“This Is Going To DESTROY Our Country!” RFK Jr On 2024 Election - Stay Free #366
Visit www.AmericanFinancing.net/russell to help pay off debt and start saving soonI recently spoke with independent presidential candidate, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. We discussed the up coming elections where we will be against Biden & Trump. I asked how is the difference and his true thoughts about Trump and his election promises. PLUS we discuss the breaking news story about a worm in his brain. We dive into his opinion and views about the Israel-Palestine conflictJoin the awakening wonders community here:https://bit.ly/RussellBrand-SupportVisit the new merch store:https://bit.ly/Stay-Free-StoreListen as a podcast:https://podfollow.com/1648125917Follow on social media:X: @rustyrocketsINSTAGRAM: @russellbrandFACEBOOK: @russellbrand
Hello you Awakening Wonders there on Spotify, Apple, Stink Whistle, Gurgle Dot or wherever you download your podcasts these days to remain at least peripherally connected to some tendril of truth in a bewildering miasma of lies and propaganda.
We appreciate you, and we love you.
You're part of our community.
So that's why we're very happy to give you an audio version of our live Rumble Show five days a week.
It's on Monday to Friday.
We decipher the latest news stories, we break down current topics that the mainstream media should be covering, and if they aren't, Then we critique why they're not and what they are covering.
Every week as well, right?
We do brilliant conversations with people like Jordan Peterson, RFK, Tucker Carlson, Sam Harris, Vandana Shiva, Gabor Mate.
These things are already up and you can listen to them now.
So remember, this is an audio version of our daily live show.
To tune in live, go to rumble.com forward slash Russell Brand.
You'll find it easily and I hope that you will love it.
Now please enjoy this episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand.
Thanks.
Thanks for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
It's a very special show.
We're talking to Bobby Kennedy about his presidential campaign, about his position on war, about the worm that penetrated his actual mind.
There's so much this To discuss today.
Thank you very much for joining us for the first 15 minutes will be available on YouTube.
We will be streaming broadly, but ultimately we will have to protect ourselves from increasingly draconian anti free speech legislation and centralized authority where media organizations come together To smear dissenters, to attack opposition voices, and we'll be streaming exclusively on Rumble.
If you want to become an Awakened Wonder and support our work, there's a link in the description now.
And for the next month, you can get a deal where you will receive our additional content, like our exclusive video, like becoming a member to our book club, like meditating with us every week.
And you can cancel at any time, certainly for the first month.
And you get a month free.
There's loads of advantages.
Anyway, click the link in the description.
So we're going to talk to Bobby Kennedy now.
You know who Bobby Kennedy is.
He's a lawyer.
He's taken a strong position against various corporations, including, obviously, Big Pharma.
And now he's polling incredibly.
In fact, there's not been an independent candidate that's polled this well, perhaps in the history
of American politics.
This is going to be a significant conversation in what might prove to be a significant moment
in American democracy.
Let's talk to Bobby Kennedy right away.
Bobby Kennedy, thank you so much for joining me on Stay Free
with Russell Brand.
Thanks for having me, Russell.
Really been looking forward to this.
Must be hard for you to make appointments on time when there are living parasitic worms crawling through your brain, even as we speak.
I apologize for being late.
My bad.
Yeah, the New York Times... Cheryl woke up this morning, the New York Times ran an article about a worm having eaten part of my brain.
And Cheryl woke up this morning and just said, nothing surprises me anymore.
But anyway, the story is that in 2010, I was having a lot of brain fog.
And I went to a friend of mine, I spoke to a friend of mine about it, and he persuaded me to go get a CAT scan at Columbia Presbyterian in New York.
And they came back and they said, you have a brain tumor.
They found a black spot in my brain.
It was right after my uncle Teddy died from glioblastoma.
So we had a lot of the world's experts on speed dial in brain cancer.
And we sent them the pictures from my brain to all of these.
They all said, yeah, it's a tumor.
And then I, And they said, you've got to get it surgically removed, which was not something that I was looking forward to.
And I was going to go to the same doctor that Teddy had.
And as I was picking up, I went the day before to pick up my films at Columbia Presbyterian.
There was a young Irish doctor.
who was a neurological surgeon, neurosurgeon in the room.
And he said, and he was asking me some casual questions and I said, yeah, it looks like I need, you know, I have a brain tumor.
And he said, do you mind if I look at the film?
And I said, no, of course not.
So we put it up on one of those light boards and he's staring at it for a long time.
And then he said to me, I don't think you've earned surgery.
And I was very, very happy to hear that.
And I said, what do you think?
And he said, I think it is this parasite called neurocystis cirrhosis that is common in India where I had been.
You get it from eating undercooked pork.
And it's a parasite I later found out And it's also very common because I spent a lot of years, as you might remember, suing the hog industry in Iowa and North Carolina.
He's made factory farms and it's also common, fairly common among some farmers in that industry.
And so he said, you know, watch it for six weeks, come back and get another CAT scan.
And then I did it.
And then I came back to six weeks again later.
And I did it at six months, and they didn't grow, and so at the end, they decided that's what it must be.
