banks used to do was to like before they brought a company public, they had to have something called revenues and cash flows.
And they were issuing companies with eyeball metrics.
And, you know, we know how that ended.
Now, there were some companies that did rise from the ashes, Amazon being one of them.
But that was a lot of corporate fraud that led to other frauds like WorldCom, Enron, what have you.
So that was the era of corporate fraud.
And I saw that.
I only spent two years at DLJ.
And then I went up to Boston to a firm called Independence Investments to be a technology analyst.
And because of what I saw going on in the halls of DLJ, I knew that it was going to end badly.
Steered my firm the best I could as a young analyst through that debacle and parlayed that into a job at BlackRock as a portfolio manager in 2002.
And spent 10 years there raising assets.
We started off with $2 billion through performance and asset gathering.
We grew it.
So we had a good track record.
And we also steered our fund through the great financial crisis, which was another fraud I saw.
And in these frauds, there's always a refrain.
In the internet fraud, it's a new paradigm ed.
And you could say that was my first mass formation psychosis.
You know, people there were like, it's different, Ed.
You can't, you got to get on board.
And then in the great real estate crisis, home prices never go down, right?
And of course, all you had to do was Google home prices falling.
And, you know, you saw that 50 years before that, they had fallen.
And then now the scene that I'm involved in is tracking ones and zeros, dead, not dead, disabled, not disabled.
And the refrain I heard for this, I call this a fraud.
This is a fraud that involves different silos, media, pharma, government, regulatory capture.
So this is the biggest fraud we've ever seen.
And the refrain is safe and effective.
So every fraud error has a refrain.
And this is the most egregious fraud I've ever seen in my life.
And so how did I figure out those other frauds?
Pattern recognition, following trends.
And so I'm just a guy that tries to get ahead of everybody else.
That was my job, was to be first.
Can you go through that a little bit more?
Because I was about to ask you the question and you said, how do I find out a pattern recognition trend?
So such as what?
So what do you look for?
What numbers do you look for?
You saw internet.
You saw what happened with mortgages in 08.
I think you guys even were calling that, right?
When like the whole big short concept, you were also saying that this season is coming where, you know, all these mortgage-backed securities, they're going to go get crushed.
So what data do you look for and what commonalities do you see with how COVID was handled versus the prior three frauds?
So what you look for is a trend change.
Markets go up and they go down.
So you try to get ahead of the curve.
You don't want to be too early because if you're early, you get run over.
You know, Michael Berry from the big short was two years early and he almost got defunded.
His investors almost bailed on him, but they held in and he made phenomenal killing.
So there's a bit of timing to this.
But what you look for is my sweet spots between perception and reality, right?
So the herd is perceiving a truth and the numbers underlying that truth are starting to change.
The herd is perceiving a truth and the underlying numbers are starting to change.
Correct.
And so basically, you try to capture when the perception is going to change to the new reality.
And so with this fraud that I saw, from the get-go, it started to seem strange.
Before the vaccine was introduced, in 2020, I saw people being suppressed censorship.
And, you know, I'm one of those, I'm an information junkie.
So when someone tells me not to look at something, it's like a moth to a flame.
I'm going to go look.
So there was all sorts of inconsistencies, especially along the lines of the treatment protocols that were coming out.
We all know now, in hindsight, that there was a suppression of early treatment to make way for the vaccine.
And you had to know something about emergency youth authorization law, which stated that there could be no emergency use authorization issued if there were already treatments available.
And that's why there was a demonization of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, which have, you know, as far as I'm concerned, work.
I've done the protocol myself when I got COVID last year, and I had a sore throat.
So early on, there was just a lot of discrepancies, mask, no mask, this unified messaging from the global governments, which we, here's a pattern.
Here's a recognition of a pattern.
When have you ever seen global governments in unison agree on anything prior to 2020?
Never.
And all at once, same messaging, same phrases, same procedures, all at once.
So that was kind of a clue that something different was going on here.
What a question.
When is the last time you've seen all the world governments, countries being on the same page?
Never.
Never.
And so Once you ask that question and the answer is no, then you can start a whole series of other questions of exploration.
So, okay, so as you're diving in and you're looking through, and I'm assuming obviously you're not vaccinated, right?
No, I did not, but you know, look, most of my family and loved ones did.
So I was telling them not to because I knew three things, right?
That it was an experimental vaccine, never been tested on humans.
I knew that because of my background on Wall Street.
I knew that Moderna was a sketchy company before they got the contract to do this.
I knew that most vaccines take seven to ten years to get safety data before they're approved.
And I also intuitively knew the operation warp speed sounded like an absolute disaster to me.
It just sounded like, so I said to myself internally, I'm going to wait.
And then to my dismay, I didn't realize the propaganda campaign that was going to be implemented upon the populations of the globe.
So when I saw everyone around me rushing to get this thing, I was horrified.
I was like, it hasn't been tested.
Let me ask you a crazy question.
Tom, this goes to you guys as well.
If let's just say the president went to these insurance companies and said, look, we are going to do this warp speed, but to gain the people's trust, you cannot upsell and get a bigger profit margin.
You have to sell this at cost.
I don't know if that makes sense or not.
So if it's like, hey, if this thing's going to cost you 60 cents, the vaccines, sell it at 60 cents, not build the insurance carrier 50 bucks or 100 bucks, right?
You think that would have made a difference in the carrier saying, well, if that's the case and we're not going to make any money on it, we're just doing this purely out of a world crisis to take care of them.
I think we need six more months.
I think we need three more months.
I think we need nine more months because there is no benefit here.
It's just purely we're doing it because it's a problem that we have.
And the downside is big because if any of these things have any side effects, we're going to be dealing with a lawsuit.
You think that would have made any kind of a difference?
Are you talking about an insurance companies or the drug companies?
The drug companies who I'm talking about.
If they would have gone to Pfizer or Moderna and said, you have to sell this at cost.
You cannot make a profit off of it.
You know what?
That might have changed their internal net present value calculations for sure.
You know what I'm asking?
The president, I'm like, listen, you want to do this?
No problem.
You can't capitalize off this crisis and make billions of dollars.
If you're willing to sell, the only companies I will work with to distribute this drug, this vaccine, is those who do it at cost.
If you do it at cost, no problem.
If not, we're not going to be doing this.
That might have changed things.
Here's a statistic that everyone needs to know.
So it took decades and decades for Pfizer to get to 40 billion in revenues before COVID.
After COVID, in one year, $90 billion.
Wow.
Go deeper on those numbers, by the way.
You say when the company was founded?
Yeah, from when it was founded to, you know, right before COVID, it took decades to get to 40 plus billion.
Pull up when Pfizer was starting.
And then since COVID, they've 40 to 15 years.
90 billion.
One year.
In one year, they went to $90 billion in revenues.
Now, I did some back-of-the-envelope math prior.
You've got to go back to 2021.
The idea was we were.
It's not decades, by the way.
It's not decades.
It's 1849.
Established in 1849.
Okay, long time.
160 years.
100 years.
180 years.
Yeah.
Go ahead.
You were saying.
So I did some back-of-the-envelope math in 2021.
You have to go back to when we were at the fever pitch of terror and fear.
If you remember correctly, they were talking about quarterly boosters odd infinitum forever with vaccine passports and you have to get your papers checked.
This was back in 21.
So I did some back-of-the-envelope math.
If that had occurred and this had been carried out and Pfizer got half of the global share of the vaccine, and I assumed 5 billion people would be vaccinated, 2 billion would either not or abstain.
And I looked at what they were charging for the vaccine.
Quarterly boosters, that would have gotten them about 390 billion in revenues.
That was where they wanted to take this.
And that would be bigger than Apple's revenue streams.
Yeah, last year, 2022, if you just show what I just texted, is $100 billion, 2022 is what they did.
So, okay.
So a part of it that made guys like you skeptical was warp speed.
That just doesn't sound right.
So name, bad name.
All the countries are united on the same page on doing this.
Fear levels are high.
Mainstream media high.
Censorship, you can't argue against it.
These are way too many red flags that you're looking at.
So to those who are overly skeptical and they don't trust somebody forcing them to do something, that doesn't naturally work well with them.
Okay.
So the rule breakers, you know, guys like you, Burry, whoever, just some of the guys that are like, yeah, I don't know if I'm buying into this thing.
You're forcing me to do it.
I need some more intel.
I need some more data.
What happened recently when you started looking at the death rates?
Because I'm in the life insurance space.
I've been in it for 22 years.
So, you know, I see cost of insurance.
I see actuary.
We sit there and we talk to carriers while COVID was going on and they would tell us the data.
Here's what we're seeing.
One of the things you talked about is the percentages which, you know, overwhelming data from the insurance industry confirms the dangers of COVID-19 injections, according to Dow.
In his interview with Jones, he quoted specific numbers from multiple major insurance companies that point toward massive increased death claims.
Unum Insurance Q4 death claim versus 2019, up 36%.
Lincoln National, up 57%.
Prudential, up 41%.
Renaissance Group of America, up 21%.
Hartford, up 32%.
MetLife, up 24%.
Agon, 24%, a Dutch insurance company whom I used to be a part of that company, plus 57%.
And Q3, Q4, in Q3, they saw an increase of 258% in claims.
That's Aegon.
These numbers are shocking according to Dow.
So these numbers, if you can explain to the audience, what does this mean when you see this?
And from there on, what did you start investigating?
Right.
So you're going to go back.
That was in the first quarter of 2022.
And we were starting, you know, we had already gone kind of viral and I got a team assembled around me.
Josh Sterling was a former sell side analyst at Sanford Bernstein for seven years.
He was number one ranked institutional investor.
So he basically knew what he was talking about.
He helped me analyze these results.
And what we decided to do was look at group life policies specifically because whole life, as you know from the insurance, it's Byzantine accounting.
So group life is shorter duration contracts.
So we knew losses would show up there immediately and they did.
So that was early days and the numbers were astounding because basically the group life folks hadn't priced the policies correctly.
And why is that?
Because in 2021, there was a mix shift from old to young in terms of excess deaths.
2020 was all about old people dying.
And that's okay for insurance companies because a lot of them are already paid in.
They're not on group life policies anymore because they're retired.
It doesn't matter.
But something very striking happened in 2021.
And that's when we really started thinking we were 100% right that the vaccine was doing something.
So the big mix shift from old to young was a big tell for us.
COVID wasn't killing young people in 2020.
What was killing people in 2021?
We obviously think it's the vaccines, and the data keeps rolling in.
We got all 22 in, and it's not looking good.
And since those numbers that you spoke about, the Society of Actuaries has collated all the numbers from the group life industry.
They do a survey.
80% of the revenues are covered.
And they verified our numbers.
in August of 2022 with a report that they put out.
Table 5.7 is the big table.
And it's claims.
It's not dollars.
It's just claims.
And right now, if you were to look at the group life policy results this quarter, they're not that bad because they've priced it up.
They've repriced everything.
So the losses aren't occurring because they're just raising prices.
But the claims, the number of the units, the deaths, is still up.
And what we saw in 2021 was alarming.