My brain fog, at the same time, I was diagnosed with very, very high mercury levels, 10 times what EPA's safety levels are, and I got the mercury chelated out over the next year, and my brain function returned.
So anyway, I'm hoping that that worm, whatever it was, I ate all of the parts of my brain that generate bad thoughts.
Bon Appetit!
It's done you a great neurological service, I say, taking away the many addictive, crazy parts of your brain
that will not serve you going forward into a campaign that's becoming near historic.
We can't recall, certainly you can't, with all these neurological parasites,
a time where an independent candidate has made such an impact.
And I'm talking about the polling and the impact that you're making,
in head-to-heads v. Biden, head-to-heads v. Trump.
and it's very exciting.
Now, how are you going to continue to navigate a relatively unique space that has many bureaucratic barriers that I know that you are surmounting excellently already on the ballot in four states and I know that there are many more to come.
I want to tackle immediately what seems to be an important fact and an important question and line of inquiry among many of the people that are drawn to your campaign because of its veracity, authenticity, transparency and clarity when it comes to the issue of war.
I think many of us look to you as the anti-war candidate although many Trump supporters will say during office Trump avoided war and has a great record in that area.
I think there are a lot of questions around your perspective on Israel and Gaza.
I'd love to talk to you about the anti-semitism bill and I'd like to talk to you about why you aren't taking a position of absolute condemnation of all Yeah, let me answer that first.
why in particular you haven't condemned this aspect of the escalating Middle Eastern conflict
that your country is continuing to support via arms?
Let me answer that first, you know, just talk about some of those initial comments that
you made and then I'll get to guys.
My polling now shows, and as you said, it's unique in American history.
We're an independent candidate in head-to-head polls.
Zogby just did the biggest poll, the largest.
Typical polls, Russell, like the Gallup poll, Quinnipiac, Harvard-Harris, New York Times, Seattle are around 1,200 to 2,200 people.
Occasionally, they'll get 3,000.
This Ogbeek poll is 26,000 people, and it has a margin of error of almost zero, and it's all 50 states.
You can actually look at the election outcomes, and because the margin of error is so low, anybody who does this poll will come up with the same results.
And what the results show, that what they polled was a head-to-head contest.
Biden against Trump, with me in the race, and Biden loses.
Me, Biden against Trump, with me out of the race, Biden loses even worse.
He loses two extra states.
He loses Maine and Virginia, and those go to Trump if I get out.
So the people who are saying I need to get out to say Biden, you know, what we found is that 57% of the people who support my campaign say that they will vote for President Trump if I leave.
And then we measured also Me against Trump?
So Biden can't win no matter what.
When I run against Trump with Biden out of the race, I beat Trump narrowly by about three electoral votes.
And when I run against Biden with Trump out of the race, I beat him in a devastating landslide.
So I win 39 states and he wins only 11.
And there's never been a time in American history when an independent candidate Oh, if there's three of us in the race right now, a lot of people would vote out of fear rather than out of hope.
Russell is that, which we already knew because my favorability ratings are the
highest, people would like to vote for me but they are voting for them because
out of fear. Oh if there's three of us in the race right now a lot of people would
vote out of fear rather than out of hope and over the next six months my big
challenge is to get Americans to vote out of hope rather than fear.
On the Gaza issue, you know, I'm anti-war, but that doesn't mean that all wars are evil.
I think defensive wars, if it's a war of choice, to me it's an immoral war.
In the last hundred years in my country, All the wars that we've been involved with, except for one, which was World War II, in my view were immoral wars, they were wars of choice, and this includes World War I. My grandfather was a peace activist in World War I, Joseph Kennedy, and he lost a lot of his friends, a lot of his relationships because of that, but he said this war, that it is going to benefit arms dealers, it's going to benefit bankers.
And it's going to benefit empires, and it's not going to benefit people.
And, of course, 50 million people died, and he was right about that.
World War II was a moral war, in my view, because it was a defense war.
Our country was attacked.
We were attacked by an implacable enemy that was intent on global domination, destruction of Western values, Western cultures, all the things that we—democracy, all the things that we believed in.
I look at the Israel, of course you know I'm very, very much against the Ukraine war, which is definitely a war of choice, and a war we could have avoided.
I look at the Israel war and I see a defensive war.
Israel was attacked on October 7th, but not just October 7th.
It was attacked for 16 years prior to October 7th, with an average of 2,000 missiles a year being fired into civilian centers.
I consider myself very, very pro-Palestinian.
I have friendships with many Palestinians.
I visited the West Bank.
I've met with the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank.
I'm associated with an organization, the Jordan River Keeper, in Israel, which is the only organization in Israel that has Palestinian, Jordanian, Arabs, and Israeli Jews on its board.
I have friends in the West Bank, in Gaza today, who I'm supporting, and who are living under terrible, terrible circumstances.
And my heart goes out to all the people who have been injured by this war, particularly the children, the civilians.
It's heartbreaking.
But I don't see why people are blaming Israel.
And I think it's a mistake.
To conflate Hamas with the Palestinian people.