One of the biggest things that I think is a smoking gun is what happened to the millennials in the third quarter of 2021.
In the group life policyholders, their excess mortality prior to that in the spring was running around 30%.
Now, you've got to remember, 10%, as stated by Scott Davison at One America, is a once in a 200-year flood for this age group, 25 through 44.
And he was seeing 40%.
40% is off the charts.
But in the third quarter of 2021, in table 5.7, their excess mortality rose up to 84%, 84%.
And then it's come down since then, which is good news, but it's still running around 23%.
And a whistleblower of mine at an insurance company who has insight to the Society of Actuary numbers just leaked to me.
We're re-accelerating this in the fourth quarter of 2022.
So it's not good news.
But for me, this spike to 84% was what I call an event.
What was that event?
Well, it was called Mandates and Mass Vaccination Program.
This is a group of people that aren't supposed to die, and especially group life policyholders, as you know, Patrick.
These folks are the elite elite.
They work at Fortune 500 companies, mid-sized companies, and they have access to the best health care.
So why would all of a sudden they die in a very temporal spike like that?
We're assuming it's the mandates and the vaccines.
I've heard the naysayers tell me, Ed, it's suicides.
So there was a suicide pact in the third quarter of 21.
Doubtful.
Doubtful, right?
Was there, and I'm also told, well, drug overdoses.
Well, to get a group life claim, you have to be employed with the company.
I don't know too many fentanyl and heroin users at Fortune 500 companies that keep their jobs for long.
So there wasn't a mass overdosing situation.
And then the third one that I heard was that they missed their cancer screening treatment or appointments.
I'm 56.
I haven't had a cancer screening in my life.
Certainly young people aren't going to cancer screen hard.
No.
I have a question.
It's easy to appreciate what you're doing because you're a numbers guy.
You're a data guy.
What do they say?
The numbers don't lie.
The math doesn't lie.
So you can totally appreciate that.
I'm looking at your book, by the way, which ironically is an actual book, not according to the Chat GPT respect.
But I'm looking at it and I'm noticing the title of your book, Cause Unknown, is in air quotes and quotes.
Was that intentional for a reason?
Because based on your data, I think you do know the cause.
Would you kind of, in layman's term, break that down?
Yeah, no.
So we, tongue-in-cheek, put it in quotes on purpose because this book was pitched to me by Gavin DeBecker, who wrote my afterward and Bobby Kennedy.
They wanted me to talk about sudden athletic deaths.
And I said, you know, that's a good idea, but that's mostly anecdotal.
So we married the two together.
So we want to show, we wanted to put a lot of human faces on this.
This is tragic.
When athletes die, especially young athletes, it's tragic.
Any death's tragic, but especially young folks.
And that's what's occurring.
And the anecdotal evidence of the sudden athletic deaths is pretty alarming.
There was a study done, the La Saine study in 2006.
A bunch of guys in Switzerland did this.
They tried to figure out what was the incidence of sudden athletic death.
And they found 1,101 such cases under age 35 where it occurred on the field or right thereafter after the field.
1,101 over 38 years is 29 per year.
So that's kind of the baseline.
Since starting in 2021, it's exploded.
We'd be lucky to have a month with just 29 sudden athletic deaths.
We've had months with 90.
December of 2021 was 90.
So, and in my book, my book's not exhaustive.
There's hundreds and hundreds of these cases, mostly local news stories.
So just based on my anecdotal evidence, that's a tenfold increase.
And the case studies in your book, how many exact examples do you put in your book?
And then how many of them are athletes?
I can't remember the exact number, but there's hundreds.
And then we put a bunch in the back.
It's just, there's just so many.
There's hundreds and hundreds.
So from 29 a year to 29 worst case a month with a high of 90 in a month.
I'm not even sure if it's 90.
That was as of the writing of the book.
It could have gotten, it could be higher in certain months.
So what are people saying when you're asking them?
They're saying the collapses are happening because of what?
Like, you remember the interview, the, the Daryl Hamlin?
Damar Hamlin.
Is it Daryl Hamlin?
Yeah, I think Damar Hamlin, right?
When he was cast by that, was he?
It was like a seven-second pause.
And you can tell they edited the video and Michael Strahan asked the question, but I can tell you they did not put it in there.
I don't know if you saw this reaction or not.
Have you seen it?
I saw it.
Yeah.
So, you know, do you have that video?
You know, because it seems like you, I mean, Strahan is asking a question that everybody is going to be asking.
It's not like he's asking a question that's like a genius question.
It's a question the world is waiting for.
People want the right question to be asked.
Can you go to the part where the question is being asked?
Just fast forward to the part where the question is being asked.
Yeah, there you go.
I think it's about to be asked.
If you want to put the audio to the right, all the way to the right.
Yeah, there you go.
Could run circled around me right now.
How did Dr. describe what happened to you?
That's something I want to stay away from.
I know from my experience.
So here's my question.
That's something I want to stay away from.
And by the way, kudos to ABCs for showing the seven-second pause because ABCs could have cut that seven-second pause and just not answer, but they put the video out there and they even put that thought out there, which maybe ABC Uruguay wouldn't even put the answer in the question.
Yeah, we don't need to put that because it's going to create a lot of what?
You know, skepticism and guys like us may be talking about it.
It amplifies.
But here's the question.
What was the question?
The question was what?
What did the doctors tell you about this?
Has anybody spoken to the doctor that was handling him to ask what he said to him?
And is that doctor going to say this is a private client patient doctor relationship that I can because of HIPAA regulations?
But yeah, I mean, so what are people saying?
This number went from 29 a year to 29 a month to a high of 90 plus.
More than 29 a month.
He says we're lucky to have only 29.
That's what I'm saying.
29 is the worst month.
Like, yeah.
So, what are they saying the causes for this?
Well, recently, Yahoo News and Bloomberg have, the good news is this was being, this subject was completely ignored, this death in young people.
But recently, in the last couple of weeks, they've had to at least acknowledge it exists.
Bloomberg said, yes, young people are dying, but it's not the vaccines.
That was their headline.
And then Yahoo News put out a similar headline.
And then I read the Yahoo News, and they've described the deaths.
Again, they named some unknown expert.
We talked to some experts and they said that COVID is causing the immune system of healthy young people to go haywire because it's so strong.
So your strong immune system as a young person is now deadly because of COVID.
You can't make this up.
There's no study.
They just say it.
This is the article you were talking about from Bloomberg.
More young Americans are dying, but not from vaccines.
The increase started well before COVID-19 shots, according to mortality data and has plateaued since.
If you can zoom out, move up a little bit.
Can we read the rest of the article or you have to zoom in or no?
Okay, there you go.
Go a little lower.
A little lower.
No, the other way so I can read the top.
Yeah.
Keep going, keep going, keep going.
Okay.
So for most people on the field, cardiac arrests of Buffalo Bill, safety, DeMar Hamlin, January 2nd, 19th, was a frightening potential at followed by, what is he not looking at as happy ending?
Vocal minority, those seized on its as purported.
What is that word?
Where are you?
Purported.
Purported evidence of the terrible toll MRNA COVID-19 vaccines have exacted on otherwise healthy young Americans.
The medical establishment and the mainstream media have generally dismissed such concerns.
The medical establishment, well, that's the problem, Bloomberg, to write the word establishment and the mainstream media.
You're assuming that some people trust the medical establishment and mainstream media, generally dismiss such concerns out of hand.
But whenever I hear them, I ask myself, I wonder if there's any evidence of that in mortality data.
So go up.
Let's see if their argument is going to get stronger.
So U.S. mortality statistics derived from death certificates filled by physicians and medical examiners collected from state and local public health agencies by Center of Disease Control and Prevention National Center.
There's available online to anyone on computer.
They used to be updated only annually, but during the pandemic, the CDC began releasing provisions numbers.
As recently, it takes a little while to learn how to.
Okay, keep going.
They're not giving an answer on the data here.
So, you know, zoom into that one.
With mortality data, it shows that, first of all, something has been killing American young people in sharply rising numbers.
Lately, the 2020 mortality rate from 15 to 34 was the highest since 1973 for those 25 to 34.
It's the highest since 1950.
Death per 100,000 population, 15 to 10, okay, that chart right there is not a good look.
And by the way, during the lockdown, can you speak to this?
You know, I was reading this during the lockdown, they also failed to point out that auto accident deaths were way down because millions and billions of miles were not being driven by that cohort.
And so therefore, those deaths were down simply because you're not driving a car.
And yet the total number was up.
But you're talking about excess mortality, right?
Excess mortality.
Can you how would where would the like the reduction in auto deaths down where would that show up?
Is that in the base number, not the excess number?
It would be in the total number.
It would detract from excess deaths.
So whatever's going on is excess to what would be down from made up for the auto act.
Yeah, normal years and years of data, decades of data on auto deaths, which are down.
It makes up for that and more.
Yeah, you know, in my book, I talk about something else that's interesting regarding lockdown.
So there's a smoking gun in the UK data that we found where once the vaccines were introduced, all age groups except 1 through 14 started having excess deaths.
1 through 14 age group, their vaccines were introduced later around November of 2021.
Excess mortality for that age group was coming down during the lockdowns because the largest single cause of death in that age cohort is accidental.
So less activity.
So their excess mortality was coming down, down, down.
And even when the lockdowns came off in the spring in the UK, their excess mortality kept coming down.
Then in November of 2021, it started going back up for age group 1 through 14.
That's when the vaccine was introduced in the UK.
It's no longer, I think, being offered for kids.
And I think they just suspended boosters for under 50 as well in the UK.
Or they're no longer promoting it.
I have a question on the lockdowns that Tom was talking about.
So it's almost like accountability and which one is worse.
And let me frame this.
So get the COVID vaccine because that'll protect you and save your life.
Okay, that's option one.
Or option two is, all right, you're locked down.
And because you're in the house, even we had this conversation with Neil deGrasse Tyson.
And because you're on lockdown, so people are drinking more, they're taking more opioids, fentanyl.
You're saying that you're drinking more, missing cancer screenings.
I guess my question is, well, what's worse?
Right.
So you're mandating vaccines and then, you know, cause unknown, air quotes, or you're forcing people to stay home and now they're resorting to not taking care of their health, not working out, drinking drugs, alcohol.
At the end of the day, it seems like a recipe for disaster that there's going to be deaths either way.
So ultimately, you know, we have to pay the price as Americans for this resounding number of deaths, whether it's from the vaccine or whether it's from lockdowns.
Do you see my question here?
And I'm sure in 2020, there were some people that drank too much or, you know, had some bad habits.
But the predominance of death, excess deaths in 2020 was old people.
That's in the numbers.
Because that was pre-vaccine.
Pre-vaccine.
I think it's important to point that out.
And that's when most of the lockdowns occurred.
We weren't really locked down in 2021.
Depending on what states you were in.
Yeah.
For the most part.
Here in the free state of Florida, no.
But here's something shocking.
So between, so the mixture from old to young is in the numbers.
So from 2020 to 2021, 40,000 millennials died in 2020 excessively, 60,000 in 2021.
So they added- Say that again.
In 2020, 40,000 millennials died excessively, according to CDC numbers.