Hamas has been the worst enemy to the Palestinian people.
It has been a proxy of Iran.
It is pursuing a different objective than the welfare of the Palestinian people.
Oh, I don't see that Israel has a choice.
There's no country in the world.
You have an organization, Hamas, that is sworn to the destruction of Israel.
It has in its charter not only that it wants the annihilation of Israel, but also that it is against Islamic law to even negotiate with Israel, except it's a ruse.
So people say, you know, we want a ceasefire.
Well, what happens in a ceasefire?
Isn't a ceasefire just an opportunity for Hamas to regroup, rearm, and then attack again, which
it says it's going to do. It says this is just the beginning. October 7th is the beginning of
a whole series of October 7th.
And it's as good as it's worth. There have been five ceasefires to date, and every one of them,
Hamas has used to rearm, regroup, hoist the banner, and attack again.
At some point, if you're Israel—and this last attack demonstrated, I think, to everybody in Israel, and this war is overwhelmingly popular in Israel, because people understand that this is no longer a tactical problem.
It is now a strategic problem.
They tried to handle it tactically for 16 years.
They did something that no nation in the world has ever done, which is to build the Iron Dome.
So they're dealing with a neighbor that's firing missiles.
If Mexico decided to reclaim Texas and started firing 2,000 missiles a year onto San Antonio and Houston, it would take us five minutes to go get rid of the people who were doing it.
Any other nation in the world would do that.
And you know, defensive wars Our legal under Article 5 of the UN Charter, for good reason, is that a nation has an obligation to protect its people, to protect its borders.
You have a group that is pledged to its destruction, and I don't see how Israel has any choice except to go in and get rid of the group unless they're going to negotiate, which they will not negotiate.
They've already said, we will not negotiate.
By the way, Every other country in the world that got in this position would surrender.
Israel has won the war.
Why is Hamas not surrendering?
It is hiding behind its own people.
It is ensuring their deaths rather than doing what the Nazis did, what the Japanese did, what everybody else, what Iraq did, which is to say, yeah, we're going to surrender.
We're not going to put our people through this.
Why are people blaming Israel?
I mean, the question we should ask ourselves, are we blaming Israel just because it's a Jewish state?
Anyway, that may be the beginning of a discussion for you, but that's a simple statement of why I take this position.
Okay, we're going to have to stop this conversation right here.
If you want to see Bobby's answer to that question, click the link in the description and join us over on Rumble, where we can speak freely.
Consider becoming an Awakened Wonder.
You get all sorts of additional content there.
Coming up are Bobby's views on war, on Gaza, a whole variety of subjects that we will be discussing freely and openly.
Join us there.
See you in a few seconds.
It's a uniquely complex issue in both historical, cultural, religious, territorial, and certainly contemporary American political life.
And Bobby, while you were talking, because of the space I occupy, even as a humble online content creator and comedian, I can hear the opposing views flying like missiles with varying capacities across borders.
Ever-expanding, ever-changing, ever-shifting borders, and because of my own respect for friends that I have that are Israeli, because of the duty I feel to all oppressed people, who in this instance it seems to me are the people that are under fire and are dying in their thousands, I feel that have to to a degree represent the arguments that are
clearly out there, that it would be remiss not to note that the International Criminal Court
are considering arresting Netanyahu as perhaps they should have arrested Obama, as perhaps they
should have arrested Bush, as perhaps they should have arrested Blair, as they will
not be able to arrest Putin due to the precedent it would likely set that all of our
leaders are war criminals.
And I suppose because of the uniqueness of your position, I suppose that what people
are asking of you is an acknowledgement that this is, you know, on a very pragmatic level,
costing Joe Biden or as he is in some quarters now known, genocide Joe votes and popularity.
It's causing division in new alternative media spaces.
And the only way that I can even respectfully navigate it as a contributor, an orator, is to say that As an observer who would not like to offend people that are Jewish or Israeli or Muslim or Arab, I feel that the one position that we might take is the position of people that are vehemently opposed to all war.
And the growing argument for, I want to say, a kind of reframed American isolationism, a refusal to allow America's considerable and unique might to be utilised for the ferviment of provocative wars, whether it's the Ukraine-Russia conflict or this ongoing conflict, due to, in both cases I suppose, one might argue that the superior power Has a particular duty that comes with power and in both cases I wonder if America if America is to continue as it appears to have militarily if not economically this somewhat unique position that there it seems that there's an enormous appetite among American people and British people that that power be directed towards diplomacy and peace and the cessation of conflict rather than its furtherment.
Yeah, I would agree with that.
I'm going to use the White House to dismantle a war machine.
We have 800 bases abroad.
The Russians have one.
The Chinese have one and a half.
And each one of those bases is just a nascent opportunity for new wars.
These wars have done nothing good for our country.
Every nation that we've engaged in a war over the past 20 years, much worse off than we found it.
Iraq is an incoherent country now.
It's just a battle between Shia and Sunni death squads.
We killed more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein in liberating that country from Saddam.