And then in 2021, it was 60,000.
What is the word excessively breakfast?
That means above and beyond the normal level.
The normal expected rate.
And so that's a 50% increase.
And then the Gen X didn't fare much better.
94,000 Gen Xers died excessively in 2020.
120,000 in 21.
Whereas old people in 2021 went the other way.
There were less.
So there was this, what we call in Wall Street, a mix shift.
And I would say it's an adverse mix shift.
It's very weird data to go through.
Yeah, it's very weird because did the virus morph?
Did it only start to attack younger folks that are employed?
So then I would come back and I would tell you, I would say, look, the elders, who got the vaccine more?
Older people or millennials and Gen Xers?
I would say elders were elderly, was more fearful of the vaccine.
So like in my family, more fearful of COVID.
Yeah, more fearful of COVID.
So my dad got the vaccine, two shots, and he got the three boosters.
My dad, he's 80 years old, about to be 81, and next month.
Nanny got the vaccine and the boosters, right?
To them, it was like, what if this?
What if that?
What if this?
People were coming to the house that were having COVID.
My dad had COVID and pneumonia at the same time at 79 years old.
It was scared that he was going through it.
So that data you're saying, why would the excessive number go higher for millennials and Gen X is did they get vaccines more than the elderly did?
Well, they got the vaccines in 21 through mandates.
So there was no vaccine in 2020.
So the mix shift for excess deaths occurred in the young folks in 2021.
No.
Once they started getting the vaccine and then this one cohort goes up 50%, the next cohort goes up 33%.
Correct.
And why wouldn't older people's numbers also?
That's what I'm asking.
Why wouldn't they, because they also took the vaccine?
Well, because there was a pull-forward effect.
We took out a lot of the weak, older people with some of the unfortunate protocols that went down in the early days.
You mean they died already?
They died already.
Okay.
There was a pull-forward effect.
And so you've seen the numbers in 2021, old people, excess deaths coming down because all the weak old people were taken out by COVID and or bad treatment in 2020.
Their numbers came down excessively because we just took out a whole bunch of people.
But since vaccinations keep rolling, they started to go back up again.
Well, let me ask you, do you remember when they showed, Rob, if you can find this data where they showed which cohort got the vaccine the most?
Those without a high school, those without a college degree, college dropouts, those with a bachelor's degree, MBA's PhD.
I don't know if you remember this data.
It showed that MBAs were the least.
MBA's bachelor's degree was the highest.
Bachelor's degree was the highest.
They were getting the vaccine.
And I think high school dropouts or college dropouts were the lowest, second lowest after MBA.
So when you do think about millennials, Gen X, Gen Y, boomers, which one of them got the highest percentage of, and seniors, which one of them got the highest percentage of the vaccine?
I haven't done that data because we don't have vaccine.
We don't have that really as granular as we would like.
Oral disarrays, 70% of U.S. with a bachelor's degree had been vaccinated or planned to get vaccinated compared to just half to 53%, less education.
In other words, a college degree is associated with a 43% increase and likelihood that someone plans to get the vaccine.
The difference by education level is larger than the difference in the willingness to get vaccinated.
Whites and blacks, 32%, the difference between, interesting, Latinos, 3%.
So you saw almost those people that are getting a bachelor's degree, they're following the system, right?
Correct.
Can you see if you can find the data which generation got the most vaccine?
While he's doing that, Tom's going to ask a question.
So, yeah, there were some whistleblowers that came out that talked about hospitals assigning causation to deaths.
And whistleblowers came out saying, you know, I had an elderly person who stroked and got classified as COVID because the hospital was looking to get the combat pay, you know, those payments from the federal government.
You're looking at total deaths, which normalizes all that out of why it's causation.
You're looking at mass cohorts, not mass cohorts, the mass numbers and the cohort saying, look, it's up, which completely normalizes out all of the BS.
And it's not BS.
The hospitals committing frauds to get the combat pay from the federal government, yes?
Yeah, so we focus on what we call the metadata, the ones and zeros, because we knew that as you go down into the data streams, there'd be fraud.
So we're just counting the, you can't hide the one versus the zero.
You can't hide the disabled versus the undisabled.
So we stay up there.
We're starting to go down deeper.
We're doing a vaccine damage project right now, my team.
But yeah, what we have is irrefutable.
They're just ones and zeros.
And because it was a mass vaccination program and it was global, these numbers that we're seeing occur in all different Western countries.
And for me, the smoking gun is the group life, folks.
This is high evacuary numbers.
And then we've got to talk about the disability numbers that we've gotten from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Yeah.
So the point I was getting to for everybody listening was to confirm that says, hey, a lot of people talk about all the things who died of COVID, didn't die of COVID.
But when you step back and are looking at total deaths over time at the time vaccines are introduced for, oh, now it's okay for under 14.
Now it's okay for under six.
You're tracking that as that came like a wave.
Correct.
And the elderly, the culling of the herd with the elderly, that was the one where people were remuted in their attempt to say it, but they were pointing out, saying, hey, look, this is far worse than regular flu.
And regular flu will take out an obese career smoker on a regular flu season.
This is worse than that.
And that was the elderly culling of the herd.
And let's not forget different protocols that probably didn't help, like Remdesme Vir ventilation has now been proven to be quite deadly for this disease.
And let's not also forget, I lost my train of thought, but I'll come back to it.
Yeah, but going back to it, I'm really trying to find out what percentage of which generation got the vaccine the most.
We can come back to this.
You know what I want you to go to?
Rob, we were looking at a number earlier.
How many vaccinations have been given so far in the last two and a half years?
As of October of 2022, I believe the number was 12.5 billion.
So we're shy of 15 billion vaccines given.
Shots given.
Shots given.
In U.S., this is from Statista, which, you know, credible source, purely data.
Number of COVID-19 vaccine doses administered in the U.S. as of February 23rd, two weeks old.
And if you can zoom in on the numbers, Pfizer, number one.
Pfizer's number one at 400 million.
Then their booster is number two at 34 million.
Moderna's number two, number two when it comes down to the main 251 million.
Their boosters at 19.4.
Johnson and Johnson, obviously, we know what happened to them, 18.9 million.
And you got a couple other guys that are there.
So give or take on this, what's that?
650, 80, 700 million just in the U.S.
Okay, 700 million just in the U.S.
I think the number is 67%, 66 or 67% of Americans are vaccinated.
If I remember that statistic correctly, I saw 66 or 67% Americans are vaccinated.
So how much of this do you believe as a data person?
This is either this is going to be opinion or if you have any kind of data to prove it, you know, it'd be great.
How much of this do you think is, you know, when I was in a relationship and I was an 18-year-old kid or 22-year-old kid, and I'm dating somebody and I was serious relationship.
My friends wanted me to be single.
Those who were single wanted me to be single.
Okay.
I'm kind of like, dude, you know, you gotta, you gotta get a girl.
It's great when you're in a relationship.
Like, no, bro, you want to be single.
You don't have to answer to anybody.
I'm like, dude, it's fine.
You know, it's like, dude, you come to the party.
They're asking about you.
Okay, great.
Then you want to be single.
Then when you're single, married couples want you to get married.
It's like, hey, dude, let me tell you, man, life is better when you're married.
You don't have to worry about it and run around all over the place.
And you're like, dude, okay, let me get married.
And you're married, like, dude, single people.
So then it's like, no, bro, you're married, but divorce is the way to be.
You got to join the divorce party and go, you know, and, you know, we were reading a statistic about a wife talking about why, you know, statistics in Maui, how it is, you know.
So, you know, it's like, hey, you got to get divorced, man.
It's really cool when you're divorced because now you have money and you can do this.
And imagine all those young girls like guys with money and success and the game is a different.
Oh, I want to be divorced.
How much of this with COVID vaccines?
People who got the vaccination, it's like, no, join my camp because God forbid if I'm wrong for having taken a vaccine purely by fear.
How much of it is people just want to defend their decision that they made the right decision and they don't want to be proven that they were wrong?
Oh, it's huge.
I saw this on Wall Street all the time.
My ethics professor said something that stuck in my head from business school.
He said, you can't rationalize facts to someone whose position is based on emotion.
So a lot of people took this out of fear, which is an emotion, and then they convinced others to join them on the ride.
And now data is coming out that they may have been wrong.
And ego is a big part of what I saw on Wall Street.
I saw people ride stocks down to zero where newsflow was coming out that it was bad and they'd keep buying all the way down because they couldn't admit they're wrong.
This phenomenon is now being repeated on a national global scale with this vaccine.
People just don't want to admit they're wrong.
And the problem is this isn't money.
This is like potentially your health.
So I view the vaccine now as a trade, right?
You're either long the vaccine or short the vaccine.
If you're long it, you continue to get boosters.
Because if you took it and now you're hesitant, that's great.
Don't take it, take it.
But if you continue to get boosters, that's like buying a stock on its way to zero.
And if you didn't take the vaccine, you're on, I think, the right side of the trade.
So it's a trade in my mind.
And what was the original thesis of the trade?
It prevented you from getting COVID and transmitting.
We both know those are lies.
So the thesis is unwinding as we roll through time.
So people who keep defending this are now defending it based upon what I call marketing scheme from Pfizer and Moderna, which says it reduces your chance of being seriously hospitalized.
There's no paper on that.
There's no data.
You know how they say, like, don't throw good money after bad.
Correct.
So let's say you're the 70-plus crowd.
You're like, listen, I'm old.
I'm going to do what I got to do to protect my health.
Or if you have preexisting conditions.
But what would your message be for the 20, 30, 40 somethings, the millennial crowd even?
You know, do they keep riding the stock all the way down?
Because I'm saying for people that have gotten the vaccine, is it just stop it with the booster?
Stop it with the boost.
I get it.
You did it, but here's what you should do moving forward.
And a lot of people were forced to do it.
A lot of people didn't want to do it, but they did it.
And there's a big, what I call marginal middle of people that weren't that enthusiastic about this.
Those are the people I'm trying to reach.
There's the hardcore Covidians who aren't going to change their mind.
They're going to get jabbed, jab, jab.
Good luck to them.
Covidians?
I call them Covidians.
Branch Covidians.
Gotcha.
It's a religion.
It's a religion in many ways to a lot of these folks.
Tribal identity.
They did a lot of virtue signaling.
When it comes to blame.
I'm going to line two.
When it comes to blame.
Okay, there you go.
You just found it.
Is that the one?
Yes.
Good for you, Rob.
Let me zoom in a little bit.
Thank you for looking forward, Rob.
Phenomenal.
Which percentage of people in each age range receive the COVID vaccine the most?
65 plus is the highest.
Okay.
By the way, what's the difference between, oh, at least one is the pink, fully is the navy blue?
Okay.
65 is the highest and it's 50.
This makes sense to me.
Scroll down so we see what the bottom line is.
25 to 49.
Is that zero to 100% at the bottom?
Yeah.
And the light pink extending to the right, it's all the nearly 100%.
Is this American or is this worldwide?
I'm assuming this is going to be U.S. because this is USA Fact.
So does that mean almost 90 plus percent of 65 plus got the jab?