We pushed Iraq into the Into a proxy posture with Iran, which is why October 7th happened, because Saddam Hussein had served as a bulwark against Iranian expansion in the Mideast and the Shia Crescent.
And now we dismantled that and handed Iraq over to Iran, and it's allowed Iranian expansion to the Houthis, to Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza.
We also, we created ISIS, we drove four million refugees up into Europe and destabilized every democracy in Europe and probably led to Brexit and to BRICS.
Oh, and we push, you know, we push all of those nations into military and economic alliances with each other in opposition to the United States.
So it's a terrible thing for our country.
All of these wars and as you know, the succession with war have been I've been terrible for our country.
I'm not an isolationist.
I believe, like my uncle did, that America should be rejecting economic power abroad and not military power.
And the world wants that, too.
China wants to dominate the globe, but they don't want to do it in a hot war.
They want to do it by Through a competition, through demolishing us in an economic competition, and I'm not scared of that.
I think, you know, we have innovation in this country, we have freedom, we have entrepreneurship, and we can beat the Chinese in that contest, and it's a contest that will benefit the whole world.
It's a contest of peace, of harmony, and of economic development, and that's what we ought to be doing.
But in terms of You know, I don't believe that there's a genocide going on, and I don't think Israel's intention is genocide.
I don't believe there's any evidence of genocide.
There is genocide going on in the Mideast, but it's a genocide of Jews, and it's a genocide of Christians, and nobody's complaining about it for some reason.
And there are much worse wars.
I don't know what's happening in Gaza right now, but for some reason, people don't want to complain unless it's Jews who can be blamed.
In Yemen, I think there's almost 200,000 kids who've been killed in Yemen, and the UAE and the Saudis and the other groups that are perpetuating that war with U.S.
support are specifically targeting civilian populations with bombs and armaments, and nobody complains.
The Uyghurs who are being destroyed and eradicated in a genocide in China, the same thing that was happening in Kurdistan.
In Syria, there are genocides all over the world, but what we're seeing in Gaza is not.
I mean, listen, let me just point out something.
There were 750,000 Palestinians In 1947, when the Palestinians declared war on Israel, they said, we do not want an Israel state of any size in the Mideast.
And they invited six other nations to join them.
And 750,000 Palestinians left.
They left for a variety of reasons.
The Arab League, the group that was making war on Israel, told them to leave, to get out of the war zone so that they could Eradicate the Jews and then everybody could come back.
Those Palestinians, which were 740,000 in 1948, are now 7.2 million.
So if the Israelis are doing genocide, they're not good at it.
Now contrast that with what happened in the other nations, the Mideast, in 1948.
Simultaneously, 750,000 Palestinians We're leaving Israel during a war.
Almost a million, about 950,000 Jews were expelled from the Mideast.
And this is a genocide that's continuing today.
This continues.
There's only 15,000 Jews left in those countries, down from a million.
They'd been there for 2,000 years.
And Israel took them in.
Mainly Israel, the United States, and other countries.
Israel's taken in three million refugees.
The surrounding Arab nations, which are 600 times the size of Israel, have a population 60 times that size, and lots of open land, lots of tremendous wealth, refused to take in the Palestinians who they had driven out.
Oh, you know, the idea of saying that there's a genocide going on in Israel because people die in war.
And in every war that's going on in the world today, there are civilians dying.
And the average civilian to combatant death rate, according to the United Nations and to the Institute for the Study of Urban Warfare at West Point, is about nine to one.
But in Gaza, it's about one to one.
So they've achieved a better, they protect it in the most challenging conditions.
The Israeli government has, the IDF, has protected civilians better than any pot, any army in history.
John Spencer said it is the, it has done more to protect civilians under more difficult circumstances than any army in history.
Oh, you know, I think that there's an argument, you know, the people who are saying that this is a genocide, it's not any, it's just not accurate.
Well, Bobby, OK, I understand that there are some pretty powerful interests in that are
involved and engaged in this conversation and I feel that it must be a real, you know, God, of course, it's a
tragedy that has broader implications than the challenges it presents to us in discussing it. That's for sure.
But I would like to, if I may ask you now, about the 95 billion dollar aid package that's just been passed that
includes military aid for a variety of countries and which I feel like Lindsey Graham
said wouldn't have passed without Trump's endorsement and support.
When it seems that as this campaign escalates and continues you're likely to be drawn into
further conflict, albeit verbal with Donald Trump, even though it seems that your
initial concerns are ensuring that you're not regarded as a figure that's taking votes away from Biden.
I feel that equally, it will be people that are ardent supporters of Donald Trump that will Ultimately or additionally come to fear your ongoing inclusion in this election.
I wonder where you stand on Trump's support of that bill.
I wonder how you feel generally about the potential that two ultimately anti-establishment candidates who in various ways have Policies and ideas and convictions that are in alignment with, you know, whether it's the current incumbent of the White House.
How are you going to navigate the territory going forward with Trump?
And what in particular do you suppose are the points of difference between you and Trump when I feel like in both cases your popularity owes something to the perception of that you are anti-establishment candidates And the feeling that people in America want real meaningful change, transparency, clarity, openness and end to censorship, less legislation like that seems designed to curtail and foreclose on free speech.
Where are the points of difference going to open up?
And where are you going to be willing to engage in conflict with Trump?
I recognize that you've invited him to participate in a debate.
And what do you and where would you take that debate, Bobby?
Yeah, I mean, the I've asked him to debate me.
We're both speaking at the Libertarian Convention in Washington, D.C.
this week, or May 24th and 25th, Russell, and I've offered him, or asked him to debate me then.
I, you know, I oppose this aid package to the Ukraine.
I was surprised that Trump actually endorsed it because he's tried to present himself as an anti-war candidate, which he did last time as well.
But then he brought John Bolton in to run NSA, and he brought a lot of warmongers and neocons in to run his military and intelligence apparatus, and they're the people who laid the groundwork for the Ukraine war.
He walked away from a nuclear weapons treaty, intermediate weapons treaty with the Russians, and he did a lot of other provocative things.
What I see is that President Biden and President Trump are very different people.
If you look at their dispositions, if you look at their personalities, if you look at their ideology, if you look at just their approach to life, all their sort of interactions with the rest of us and with the world, but if you actually look at the issues, that they talk about, that they differ on.
It's a very narrow Overton window.
It's guns, it's abortion, it's transgender rights, it's the border, and a handful of other culture war issues.
And these are all important issues, but they're not existential issues.
The existential issues are issues that they never talk about and that the American people want to hear about because Our nation is at stake, and one of those issues, of course, is the national debt, which is now $34 trillion.
And, you know, the service on that debt alone costs us more than our military budget already.
Within five years, the cost of servicing that debt will absorb 50 cents out of every dollar that we collect in taxes.
Within 10 years, 100%.
This is not sustainable.
It is existential for our country.
We have to figure out a way to cut that and grow our economy.
And neither of them is talking about that.
Why aren't they?
Because they ran up half of that debt between the two of them.
President Trump, in four short years, added $8 trillion to the debt.
More than all the presidents combined, from George Washington to George W. Bush, 283 years.
And President Biden is now racing to catch up with him.
And over the past hundred days, President Biden has added a trillion dollars to the debt.
It's sinking us all.
They can't do anything about it because they're the ones who created it, each one in four years.
The chronic disease epidemic, which is the biggest issue now in our country, and $4.3 trillion a year it's costing us, and they did nothing about it.
During their terms, except for supervising its expansion, they don't have any capacity to do anything about it, and they're not even talking about it.
The polarization between Americans—both of them say they don't like the division, and they blame it on the other guy.
It's more toxic now than at any time since the American Civil War.
It's being amplified by the algorithms and the social media sites, and it is going to destroy our country if we don't figure out a way to bridge the divide and get people to see themselves as Americans again.
President Trump and President Biden cannot do that because they are the products of that polarization.
They're telling people, you need to hate my opponent, you need to hate MAGA people, you need to hate, you know, Democrats, communists, whatever.
They're feeding into it.
Their whole electoral strategy is on marginalizing their opponent's group and getting people to fear them.
The issues that you talk about—transparency in government—they presided over government.
They did nothing about the transparency.
Nothing about the lies.
Our government now lies to us every day on a variety of issues.
And what I'm going to do the day that I get into office is pass an executive order saying that any public employee, federal employee, who lies to the public in conjunction with his job responsibilities will immediately lose his job, no matter what subject it is.
I'm going to forbid the lying.
I'm going to open up the freedom of information laws so that we really see what's happening to our government.
I'm going to put the budget on blockchain so every American can look at it 24 hours a day.
And I'm going to have total transparency in government, which is what democracies are supposed to be about.
The war machine, as I said, neither of them can unravel that.
Both of them are addicted to it.
Both of them surround themselves with people who are trying to perpetrate it.
Those are just some of the issues that, you know, the corporate capture of our government, this corrupt merger of state and corporate power, they're part of it.
President Trump said he was going to drain the swamp.
But he comes in and he puts Scott Gottlieb, who is a business partner of Pfizer, in charge of the FDA.
Scott Gottlieb does a $100 billion favor for Pfizer and then leaves to go back to Pfizer to the board to collect his payoff.
And if you look at each one of the federal agencies, the same thing happened.
Somebody from the industry, Trump brought somebody from the industry in to run that agency, that person generally profited on it, and then went back to the industry to collect their dues.
I don't see, I see the rhetoric is very different but what they actually are offering the American public they're both the same.
Your polling success I believe Bobby is based on the fact that there is something profound existential and I might even offer spiritually happening not only in the United States but across the world at the moment.
You have been subject to some incredible censorship in particular the film narrated by Woody Harrelson has been banned by Meta and is a good film and it gives a very good
presentation of some of the significant points of difference between
you and the other candidates. It seems to me that the emotional appeal of
Trump, his ability to convey deep, deep rage Dissatisfaction.
A fury towards institutions that for a long time have betrayed American people.
The condemnation, criticism and abandonment of ordinary Americans.
The attempt to stoke racial and cultural division wherever possible.