I remember with the refrain, getting back to what you were talking about at the marketing, you were just talking about the refrain, safe and effective, safe and effective.
Get the elders first.
And Cuomo on TV, let's protect people in the retirement homes.
That's what drove that.
Right.
Well, they got first right of refusal.
And then you started seeing it's 100%.
99%.
Can you go a little lower?
90.
I don't think it was right.
Refusal.
I think it was let's protect them.
And so you had the nation's children and grandchildren lobbying grandma and grandpa to get it.
You're first because you're the most vulnerable, grandma.
Go get it.
Well, I got this here.
White is the second lowest.
Blacks are the lowest to get the vaccine.
Then the highest is American Indian, Alaskan Native.
Asian is second.
Native Hawaiian, specifically Maui.
Pacific Islander is the third.
And then you got Hispanics, fourth, multiple other.
Then you got whites and blacks.
Go Laura.
Let's see what other data you see here.
Okay, that's it.
That's what you got.
Very interesting.
Is that by state right there?
Well, I mean, I'd be curious to know if you go to California.
What's the California number?
Vaccinated.
California is what?
85, 74.
85.
Damn, 85%.
That is insane to me.
Go to New York.
See what New York is?
Left, left, left of MA?
Right there.
Yeah.
It's what?
93%.
Oh, my goodness.
What about Florida?
Yeah, Florida's 61%.
Is that 61 or 81%?
81.
Okay, so that's seniors.
Go to Texas.
75%.
Go to Illinois.
What is that?
78%.
Go to Oregon.
Yeah, because outside of Chicago, Pat, that's 80%.
Interesting.
Florida's 81.
Seniors.
Go to Connecticut.
Connecticut is a hardcore, you know, 95%.
Go to Alabama.
Connecticut is 95%.
Go to Alabama.
Go to Mississippi.
Go down there.
Alabama is 64%.
Or you have a higher African Americans, which showed up on the other chart.
61%, 64%.
Go to Utah, just out of curiosity, Utah, 74%.
And Hawaii for our friend Ed?
90%.
90%.
You guys are killing it out there.
I live in a strange state.
A lot of people got it.
Probably the wrong phrase.
Yeah.
By the way, somebody just commented.
Somebody just commented right now.
Raul Orpeza did a super chat.
He says, it's not necessarily that those with a bachelor's degree are following the system.
As a student, I was forced to take the vaccine before I could continue with my classes at undergrad level.
Maybe grad students were forced as well.
Interesting.
No, these mandates are still going on in U.S. colleges.
Notre Dame.
Still?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Notre Dame is one of the most egregious policies right now.
And I'm just horrified.
I'm not going to give them a dime until the Joker can't get into the United States.
Here we go.
Cannot play in a tennis tournament.
2.0.
Yeah.
You know, Sunday, I'm at the park and I'm talking to a friend, Jeremy.
And I said, hey, would you ever be okay with your son serving the military?
He says, I would love for my son to serve the military one day and protect this country.
But I can't.
I said, why not?
He said, because they're going to force him to take the vaccine.
I say, your reasoning is purely vaccine related.
He says, yes.
He says, how many vaccines did you take?
I told him I took 11 on the first week when you go into the military.
And then we also had to take the anthrax.
We had to take all this other stuff that's military property.
I wonder how many parents are going to be turned.
Like, Tom, your kids going to school, they have to take the vaccine to go to school?
No, not right now.
Right?
Certain schools.
No, no, no, no, not high school, college.
If she chooses to go to a certain college, she has to take the vaccine.
Well, we're going to see what those mandates look like.
But we're quietly looking at that sort of stuff as we.
My daughter's a junior, took the SATs.
So this fall, all the packets go in November 1st.
And part of our evaluation process is, is it mandate or is it optional or is it preferred?
You're looking at that and you guys are seriously considering that as.
You have to.
Yeah.
Man, that is pretty wild.
As a parent, you have to sit there and say, you know, I'd love my kid to go to such and such college, but they mandate vaccines.
You know what?
Because of that, we're not going to go there.
A lot of parents are going to have to make these decisions.
And at $83,000 a year, national average for most private and fully established state universities, that's the average.
What's the number?
$83,000.
That's room, board, travel.
That's a national average.
The tuition is right around 60.
But then you have about 15 to 17 for a dorm and meal card and books and all lab fees.
So for $83,000 a year, I have to pay that to increase the mortality rate of my daughter.
Sorry.
Yeah, that's the insanity that we're under.
One stat I'd love to share with all with the audience is between March of 21 and Feb of 22 when we first started doing this, 60,000 millennials excessively died.
In the Vietnam War, 58,000 soldiers died over 12 years.
So in one year, 60,000 millennials disappeared.
One was due to the Viet Cong, and the other was due to a needle, I think.
What do you think the refrain, not what do you think, what are you observing their frame?
Because safe and effective was a refrain.
And I'll go back and I'll share with people how this works because I happen to agree with you about fraud.
So I'm going to ask a question at the end of this statement.
I was part of a venture-funded company in year 2000, and we were out trying to raise money.
And we had, we were, our product was sold as a subscription, you know, for money that paid operating costs.
And so we were not eyeballs or what back in the day was called vanity stats.
Right.
And as an investor and coming from Wall Street, you know what that is.
What was happening at that time is the venture capital community was openly saying, listen, right now we've got a lot of dot-coms.
They were simply called dot-coms at the time.
And we got to get out.
And there's one of two ways to do it.
One is greater fool's theory that another VC marks up the valuation and comes in.
And so that positions it favorably.
But that's just marking up your investment.
The way they got out was through IPOs.
What happens at the IPOs is there would be some shares that would be restricted that couldn't be sold.
But in many cases, the VCs got out with the public offering.
So in other words, the venture capital community knew that these dot-coms had structural issues, but there is this, the bankers were getting banking fees.
They were in favor of the IPOs.
The venture capital was in favor of transferring all their risk to the public market and then getting the return on what they had.
And then maybe they had some of the was left there.
And the refrain that I heard over and over again, hey, the rules have changed.
It's different business now.
The rules have changed.
And I would ask, what rules?
Which rules have changed?
Are people just going to be buying online?
So you're taking retail costs out of brick and mortar.
But the refrain back then, I remember, was the rules have changed.
But I was looking at it and I was kind of horrified because they said, all the VCs are doing is getting out to the next round.
And this time it's the public market.
So now they're out.
So the dot-com crash happened on Wall Street after they went public, but they got out.
And you know who they had air cover from?
The money that's invested by the VCs, you know who it comes from?
Michigan public employees, sovereign wealth funds.
There is a ton of people that put money into the VC funds that wanted to get out.
So there was a whole group below the surface, you're nodding, that wanted to get out.
So they were in favor, get the IPO out, get it to the public market.
Then the VC got a return.
But more importantly, Michigan public employees got their money back.
Yale Med School Endowment got their money back.
Major family offices got their money back.
Do you see what I mean?
And then the dot-com crashed on the retail investor.
Yeah, y'all.
The last person to hold a bag is always retail.
It's called a liquidity event.
The VCs got their liquidity event at the expense of the retail investing public.
So that was a fraud, and that's what I heard that.
So other people, I wanted to amplify what Ed was saying at the beginning where he said he's seen multiple frauds in his life.
I saw that one.
What is the refrain right now as we move into chapter two or three of this pandemic and COVID?
Originally, it was safe and effective.
Get the elderly.
I remember that.
What is it right now?
Is there a refrain now or is this we're in the fallout phase?
We're in narrative spin control right now.
So I see different narratives emerging.
One of them is, oh, you know, yes, we were wrong, but we didn't, we were flying by the seat of our pants and we were doing the best we could.
Who do you hear that from?
Who's actually, I think the Atlantic, which is kind of the mouthpiece of the establishment, wrote an article on that recently.
Talking about masks.
They said, hey, N95s didn't even work.
Right.
And so, oh, so masks didn't work.
If the N95 didn't work, forget about the bandanas and all the cheap masks.
Nothing works.
The Atlantic just put out an article recently said, yes, the experts failed miserably, but you still need to trust us.
You can't make this up.
These folks seem to have no self-awareness.
I just send you an article.
Pull that up if you can.
It's like my alcoholic uncle slapping my aunt, crying in front of my cousins, and then saying, I'm really sorry I did this, but trust me, I won't happen again next week until it does.
Yeah, exactly.
Sorry to hear about your family problems, Tom.
By the way, so here's an article, Tom.
Top 25 best vaccine optional colleges in the U.S. Number one, U.S. Naval Academy.
Number two is, look who number two is, UNC.
Interesting.
Isn't that where a lot of the data came from?
I believe they did a lot of gain of function research as well.
Three academics.
Chapel Hill?
Yeah.
You're probably going to see all the academies.
You're going to see Annapolis.
You're going to see Colorado Springs.
Hillsville College, Michigan.
Davidson College.
They're mandated in the military.
University of Florida.
Just West Point.
Wait, wait, what?
Was there U of F was in there?
Yeah, absolutely.
Number nine is University of Florida.
I know that's.
Well, you know why?
Because the university may want to do it one way, but the funder, you know, University of Florida is not private.
Georgia Tech, Georgia Tech.
You'll probably put Florida State on this now.
University of Austin, UT.
Downstreet from Wisconsin.
Okay.
Madison.
There's Merchants.
Ohio State.
Ohio State University.
Optional.
Okay.
North Carolina State Rally.
Florida State University.
There you go.
Alabama.
Also gets money from Tallahassee, by the way.
Clemson.
In Tallahassee.
Oberlin College.
Government.
Rhode Island, Grove City, Southern Methodist, SMU.
Good for them.
Purdue.
Texas.
Okay.
Indiana.
So there is options where they're allowing the kids and the parents to make a decision.
No Ivy League schools, huh?
No, the Ivy Leagues are still on board.
Now, why do you think that is?
Why are the Ivy League so on board with all this?
You know, it's tribalism, I think.
It's like they were all in, and they're not, you know, I don't think Ivy Leaguers like to admit they're wrong.
When I was on Wall Street, you know, I didn't get a Harvard MBA, but I met a lot of Harvard MBAs.
A lot of them are smart, good people, but a lot of them also. have egos and never admit they're wrong.
Even when they're wrong, they'll say, Ed, you were right for the wrong reasons.
Well, just agree to disagree.
How about that?
So let's transition into the next.
You won the game on fumbles, so you didn't really win it.
You didn't win it with offensive prowess.
It was fumbles.
Correct.
Go to page six, the 10 minutes about COVID experts, if you can do that.
Okay.
This is a New York Post story.
I'll read this to you.
I thought this was an interesting article.
Number one, 10 minutes told by COVID experts and now debunked.
Number one, misinformation number one.
Natural immunity offers little protection compared to vaccinated immunity.
A Lancet study looked at 65 major studies in 19 countries on natural immunity.
The researchers concluded that natural immunity was at least as effective as the primary COVID vaccine series.
Misinformation number two.
Can we stop right there?
Yeah.
Lancet, that's a respected medical journal.
So this is somebody stepping out of line.