To focus continually on the hot-button topics that you note as the points of difference between Biden and Trump.
It seems to me that what is required now is a significant shift in American political life.
And it seems to me that what needs to be made explicit is a significant curtailment of the power of the CIA and their numerous carve-outs, an end to the extraordinary projects that have created these numerous peculiar interstitial agencies that seem to censor on
behalf of the of the deep state and create propaganda in a variety of nations on behalf of the deep
state. There needs to be a new installation of hope. There needs to be, I feel Bobby, a sense that on
day one that the problem of the, for example, the CIA, the FBI will be addressed and you are
in this extraordinary position of having gone from being an extremely marginal figure who's
been condemned as a crackpot, a kook, an anti-vaxxer, a maniac in spite of your literal,
the literal heritage and legacy of your name and your personal achievements as a lawyer standing up
to significant corporations successfully.
Do you feel that you are going to be able to make specific offerings that fulfill this enormous appetite for change?
Or the deeper that you get into this campaign, do you start to sense that there is something that's being... that you are undertaking something that is insurmountable?
That these institutions are by definition bound into the type of corruption that you can't stop?
People in Congress investing in stocks and shares.
You can't end massive donations.
You can't limit the power of the military-industrial complex.
You can't expose the true relationships between big tech and the deep state.
How are you going to do that?
Is this something that's about reform?
Is this something that's about a return to values?
Is this something that can even be umbrella'd by the incredible brand recognition, both of your surname, but of your own achievements?
Or do you think that this is something that ultimately, because as you have pointed out, Trump ran on an anti-establishment ticket, but you say presided in accordance with relatively typical values.
How are you going to deliver when it seems so entrenched?
Oh, you know, I feel like I'm more excited about governing than I am about running.
And that I feel competent to do that, and particularly with, you know, I understand how the agencies work.
I've litigated against the corruption in our country, and the economic problems, the social problems.
A lot of them just come from, and the lack, the diminishment of faith of the American people in their institutions, and the anger at the institutions, are all rooted in this Capture of our institutions by corporate powers.
So, you know, the major agencies of government have all been captured by the industries they're supposed to regulate and act as sock puppets or subsidiaries of those industries serving the mercantile interests of these big corporations rather than the, you know, the public health interests or the or the freedom interests or the democratic interests of the
people of the United States of America. I have, I think, a particular ability to
unravel that because I've litigated against so many of these agencies. When you litigate
against them, you get a PhD in corporate capture.
I've sued NIH, CDC, FDA.
I've sued EPA.
I've sued the USDA, which is the Department of Agriculture.
I've sued the U.S.
Department of Transportation.
And I know in many of these agencies, I know that particular individuals We'll need to be moved out.
And I understand the perverse incentive systems that put agency capture on steroids.
For example, FDA gets 50% of its budget from pharmaceutical companies.
That is not a formula for independence and public service and good government.
And NIH, scientists who work for it, 30,000 scientists who work for NIH make money, can collect royalties on the products they
regulate. And again, that's a weird conflict of interest that I'm going to end. The CIA is the most
problematical agency, but I have a very clear idea of what I'm going to do with the CIA. And it's the
same plan that my father had in 1968, and my uncle, President Kennedy, had in 1963, which is to
separate the plans division, which is the dirty tricks division, the division that fixes
elections, kills foreign leaders, and runs all the media around the world, and is propagandizing
the globe.
To separate that from the espionage debate, espionage is what CIA was created for, which is information gathering and analysis.
And that's something that the President of the United States desperately needs.
Very, very good information to make decisions on.
The CIA, very early in its life, perverted its purpose by taking on these other Responsibilities and powers that were never intended, and now it's a government within our government, and it is threatening democracy.
One of the problems is, we passed an act in 1948, Russell, called the Smith-Munt Act, and that act made it illegal for the CIA to propagandize Americans.
They can propagandize everybody else in the world, but they're not allowed to propagandize Americans.
And that act was waived in 2014 by President Obama, and it has now given the CIA permission to propagandize our people.
So, you know, right now there's a big movement in our country to ban TikTok because they're scared of the influence of China, which I think is a legitimate fear.
But I'm much more frightened.
Of the capacity of the CIA to control, particularly through AI and these other new technologies, to warp our perception of reality, to serve an agenda that is not a democratic agenda, to control people, to diminish the reach of democracy and increase the power of totalitarian elements within our societies and of, you know, of nefarious groups within art societies, and I'm going to restore the Smith-Bund Act.
In 1973, Americans learned for the first time that the CIA had been violating the Smith-Bund Act, and they had a program called Operation Mockingbird, where they had the leading journalists, over 400 of the leading journalists in our country, and editors at You know, the New York Times, the Washington Post, ABC, CBS, NBC were actually working for the CIA and propagandizing Americans.
And the country was shocked.
We had congressional hearings, the CIA, agreed to dismantle that program.
They said we'll continue to propagandize everybody around the world, which they do to this day, mainly through USAID.
They spend $10 billion a year.
They're the biggest funders of journalism on earth.
And, you know, and so they can they can craft and mold public perception elsewhere, but they're not supposed to be doing that here in the United States.