Is that correct?
Yes.
They put out a lot of misinformation during COVID, so they're going to have to reestablish their credibility.
Sorry to interrupt you, Pat, but I saw this earlier in the morning.
It's important what you just said, though.
Did you hear what he said?
Yeah.
They put out a lot of misinformation during COVID.
So now they're trying to clean up some of their own misinformation that they put up.
So good for them, at least for doing it.
Misinformation number two, masks prevent COVID transmission.
Cochrane reviews are considered the most authoritative and independent assessment of the evidence in medicine.
And one published last month by a highly respected Oxford research team found that masks had no significant impact on COVID transmission.
It's pretty wild to think about all the fights on planes, the discomfort.
Put it on, raise it, cover your nose, all those issues you would have on flight.
Do you know what N95 means?
Nah, 95% chance you get it anyway.
Tom, you're on fire today with your jokes.
I mean, this is, oh, my God.
I mean, he's trying out to be comedian.
He spent a little too much time with Crowdie yesterday.
This is what happens.
Misinformation number three.
And three Yetis of coffee.
Schools closures reduce COVID transmission.
The CDC ignored the European experience of keeping schools open most without masks mandates.
Transmission rates were no different, evidenced by studies conducted in Spain and Sweden.
Okay.
Number four, myocarditis, Tom, from the vaccine is less common than from the infection.
Public health officials downplayed concerns about vaccine included myocarditis or inflammation of the heart muscle.
We now know that myocarditis is 6 to 28 times more common after COVID vaccine than after the infection among 16 to 24-year-old males, which is kind of this one of the things you're talking about, right?
This data here.
Yep.
Number five, young people benefit from a vaccine booster.
Boosters reduced hospitalizations in older, high-risk Americans, but the evidence was never there that they lower COVID mortality in young and healthy people.
So it did help in older and high-risk Americans.
That's what they're saying.
Yeah.
And this is a New York Post article, right?
Misinformation number six, vaccine mandates increased vaccination rates.
President Biden and other officials demanded that unvaccinated workers, regardless of their risk or natural immunity, to be fired.
A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major U.S. cities had no impact on vaccination rates.
They also had no impact on COVID transmission rates.
George Mason, for you.
Number seven, COVID originating from the Wuhan lab is a conspiracy theory.
This one, we're definitely going to get it to here in a minute.
But I'll come back to number seven.
Number eight, it was important to get second vaccine dose three or four weeks after the first dose.
Data were clear in the spring of 2021, just months after the vaccine rollout, that spacing the vaccine out by three months reduced complication rates and increased immunity.
Spacing out vaccines would have also saved more lives when Americans were rationing a limited vaccine supply at the height of the pandemic.
Epidemic.
Number nine, data on bivalent vaccine is crystal clear.
Dr. Ashisha Ja famously said that despite the bivalent vaccine being approved using data from eight mice, to date, there has never been a randomized controlled trial of the bivalent vaccine.
I think all the mice got COVID as well.
Number 10, one in five people got long COVID, get long COVID.
The CDC and prevention claim the CDC claims that 20% of COVID infections can result in long COVID.
It's often normal to experience mild fatigue or weakness for weeks after being sick and inactive and not eating well.
Calling these cases long COVID is the medicalization of ordinary life.
I'm going to go back to seven.
That was a supplemental fear, right?
You're going to get long COVID.
I'll get it and I'll fight it off.
Yeah, but you can have long COVID and have other things.
So it's like the supplemental fear for people that thought they were going to get natural immunity.
And that's the new, one of the reasons being floated for sudden death and all these excess deaths is long COVID.
Interestingly, long COVID doesn't have a clinical definition yet.
And it explains everything and nothing all at the same time.
Pat, I know you want to get to number seven, but I think even after seven, we should highlight that next article, which I think is available.
I mean, obviously, it's all within it.
So number seven, COVID originating from the Wuhan lab is a conspiracy theory.
Google admitted to suppressing searches of lab leak during the pandemic.
Dr. Francis Collins, head of National Institute of Health, claimed and still does, he doesn't believe the virus came from a lab.
Ultimately, overwhelming circumstances, circumstantial evidence points to a lab-leak origin, the same origin suggested by Dr. Anthony Fauci by two very prominent virologists in January 2020 meeting he assembled at the beginning of the pandemic.
So you hear that, and then story comes out by FBI Director Ray acknowledges the Bureau assessment that COVID-19 likely resulted from a lab incident.
This is a CNN story, folks.
This is not a fox or anything else.
This is a CNN story.
Okay.
So FBI Director Christopher acknowledged in an interview with Foxmonse that the FBI believed the COVID-19 pandemic was likely the result of a lab accident in Wuhan, China, stating that the origins of the pandemic are most likely a potential lab incident in Wuhan.
The Department of Energy low-confidence assessment that COVID-19 most likely originated from a laboratory leak in China underscores a divide in the U.S. government as a majority of the intelligence community still believes that COVID either emerged naturally in the wild or there's still too little evidence to make a judgment one way or another.
Ray stated that the FBI has a team of experts who focus on the risk of biological threats that come into the wrong cans, including by a hostile nation state, and that the Chinese government has been doing its very best to try to thwart and upfus, how do you pronounce that word?
Obfuscate work here.
So here's my question for you.
When you're hearing the director of FBI, saying this is most likely coming from Wuhan Lab, when you're hearing, you know, the Department of Energy, this cannot be Stephen Colbert calls out the Department of Energy.
I don't know if you saw that or not.
If you got anyway Lane, I'd be like, Yeah, if you got the clip of Stephen Colbert calling out Department of Energy, like, dude, you're a comedian, right?
Exactly.
He got pissed off at Jon Stewart for Jon Stewart saying, What do you mean it didn't come from?
You know, if you can find this clip, his reaction, he was not happy about Department of Energy.
That's also the same Stephen Colbert, who literally had syringe dancers doing the worst thing I ever saw.
The Rockefeller Rocketeers dance.
Right.
Good question.
So, so.
Can you pull up the picture, by the way, of the vaccine dance that he did?
Yeah, that was.
So here's a question for you.
Here's a question for you.
By the way, this is a question for all of us here.
How much of it do you think they fear?
Don't play this right now.
We can come back to this.
I mean, we've all seen this pathetic performance that they had, which was, but how much of this, Tom, Ed, do you think it's they fear that if they were wrong, they worry that a guy like Trump is going to come out and his entire campaign is not going to be, let's make America great again.
It's not going to be, I'm with her.
It's not going to be forward.
It's not going to be dream.
It's going to be told you so.
Can you imagine if Trump's campaign slogan is told you so, right?
Can you imagine if this guy comes out and saying, it's not about America first, it's about told you so.
I told you, Russia had nothing.
I told you vaccine.
I told you, I told you.
So where they are fearing, they're fearing if a guy like that comes out, holy moly, they do not want that guy to be right.
Or, or, or, is it singular to one personality, which is Trump, or is it singular to the anti-establishment that question the narrative, that's questioning the traditional education route that people are taking right now, that's questioning grooming, that's questioning this censorship, that's questioning all of that.
Is there fear that entire community of influencers that have been calling them out, that they could potentially be right?
Or is it singular to one personality that they fear him using this against them?
Which one do you think it is?
I think if you get a unified populace, because there's one thing the American voter has been unified on in the last, was it 35 years is that Congress only gets a 22% approval rating.
Never mind the president's approval rating rising and falling.
Congress has been a 22% approval rating.
And during Trump's campaign, forget that it was Trump, the messaging drained the swamp.
Whoever you are as a candidate was very effective as American people because it lines up with their notion, well, you know, Congress is a cesspool or a swamp, whatever you want to call it, anyway.
And so if you move from drain the swamp to throw out the proven liars, then you open up the opportunity.
And I'm going to use a word here.
Remember, Mussolini came to power, among other things, with, I'm just going to make the trains run on time and you can't trust anybody else.
It does open the door for not, you know, dictatorial psychopaths like Mussolini, but it opens a door for a compelling personality to rise on the incredibly not just disappointed, but now angry populace.
You know, you had a low approval rating for years, drain the swamp, I agree with.
Now you're not just liars, you're proven liars, and you all got to go.
And it opens the door for that personality to take that vacuum and drive it.
You know, I have to ask the question, why now?
What's the timing?
Three years after what many of us suspected and knew in 2020 that it was a lab leak, you didn't have too many brain cells to figure that out.
Why now?
What's the timing?
And I think it's a distraction from what I continue to believe is the most horrendous crime ever, which is this vaccine fraud, because the death and disabilities continue and they need to blame somebody.
And why not China?
And take the blame off of them for introducing the vaccines.
Because the U.S. is the one that rode the vaccine wave and we're the ones responsible for it.
Unpack that.
Unpack that with China.
So you're thinking they're sitting there saying, yet let's unify and go against China and say that it was their fault and to hope that we win the election again.
If you do that, you're only like, okay, so if you know how, let's just say a president prior to you had these 10 policies he chose to drive, okay?
He's a one-term president, you win.
You say, we're going to stop that with this thing and we're going to say that was a bad idea.
Three years later, out of the 10 things, you canceled nine of them.
Now you bring back nine of them.
Guess what the other side's going to say?
This is the opening remarks on my first speech.
When I was president, I pitched these 10 things.
You guys said you didn't want me.
You wanted a guy named Joe.
No problem.
You got him.
He turned off my nine ideas on what I said.
But three years later, every one of the things he canceled, he realized were the right moves.
He brought it back up.
So all along, you really just wanted me.
That's going to be the campaign.
So I don't think that can be the case because that just speaks into Trump's narrative.
I think that they may have to speak into Trump's narrative because the deep state and the people involved in all this.
I mean, this is the most horrendous thing that's ever happened to our country.
The numbers are stark.
I haven't even talked about the disabilities.
The deaths are bad, but the disabilities are affecting the economy for sure.
What do you mean by that?
Rob, were you going to ask something or say something?
It seems odd, the timing of everything that's going on between Russia, China aligning together.
And now all of a sudden, we've had this big push in the United States to back Ukraine.
And now all of a sudden, after three years, they're coming out and saying, well, it was China.
It was China.
China did this.
Well, could it be that they're trying to align and gather citizens of the United States to look at China and go, well, look what China did.
Now China's aligning themselves with Russia.
Now we're going to throw our full support behind Ukraine, almost to unite us.
Much like after 9-11, 9-11 happened, Patriot Act happens.
We go into Iraq and Afghanistan, and all of a sudden there was this sense of patriotism.
We haven't had that sense of patriotism in this country since 2015, 2014.
And now all of a sudden, hey, we have a common enemy.
Could that common enemy be China?
because China may be aligning themselves with Russia.
Well, China...
That's a good point, by the way.
No.
No, I agree with that.
Look, China, conflict with China and Russia, right now it's done through proxy with the Ukraine.
We're not currently involved kinetically with China and Russia.
But I'm predicting that unfortunately that's going to come to a head in the next couple of years, if not sooner, primarily because we have a sovereign debt crisis.
That's unfolding.
The monetary system, as we know, is kind of unraveling.
And also we have this vaccine crime.
So wouldn't it be nice to wipe both issues off the face of the map with war?
I think war is inevitable.
I hate to say it, but I think that's where we're headed.
Oh, that part I agree.
Because historically, what happens when America's been in war, they typically re-elect that president because they don't want a disruption.
That's just studies have shown, right?
If we're in war, the same president gets re-elected.
There's many different cards you can use for reelection.
That's definitely one of them.
And we're definitely headed in that direction.
How bad and ugly it's going to be, nobody knows.
Some are even saying we're already in war.
We're just using a country proxy war that we're using Ukraine as a way of going against Russia.
But for me, this is all playing into the hands of one guy.
It's all playing into the hands of one guy.
You can love the guy, you can hate the guy.
I don't care if he is wanting to have a campaign and name the slogan, anything he can name it.
Told you so.
It's a campaign called I Told You So.
By the way, if the campaign made a shirt called I Told You So with his face on it, it would sell millions.
I'm telling you right now, if Trump's campaign, if they sold a shirt right now, it would be the new MAGA.
It wouldn't, you know how the MAGA hat blew up and it was all over the place?
All he needs to do is add a new product to it called I Told You So.
By the way, even check to see if they have that product already or not.
Type in Trump I Told You So shirt and see if it's on their website.
Have you seen the meme I identify as a conspiracy?
There you go.
Yeah, they need to make that as their what website is that at, by the way.
Is that them selling it?
That's Amazon.
No, no, they need to sell it.
They need to sell it.
They need to sell a merch called I Told You So, and I think that would sell so well.
If they keep going this direction, this is why if I'm a Democratic strategist, I'm like, listen, guys, here's what you have to realize.
If you keep going the direction you're going to trash China, you're probably not going to get reelected because all they're going to say is we were right all along.
You have to take a different page to show Trump was wrong.
They can't show Trump being right.
And too many of the decisions they're making right now, they're showing Trump was right.
Strategically, that's a dumb move they're making.
It's just my opinion.
I'm not a political strategist.
Just somebody thinking about it.
I don't think that's the right move they're making.
So, okay, let's go to the next one.
Let's go to the next one.
By the way, before I go into the next one with the BBC story about the cover-up text messages that leaked, what stats did you want to share about the disabilities?
I think that's important.
Yeah, the disability data is pretty stark.
So since the introduction of the vaccines, disabilities have taken off nationwide.
And I'm using U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics.
So prior to COVID for the prior five years, we had about 29 to 30 million disabled Americans just bouncing up and down.
Around February of 21, it took off and it went up and to the right, concurrent with the vaccine uptake.
We do statistical analysis.
It's like a 0.9 R squared fit.
That's geek speak for there's some correlation there.
Now, they'll say correlation is not causation, whatever.
But since the introduction of the vaccines, we went to a high of 33.2 million disabled folks in September of 22.
So again, I told you 29 to 30 million was the average prior five years.
So we added 3.2 million in about 18 months.
When you break down the data, of the 3.2, 1.7 million is employed.
So the employed are having a tough time, excessive death and disability.
What are the disabilities that are just, it's just, it's a one in a zero.
They don't get into the granular.
It's just raw numbers.
So I'm saying there's a signal here.
I don't need to go any further than that.
That's a big number.
It's a 10% increase overall.
The rate of change in growth was a three-sigma event, three standard deviation happens 0.03% of the time.
0.03% of the time.
Not 0.3%.
You said a 10% change, but I'm looking here at 3.1% to almost 4.1%.
So that's like one over 3.1%.
That's 33%.
33%.
Well, I was about to get into that.
So for the employed, their disability rate went up 31%.
The general U.S. population's disability rate went up 9%.
Then not in labor force, those who quit or got fired, who could have been in the labor force, their disability rate went up 4%.
So whatever's going on, I think it's the vaccine, something is happening to the employed people of our country.
They're dying excessively and they're getting disabled faster.
So when I went before Senator Johnson in December, I said we have a national security issue here.
And if you don't believe me, it's the vaccine, then what is it?
Why aren't we talking about it?
Because the employed of our country are dying faster than everybody else and getting disabled faster.
And when you break it up between employed men and women, women are getting smoked.
Women's disability rate increase is 39%, men, 19%.
Why is that?
Dr. Naomi Wolf has done some analysis of the clinical trials at Pfizer, and the incidence of adverse events affected women.
They saw about 70% of the adverse events were women.
That fits with the data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Again, two different studies showing the same thing.
Someone just put out a piece today.
I retweeted it.
I forget her name.
But she basically said that whatever's going on is affecting, whatever's going on is affecting women.
And it has something to do with the menstrual cycle, the spike protein.
It's a disaster.
It's interesting.
A 33% increase in the disability rate here.
And also, you gave us some numbers on mortality, excess death rates that were also 33% to 50% up.
So it's kind of interesting that these two families of stats being disabled or dying are both up.
That was excess death rate, correct?
Yeah.
Both up 33% and both up starting third quarter 2020.
Yeah.
What are you thinking?
They're rising at the same time.
So whether you're disabled or you die, it's very, very nervous that both of those stats are going up 33% over that time, consistent with people getting the vaccine.
So disability rates up 33% starting third quarter of 2020.
You know, excess death rates up 33 to 50 percent, depending on the cohort you're talking about, starting third quarter of 2020 going forward.
So it says that once the vaccine's introduced.
It started February 21.
Right.
I was going back, yes, February 21.
I was going back to end of 2020 when the big ramp of stabs happened because supply caught up and there was mass vaccinations underway.
Yeah.
Pretty disturbing data.
Yeah.
Look, so 1.7 million unemployed people is 1.7% of the workforce, about 100 million employed in the U.S.
So if you're wondering why there's a labor shortage, part of the reason is due to disability and people just quietly just disappearing from the workforce.
Some people are actually working with disabilities and that's another issue.
So this leads me to the Reuters article.
Fact check video claiming COVID-19 vaccine left 13,627 dead and 17,794 disabled is sourced from an unverified VAERS data.
This is a Reuters article, if you want to go to that right there.
Video being shared online that's gone viral.
Advanced event systems, U.S. vaccine event centers are reporting systems which reported not to prove casualty.
If you can go a little lower.
Video regarding the comments are saying not doing it.
These numbers are based on reports, not actual adverse events and deaths confirmed by Center of Disease Control.
As shown, VAERS, Welcome Healthcare Providers, Vaccine Manufacturers and Public Attorney, he warns that the data on the site may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, and unverified.
Why are they so worried about just investigating this?
All you have to do is a journalist from the left here.
Let's look at this data.
According to the CDC guidance listed on this page reporting adverse events from COVID-19 vaccines here, there has been 6,968 reports of death recorded from December 14 to 2020 to August 23rd, 2021, among people who received the COVID-19 vaccine.
It is important to note that the FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VARS, even if it's unclear whether the vaccine was the cause.
Reuters has debunked similar claims that VAERS data has implied.
Casualty here and here.
Okay, keep going, Laura.
What is their worry about this?
So VARES normally would have sent us in February of 2021.
The doctors, the frontline doctors said that this product should have been pulled because we had a death signal from VARES, but it's been ignored.
VARES is the vaccine injury database.
And, you know, in 1976, when we had the swine flu, they pulled that after 25 deaths.
And Verz is over 17,000 now.
So I don't, you know, this is the most bizarro thing I've ever seen in my life.
The fact that this is continuing.
I mean, the mere fact I'm on the scene here is a problem.
Why is a guy from Wall Street having to do this?
This should have ended in the early days of the vaccination.
Can you repeat what you just said about swine flu?
You went really quick over that.
I want to make sure people hear what you just said.
Yeah, so in 1976, there was a swine flu vaccine that was created.
And there was a big push by the president, a lot of celebrities.
It sounds similar.
25 deaths, and they pulled it.
Pulled the vaccine off market.
Off-market.
Ended the program.
So apparently life's gotten a lot cheaper in the last 40 years.
And again, if you talk to some of the doctors that have been censored and maligned and smeared, they will tell you there was a safety signal in VARES.
And if everything was operating properly like it was in the 70s, this would have ended in March of 2021.
They would have pulled the damn thing.
But here we are today.
You got me.
The fact that I'm on the scene is sad because there's enough ones and zeros that I can count them.
And I shouldn't be here.
I should not be a public figure.
I should be on Maui on the beach relaxing.
And here I am because no one else seems to do it.
Well, on behalf of Fauci, we'd like to apologize for you not having enough time on the base.
But let's go to this story that you have from BBC or Radar Online.
I'll just read this to you.
COVID cover-up leaked text messages show British health minister suggesting to deploy new virus variant to frighten the pants off everyone.
How in the hell is this?
Leaked WhatsApp messages has revealed that Matt Hancock, the former Secretary of State for Health in Britain, attempted to frighten the public into compliance with COVID-19 restrictions.
The Sunday Telegraph obtained the messages in which Hancock appeared to suggest to a top aide when to reveal the existence of Kent variant of COVID to ensure people comply with new lockdown rules.
In another conversation, Simon Case, the head of Britain Civil Service, emphasized the importance of fear, guilt factor, and the government's messaging.
These messages are part of over 100,000 leaked by journalist Isabel Okep Okershot, who defended their release as being in an overwhelming public interest.
The leaks have raised questions about the handling of the pandemic in the UK and other countries around the world.
What are your thoughts on this here?
This is a bombshell.
I mean, this is unbelievable.
So what's going on right now, and you guys are probably noticing it, the information's coming fast and furious.
Like there's leaks, there's things.
It seems like there's a mass awakening going on.
This is just unbelievable.
And I saw one of the, I don't know if you just read it, but the one about the, you know, I just got Tedros his chips.
He talked about chipping people, his chip vaccine.
I'm not sure there's a chip in there, but he said it in one of the leaked messages, not on this one.
But this is unbelievable.
This is the kind of thing.
Let's read this, Matt Hancock.
We frighten the pants off everyone with new strain, but the complication with that Brexit is taking the top line.
Yep, that's what will get proper behavior change.
When do we deploy the new variant?
Been thinking about that, about this, and think we need to move, be more cautious, the strain that is.
I think you made the point earlier, but we need to keep schools off paperwork agenda.
Yes, we're doing a bit about not taking the top, I think.
Big risk with the variant.
Right-wing papers go for renewed push for let it rip on the basis the vaccine strategy is undermined.
Go a little higher.
I can't see it, Rob.
That's why we reassure on the vaccine.
Yeah, I saw that a couple days ago, and the new leak is him talking about pushing the chip, meaning the vaccine.
Can you find a new leak of the chip?
Type in chip.
Go to the top and type in.
Yeah, there you go.
Anything comes up on public health.
He's talking about crowd control and changing behavior and controlling.
Correct, of course.
But there was a reference to a chip, which people are going crazy with.
Again, this is just pretty unbelievable.
This is about control.
This is about power.
This is about changing behaviors.
It had nothing to do with public health.
Who?
What's the outcome?
What are you doing this for?
So here's the part.
I don't care if you're left, right, middle.
Like, the left doesn't benefit from this.