But now, since 2014, they've been able to do it.
And there's been a series of great articles recently by historians like David Talbott, like Dick Russell, and others, Kevin Shipp, who are intelligence agency historians, showing that there are journals now in the United States that are controlled by the agency.
Daily Beast is Daily Kos, Salon, Slate, Rolling Stone, which used to be the center of the counterculture, the guy Who runs Rolling Stone, and the company that purses Rolling Stone appears to be on the CIA front, and the guy who runs it, Noah Schlachman, is a person who came out of the national security state.
And if you look at the articles now in those journals, they're all very pro-vaccine, which of course is a Defense Agency program, and they're very pro-war, every kind of war.
If you look at all of the agenda items of the CIA, you can go down the list and check off that all of these journals are now are kind of automaton-like in supporting
and promoting those agendas.
And it's not healthy for a democracy.
It's very, very dangerous.
Your staggering book, "The Real Anthony Fauci"
illustrated in incredible depth with extraordinary footnotes and evidence
the true history of Anthony Fauci.
the true history of Anthony Fauci, his early engagement with military projects,
His early engagement with military projects, his incredible portfolio and involvement
his incredible portfolio and involvement with the development of dual-purpose research.
And when I read it some time ago, when you were still a figure banned from online spaces,
inaccessible to all but the most esoteric and eager investigators of marginal spaces,
I felt like, well, this can't be true, but it makes sense and it is true.
For you to have moved from a place where when your books are a bestseller,
the New York Times just almost run a blank space as if you're Elvis's pelvis,
to the point where you are now running for president and polling well,
How do you think that those kind of ideas, because it sounds like you're saying that ultimately Anthony Fauci is a criminal and it seemed to me like when you were saying federal employees that lie should be held accountable.
What happens to Anthony Fauci?
What happens to Big Pharma in the event that you're granted that kind of executive power?
If I get in there?
Yeah.
No, I don't.
I don't have a really clear plan.
I mean, I. I think the best thing for our country, Russell, is to have some kind of truth and reconciliation commission, you know, like they've had in Latin American countries, El Salvador, Argentina and all over the world.
And the way those commissions work is you appoint a high-level commission of people who are representing kind of all the major stakeholders, but who are very highly respected people.
And then they take testimony.
And if people from the government agencies come forward and tell the complete truth about what happened during COVID, for example, then they are immune from prosecution.
Those things that they testified truthfully about and the people who refuse to talk are now subject to prosecution and you build you know the information base and then they put out a report and tell exactly what happened and you know I will a lot of these commissions are just fancy ways of covering up the truth And, you know, and satisfying the public demand for an investigation.
But I'm going to do a real investigation.
I'm going to tell I'm going to be rigorous about making sure the Americans know every item of truth that happened then and the rest of the world, because it's critical to make sure we never do anything like that again.
And we know.
You know what works and we know what doesn't work, and we can recognize when we start heading down a bad path again and We need that kind of rigorous process that also provides for the people who won't cooperate with it may be criminally prosecuted.
Sir, may I ask that doesn't a reckoning of that scale expose what many people would regard as the true powers that ultimately manipulate and move through various intersectional points between the deep state and other globalist bureaucracies and benefit indeed from America's ongoing covert involvement in coups and wars?
Ultimately, if you challenge those kind of interests, how doesn't your own family history Well, you know, that is irrelevant to me.
and awfully and indeed tragically demonstrate that in all likelihood a
serious undertaking of such an endeavor would likely lead to your murder?
Well, you know that is irrelevant to me. You know it's relevant only in that
it would be strategically a bad mistake to let myself get murdered.
And so I'll take precautions to help ensure that that, you know, to make that difficult for anybody who wants to try it.
But, you know, look, we had a generation of Americans in 1776 who put their lives on the line for our country to give us this constitution.
They put their property, their reputation, their health, Their families, and a lot of them died.
And then again, during the Civil War, there was 659,000 people who gave their lives so that we could have our country.
So I think people from every generation need to, you know, need to be willing to take risks to hold on to our Constitution.
If we're not willing to take those risks, we're going to lose it.
So you need at least a few people in every generation who say, Oh, America is worth it.
America is worth it.
And, you know, we've had millions of Americans die in wars to protect our freedom.
And we all have to be willing to do that.
So, you know, I think it was Jefferson who said that every generation must water the tree of liberty with bloodshed if we're going to keep our values or be willing to do that.
You know, so I think that's something that, you know, that's just an assumption that I feel, you know, that makes any kind of threat at this point irrelevant to me.
Bobby, you talk about your Catholicism and the catechism in your video that's being, it seems at least, pretty significantly suppressed on Meta.
What do you think is the importance of spiritual values, the importance of God?
I've recently been baptised myself.
Returning to an explicit spiritual path?
Walking with Christ?
Surrendering?
What do you think is the importance of it?
Do you think that a more explicit and overt spiritual solution is what America requires?
Otherwise, how do we even underwrite these values?
Where do we get redemption from?
Salvation?
Forgiveness?
In this ongoing culture war?