This isn't like, hey, all the Democrats unified to go up against and use this to control the behavior.
You really think, like, John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Democrats want this?
Like, this is not a Democrat, Republican, independent.
This is not good for anybody.
It's tyranny.
It's power.
Who would want this, though?
Who would want this?
You want to hear my personal opinion?
You know, the Klaus Schwab, New World Order, World Economic.
Is that kind of where you're going to go?
No, no.
Those guys seem to be fall guys at some point.
They're clowns.
They're caricatures of Bon Val.
You think Klaus Schwab is a clown?
He's not as strong as people think he is.
No, I'll tell you what I think.
This is a personal opinion, and I didn't put it in my book because it doesn't lend to the fact that we just got dead people and disabled people.
But I think that prior to 2020, those of us in the financial community were looking for the end of the everything bubble, sovereign debt crisis.
So, you know, you moved from bank fraud, and then 12 years later, it's going to be sovereign debt fraud at some point.
And we're looking for sovereign bond debt collapse.
And wouldn't it be nice to have a control system to manage riots, bank runs, and all sorts of things?
I think there was an agenda that was driven.
That's why there was such global messaging in unison.
It was about the financial system collapsing.
You need a control system in place.
And, you know, the vaccine passport was going to lead to the digital ID to the central bank digital currency.
That's ultimately where you want to go.
I think this is driven by politicians and central bankers.
That's my personal opinion.
I have no proof, but it makes the most sense to me.
You need a control system in place before everything collapses.
You don't put big pharma on the page.
Big Pharma is a beneficiary of that, and they slap together some.
And a tool.
And a tool.
Right.
Here we go.
No promises, but I'm trying to land a Bill Gates endorsement of the platform.
Who is Damon Poole, by the way?
Tell him that considering how many people I'm getting his chips injected into, he owes me one.
What?
There you go.
What?
So now you see.
What?
Yeah, that's crazy.
Yep.
So you know what's interesting?
I'm on your page because I believe.
Who is this guy, Damon Poole, though?
Hang on.
Hang on, go back to this article.
Zoom out.
Let me read this here.
This is MSNBC.
This is MSN.
This is not Fox or Bright Ball.
No, this is MSN.
These are real.
Matt Hancock cracks a joke about Bill Gates' COVID conspiracy.
Melissa jokes that he owes me one.
The then health secretary was hoping to get Microsoft billionaire Gates help in promising an offer of UK experts to promote UK expertise in identifying coronavirus variants when he made the chip in January 2020.
At the time, the internet was washed with crackpot claims that the vaccination program was being used as a means of controlling the world's population by implanting microscopic chips into people's arms.
Some of them suggested the evil genius behind the plot of Mr. Gates, who was once the world's richest man, on January 25th, 2021, Damon Poole, Mr. Hancock's media advisor, sent him a WhatsApp message asking him if he had spoken to Ted Rose, the director general of the World Health Organization, about the new variant assessment platform, which offered other countries UK expertise to detect and assess new variants around the world.
Many of the conspiracy theories about the COVID vaccine were said to have been spread on the internet by pro-Kremlin outlets.
Pro-Kremlin outlets.
Of course.
They included a suggestion that Mr. Gates wanted to implant tracking devices inside every human through mass vaccination and that microchips containing vaccines would allow Microsoft to control the entire world population.
The European Union even issued a lengthy advice on how to persuade people that the microchip plot was fiction.
Another popular conspiracy theory said to have been spread by Russia was that Oxford University jab was a monkey vaccine that not only contravened animal rights, but would also turn people into monkeys.
Mr. Gates did not in the event endorse NVAP.
What?
You know, I don't know anything about a chip, but this is disturbing.
It's just disturbing that he's saying this back then.
Well, here's what I like.
What I like about this is that MSNBC, you know, BBC is being forced to have to show this.
Correct.
The only reason they're showing this is probably because this was emailed to everybody, these pictures, and said, you best show it or else.
So if others do and you don't, you're going to look like a clown if these things are being shown.
And of course, they're putting their spin on it, which is what they do.
By the way, I honestly don't care.
You add your spin on it.
It's totally fine.
That's what we all do.
We add our own opinion to it.
Here's what I think is really going on.
You may be wrong.
I may be wrong.
They may be wrong.
But the fact that you're talking about it, the audience has to, the populace has to go Google and do their own research and say, holy shit, this is not fake.
This is real.
Great.
Then starts the conversation.
Yeah, was he making a joke or was it, you know, who knows?
But the fact that conspiracy theorists said this three years ago, now it's popping up.
This is progress, if you ask me, by the way.
I see this as progress.
Yeah, information in the public hand is progress.
I completely agree.
So there's something that you talked about, and I've believed for a long time that what happened in Greece 11 years ago.
Oh, I remember that vividly.
And I know, and I'm connecting the dots here because it goes right to France six weeks ago, where they said three things.
The government is broke.
So therefore, you have to work longer until you retire because we're broke.
We don't have anything to give you.
And oh, by the way, through a thing called the austerity program, in Greek, there's a Greek word for it that in English translates austerity.
You will be getting less government benefits.
Translation, less social security and Medicare.
They have a socialized medicine there, but there's certain rationing of things unless you walk in with a compound fracture of your leg.
Of course, they'll take care of you.
So those three things flipped out Greece.
And you had a barbell-shaped protest, meaning there was something on both ends.
You had older workers walking in the street saying, I worked all my life and I'm going to get less and I can't retire for five more years.
And then on the low end, you had the non-college educated youth that were saying, hey, I want my lifetime job at the post office on the government dole.
I'm not going to get that because my grandpa has to work five more years.
So where's my free government job?
You see?
And then there was the riots and the younger side took over and they were burning the cars.
So it started out.
That was 11 years ago.
What just happened in France is eerily similar, except it was that you didn't have the kind of, there was like 11 days of riots and fires and things that were there in Greece.
But same thing happened.
You have to work longer.
Our spreadsheet is constrained, our government spreadsheet, and you're going to have less benefits when you get there.
All of those things are connected to sovereign debt problems.
And so what happens is there's only two ways out of this.
And this is not Tom speaking.
Look it up.
Do all the research you want.
Way number one, actually way A, not in any order, is to inflate your way out through a dramatic level of multi-year crisis because then the government debt is paid off with cheaper money and they inflate their way out, crushing the citizenry.
The second way out is the Jubilee or what's also known as grand resets, which are negotiated settlements and currency wipeouts at the end of global war.
Defaults.
Correct.
Basically, yeah.
Which is easy to administer at the end of the war.
You lost, whoever you are.
I won.
Your currency is wiped out along with the debt.
We reset and away we go.
There's the only two ways.
And sometimes the first one is called a jubilee.
We'll declare the year of jubilee and we will reset the currencies because we've settled the conflict.
Good news.
We all go into the future.
And that's, and I happen to agree with you.
I think there's there when all of these, when all of the chickens come home to roost on this one, they need something to cover.
There needs to be a triggering mechanism.
There needs to be an excuse.
The only narrative that can deliver inflation sustained for long enough to monetize the debt to get out of this other than default is war.
That's the only narrative that the public could rally around if they were propagandized properly and believed in the righteousness of whatever we're doing.
But that's the only narrative.
Yeah, that's what I was referencing is the negotiated settlement to a war.
Oh, well, what happened to Canada's currency?
Hey, it was a war.
We had to figure this out and this is what we're doing.
And then the citizen goes, okay, I guess we have to do that.
Yeah, look, the bottom line is 99% of the globe doesn't know this, but the social contract has been broken.
Most of the governments are broke.
They can't pay out all the benefits, the pensions, especially Europe.
The Euro, as we know it, it's not a question of if, but when it dissolves.
And Southern Europe is basically Germany is floating everybody else's free party down in Southern Europe with a demographic problem.
How long is that sustainable for, though?
You know, that's the $1,000 question because then you can make a lot of money.
But so timing is always a lot more than $1,000.
You can make some real money with that one.
And by the way, over 27 months, I think if you look it up, that was where the mass of George Soros wealth was created was in currency hedging over a 27-month period.
Isn't that correct?
Yeah.
Yes.
What, recently?
No, way back years ago.
Oh, yeah.
He broke the pound.
Yep.
Yeah.
That's how he made it.
And the money he made was ridiculous.
Yeah, what you just said, if you know, you can make a lot of money if you know when.
And going back in history, that's where he made it.
That's where he did it.
That's the Made Bank.
That made him who he is today.
That was his big – and he did – I suspect he did that with Inside Info, basically being friendly with all the people inside.
And by the way, it's funny because another story came out about CNNX boss Jeff Zucker told staff not to probe lab leak theory because it was Trump talking point.
Again, he's talking like a strategist.
I agree with him.
For Democrats, it's good to not to do that, right?
Because he's talking like a Democratic strategist.
He's not talking like a CEO of a media company.
Correct.
Because CEO of a media company needs to go out there and tell the story so people keep watching your show and watching your content versus we don't trust you anymore.
Now they're in the gutter with views.
But let's talk about the marketplace right now.
Tom, you saw some data on data that came out with mortgages today, with home prices today.
You mind getting into that?
Yeah, there was a Roundup article that was in the, what I mean by Roundup, in the Wall Street Journal today, they were talking about housing market momentum stalls as critical spring season approaches.
And what they rounded up into this correct was quantitative look at all the elements that are there right now.
For instance, interest rates that had started going down in November have now picked back up to 6.65.
And some of that, the bonds that determine mortgage interest rates are already expecting at least a quarter point in about a week, 16th, 17th, the Fed goes out.
Yeah, I think so.
Along with, and that's also a day where they announce all the economic stats.
I think this is a stats release as well.
And mortgage applications right now, the lowest it's ever been in how long?
I'm going to take a guess.
How many years?
Mortgage applications, lowest that they've been in 28 years.
Holy shit.
Yep.
Right now.
According to this article?
Yep.
And the article is just pulling out.
What the journal is doing is they pulled together all this stuff in one place.
And they said, you know, you've got supply, the new listings are down another 20% year over year.
And you've got March to June.
What they're worried about here is the stock market looks for all of the mortgage industry to have a really good second quarter because March to June, it's sort of like if you think of Black Friday for electronics and Q4 is really good for electronics and TVs and phones and all that.
Second quarter is always historically just a party if you're in the mortgage industry because 40% of the transactions of houses happen right before school's out and right at school's out, April to June.
And the journal is pointing out that that's off another 40%.
And the supply, he says, is stable, but it's sitting because there are experts in there that said in 17 years, over the last 17 years, the buying consumer has never been this demonstrably rate sensitive.
That happened as a result of how many years of 2% to 3% mortgages.
And they're getting their heads around, well, it's up three times.
When does it go back down?
Because for most of their buying lifetime, they've had this artificial 2.5%, 3% interest rate.
And so this article today in the journal just really, I was surprised to see the journal put it all together, all the stats, no suppositions, no spin, and just saying, hey, we're about to have a not fun March, excuse me, April to June, which is normally party time in housing.
You know who is winning today?
Wall Street Journal is winning today.
I got to tell you, if there is a paper I read every day for the last year now, it's Wall Street Journal.
They're telling the story from a very independent standpoint.
There is not a, like you almost don't feel opinion and hate and anger.
It's just, here's what's going on.
Here's what you got to look at.
This is what's going on in history.
It is, if you're going to trust specifically from, they've always had a very good reputation, but specifically right now, people don't trust anybody.
Like, where do I go to the REIT?
They're crushing it right now.
Yeah, this is not a story that's led with CEO of RE-MAX says it's going to be fine.
Just give me a minute.
You know, you don't have any of that, you know what I'm saying?
Sort of industry puff pieces.
No, there's nothing.
And I was, I looked at it and it's what we've been saying, that everybody thinking that five and a quarter is going to be the top end for the Fed rate is wrong.
Larry Summers over the weekend was actually openly campaigning and telling the Fed you're behind the curve on this one.
You need to put a half a point on the next rate increase and then two more quarters.
You're behind the curve.
In other words, he's saying, Jay Powell, you need to do more on the interest rate to get inflation under control than you're doing right now.
And when you went to quarter points in fourth quarter, you actually allowed inflation a chance to reheat a little bit.
Now, whether that all comes to pass, but it was kind of a dark weekend because it certainly doesn't look like rates are going to be coming down now before third quarter.
And that's what everybody's saying.
Even the Bulls and the Bears are all in agreement.
If he raises him a half now, he's probably raising a quarter quarter on the next two meetings.
We're suddenly at 575 at the Fed rate, and housing's not going to bounce back until we get three drops.
Now that's looking like September, November earliest.
So it may be a 24 recovery on housing market, or shall we say, statistical relief so that the market can recover as people put their houses on the market or go buy something rather than a second half of 23.
And how high does this go, right?
Because the Fed fund rate right now is 4.5, give or take.
And then I think the historical long-term average is 4.6.
And then, you know, repeating history or being a student of history, I'm always shocked to find out that in the 80s that mortgage rates were double digits.
Yeah.
12%, 15%, 20%.
What?
Like, those are credit card numbers of what you used to get a mortgage for.
It's insane to me.
What was your first year you bought a house, by the way?
The first year I bought a house was I was 26, and I think I got a 7% mortgage.
And what year was that?
So 26, 62, 26, it was 88.
Yeah, yeah.
It was 88.
And that would have been a great rate in the late 80s.
7.5%.
By the way, I remember talking to the guy that was doing my mortgage and feeling like I just locked in on a little dip.
He just hooked you up.
And right now, I mean, mortgage rates are 6.5%.
I'm just saying, like, as someone that is, you know, likes to keep their money in cash and invest and rent and kind of invest the difference.
I don't even know when a good time to even think about buying right now is 6.5% the bottom.
Or are we going to, are we trending towards double digits?
That's insane to me.
And that's what the journal is talking about is that there's experts out there that are saying, they're saying objectively, objectively, not opinion.
Buyers in their mid-30s right now have never seen interest rates like that.
And these are the most rate-sensitive buyers that they've ever seen.
Yeah, if you're a millennial and you're looking to buy a house, all you're used to is zero, one, two, three, four.
Like, and all of a sudden it's 6.6.
By the way, Uncle Adam talks to his friend Tom about 6.6%.
But by the way, I don't remember.
This is where we need to stay.
I know this is not popular, but this is where we need to stay.
You know, we keep talking about how much fake money was made, 128 months, economic expansion.
COVID doesn't come.
That could have gone another Euro two.
Could have been 150 months.
You know, it's not, you take COVID out, it's 150 months.
They're keeping rates as whatever it was, and people are just funding everything.
This is where it needs to stay for a minute.
Okay.
The problem is going to happen, Tom, is let's just say inflation does drop to 2%.
There's like, okay, guess what?
Let's start lowering it again.
No, no, no.
Pump the brakes.
If you really wanted to start breathing a little bit, you got to get off of steroids and growth hormone for a couple of years.
Okay.
That's right.
We've been on it for way too long.
So that part, no one's going to know because who's going to replace Jerome Powell?
Who the hell is going to replace?
You know how last time we're having a conversation with Crowder, and the question was, so Susan stepped down, right?
Everybody was like, well, you know what?
The great story, Susan from Susan Wojewski.
Susan Wojewski from YouTube just stepped down and because she did this, this, this, this wrong.
Well, the person that replaced her is worse is what the fear is.
Like, hey, Jack Dorsey is stepping.
About time, Jack Dorsey steps down from Twitter.
No, bro, you wanted Jack Dorsey to stay.
Exactly.
The guy that replaced him is worse.
So as much as people are, you know, giving Powell a hard time that he's pounding people on upstairs, and I know you always talk about his bedroom activity.
This is an inside joke for Tom.
Tom's got very interesting things.
I refer to the economy as a poor cheerleader up in her bedroom.
That Jerome Powell is going to keep pounding that cheerleader until her parents come home and parents coming home is 2% interest rates.
But the new CEO of YouTube is Neil Mohan.
And you're saying that he's not saying that.
I'm not saying that.
They are saying the question is sometimes you have to, you know, you have to worry who's like, for example, okay, we got to get rid of Putin.
Cool.
Who's replacing him?
Yeah.
We got to get rid of.
Okay, cool.
Yeah.
Who's replacing him?
So that is just as much of a concern as it is.
At least you have enough data to know how this person's going to be.
Right.
The markets don't like uncertainty.
So just keep the guy in until this phase is over because you switch mid-game.
People will be like, I got to figure out the new guy.
I actually think Powell's doing an okay job.
I was just going to ask, I don't know if I'm going to sit here as the goat or he's doing.
I agree.
I actually think he is.
If you look at him compared to some of the other guys, I think he's actually doing an okay job.
He's doing way better than Grandma.
Than Janet Yellen?
Yes.
Yeah.
I mean, Ben Bernanke.
That's not even a question.
But yeah, so here, so here's a question for you.
Have you ever had any interactions with Michael Burry?
Have you ever done anything?
No, no.
Why is he so low-key?
He's on Twitter one day.
He shuts it down, comes back again, tweets, closes it again, doesn't do interviews, doesn't talk to people.
Strong insight, very interesting.
He's been right one too many times.
What do you know about Michael Burry?
Well, so after the housing crisis, he made a speech excoriating Congress saying that they all knew this was coming.
It's all their fault.
Then he started being investigated by the feds and tax and IRS.
So ever since that experience after the housing crisis, I don't think he is one to be on the public stage.
But he is, he knows what's going on with the COVID vaccines because he's intimated that he's investing in some of these plays on that in stock on a stock individual basis, like buying blood-thinning companies and shorting other companies.
So he's already playing the COVID vaccine stuff.
To me, he's a very interesting guy to watch closely.
I see him as a stud.
I think he's got courage.
I think he's tough.
But I hope, you know, I wish he was a little bit more vocal.
Yeah.
I think it would be great if he came out and gave his thesis on what's going on with COVID vaccine.
Dude, I would love nothing more than to have a two-hour conversation with this guy just to sit down and say, Michael, what do we expect and what's going on?
And by the way, I also think he's a crusade guy, meaning I think he's a true believer.
I don't think it's just about money for him.
I don't think he's just like, hey, he wants to get rich and, you know, go party in, you know, Thailand and do whatever some of these guys, you know.
I think this is a guy that really cares about what's going on.
He has concerns.
He has good insight.
I think he needs to be more vocal.
So if you know Michael Burry, if anybody knows Michael Burry, you're a friend of his or you're a close colleague of his.
Kind of let him know.
I'd like to talk.
Guess what I'm trying to say?
I really like him.
I'd love him to make a contra COVID ETF, and that way he'd have to go out with investment letters because I'd love to read those.
Yeah.
Okay.
Well, this has been a fun podcast.
We've had a couple of things before we wrap up here.
One, Tom, you launched your show yesterday on your own channel, BizDoc.
We're very excited about it.
It was phenomenal.
Can you tell the audience what to expect with your show before we wrap it up with the book here?
Yeah, the BizDoc podcast brought to you by Valutainment.
Thank you very much, Pat.
Every Monday, 11.30 Eastern, 8.30 Pacific.
It's an hour.
Stats, stories, and what it means for you.
I like to find the story behind the story and talk about what it means for the Valutainment listener, entrepreneurs, leaders, people trying to make a mark, owning their own company, working for people in that, and to give you something to start the week with and the news you can use.
I love it.
So Monday at 11.30.
Eastern, 8.30 Pacific.
So before lunch on the East Coast, right as you get to work on the West Coast, live on YouTube and then syndicated to all the places that the Value Tainment podcasts are syndicated through our partner Spotify and others.
For those of you who love Tom, tune in.
We are doing one more podcast this week tomorrow.
I believe it's at 4 o'clock or 3 o'clock.
3 o'clock.
3 o'clock Eastern Standard Time.
We will have home team only.
We got a lot of things that we have to talk about that we haven't done for a week or so.
And then we will not be doing any other podcasts for the rest of the week.
We did announce yesterday on Steven Crowder's podcast.
I want to tell it to you guys again.
We're going to launch ticket sales for the April 7th live.
We're going to do it this time at night because we ran a survey and a lot of you guys want this live podcast at the studio to be nighttime, not morning time.
We're doing it Friday night at 7 to 9 on April 7th.
We may have some guests.
We're not going to disclose it until you show up and we see who it is.
The last time we did this, we saw that within a couple hours.
Text the word podcast to the number 310-340-111132.
Again, text the word podcast to 310-340-1132.
The moment we have tickets for sale, you'll be there.
Some of you guys, VIP, you had a chance to go to the cigar lounge, had an hour conversation with a bunch of different guys about what's going on.
It was a phenomenal time.
We'll love to see and meet many of you guys who weren't there on the first one that we had.
And last but not least, Rob, let's put the link below to cause unknown.
Highly recommend everybody go get a copy for themselves.
Look through the data.
Look through the articles.
Look through what he has in here and question it.
Why is this taking place?
It's simply to question and then find from there, have conversations with them people in your community.
Talk amongst each other.
Talk to your family.
Talk to your relatives.
Talk to your coworkers.
What do you think about this?
What are your thoughts about this?
Have you seen this year?
But start by ordering the book, Cause Unknown.
Rob, let's make sure that's below as well.
Ed, appreciate you for coming out here from Maui.
I know you would much rather have the lifestyle in Florida than the one in Maui.
I love the weather here.
It's awesome.
We love it here.
I mean, I've been to Maui one too many times and I love it there as well.
We went there one time years ago and we walked on a volcano, active volcano with lava coming down.
And we have to get up at four o'clock in the morning to make it to the other side so we can walk before the Ranger shows up.
And they told us all the signs: if it all of a sudden starts raining, if you smell this weird smell, and if the things you're walking on is about to break, if it does, it's game over for you.
Walk back.
We got to that point where it was myself and a couple of our friends, John and Mario there.
Jose was there, and we're walking there.
And all of a sudden, Jose and I step on this thing.
I'm like, uh-oh, it's time to walk back.
We walk back, but we have a lot of good memories in Hawaii.
Probably not one of the best decisions I made in my life.