Men like you and me that have lived pretty crazy lives and I certainly haven't made the mistakes I've been accused of making but by God I've made mistakes.
How do you insert or colour American political life with a set of values that due to the nature of secularism are extracted even though it's beginning to seem to me precisely what's necessary.
Some kind of return to a set of values that are unifying and uplifting.
Yeah, and I think Americans want that.
I mean, I think there's two questions there, which are one is kind of the individual question of, you know, what is our responsibility of human beings toward?
And what is our relationship with God or whatever you want to call the ultimate embodiment of power and principle?
And I think our Our relationship is to strive for existential truth, strive to understand and to comply.
In other words, to understand what the right thing to do is and what our correct relationship is with the universe, with God, with our neighbors, with our community, with our wives and our children.
And then strive for wisdom.
The word wisdom means a knowledge of God's will.
It's an instinctive feeling and instinctive knowledge about right and wrong.
What is the right thing to do in every circumstance?
And once we've gotten to that point, then our responsibility is how do we accept
what being different to everything about life, to the material world, and just be focused
on what our actions are at any given moment.
Are we doing the right thing?
Are we doing the next right thing right now?
The only thing that any of us control is that tiny piece of real estate inside of our own shoes.
And, but we do have control over that, you know, and that's what we focus on rather than what's happening
in the world around us.
That's all the turbulence of life, or politics, of controversy.
Um, and.
And we have to go a little below the surface where it's calm and find that calm in our relationship with a spiritual life.
And then focus on right and wrong, on pursuing the light.
And walking away from the darkness.
And you know, that's the struggle.
Each one of us has our own journey.
I think it was Socrates who said, good is what the good man does.
In other words, in any particular situation, there may be no right or wrong.
You can't say.
You can say that lying is for me, lying is always wrong.
But there may be circumstances where it isn't.
So the rules and regulations, as Christ talked about constantly, he said, you know, people are binding up heavy burdens for other men to carry with all the rules and regulations and the hierarchies and orthodoxies.
And he said that, you know, he was kind of breaking the rules and saying, What you eat, you know, how you, whether you act on, if you, if you act on the Sabbath to heal somebody, that's a good thing, right?
If you, what you put in your body, the clean, it's not what makes you unclean.
It's the way that you conduct your lives, whether you conduct it with integrity, with kindness, whether you comply with the golden rule, which is to do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
And that these are, you know, he was kind of of creating an ethical framework for religion. And there
were other Jewish rabbis at that time, Rabbi Hillel, who were, you know, probably huge influence
on Christ, who was, who is separating from the, you know, the, the old notion
of, of orthodoxies, of kind of tribal religions and say, no, it's about ethics
and bringing ethics down as the center of organizing framework for, for, for religious
practice rather than just a tribal belief, you know, and, and
Thank you.
And that's what I think we have to all strive for, but we have to find it in our own way.
What Socrates meant when he said that, what the good man does is that there's never any answer.
God has made reality very complicated for us so that there's never a clear answer of
what you do in any circumstances.
It's the exploring of the options and the striving to do what's right that builds our
character.
The determination to do what's right and then the striving to get there.
So I think we all have to do that as individuals.
I know how we're supposed to recover ourselves as a country.
We get our sustenance from the soil, from good, rich, chemical-free soils.
We get it from, you know, feeding our kids sustaining type of foods and nutritious foods and making sure that they have that.
We get it from building relationships in the community, from moving away from the atomization, the fragmentation that, you know, that is the legacy of all these, you know, social media and, and, and technologies.
And, um, And we do it.
Ultimately, community is the only source of dignity and knowledge and the only real rich future in the post-industrial era, the post-technology era.
We have to strive to hold on to community and to build community in ways.
And that's why one of the things I've said I'm going to build these wellness farms all over the country as my big Peace Corps program, where kids can go and get off of drugs.
And, you know, not only illegal drugs, but also psychiatric drugs, I guess, SRIs and benzos.
And that these places are going to be places where you stay for maybe prolonged periods, however long you need.
We're going to have no cell phones there and no screens so that people learn to talk to each other again, you know, and to relate to each other and to build relationships with each other because that's the source of our strength.
And that's the source, ultimately, of strength of our democracy, of our nation.
it's going to come from lots of little nodes of communities, experimenting with different
ways of living in community all over our country. And that, to me, is not only good for our
physical health, but also our spiritual health as a nation.
Thank you beloved Bobby.
I've only had a few skirmishes with the kind of powers that I fear engage whenever there is an emergent voice for good and it's really been pretty terrifying and thank you very much for your willingness to engage with that power.
I really appreciate and admire that in you and respect that in you.
Your valour, your decency, your kindness, your gentle madness, your parasite-ridden cerebellum.
I hope that you're still going to be capable to participate in some kind of pull-up competition, which I'm regretting ever having even conceded to.
Is that something that's likely to take place in Nashville?
Because I'm pretty keen to avoid it if there's a way.
I think you can avoid it.
I actually pulled my bicep this week.
Good.
So I think you're off the hook for Nashville.
Perhaps we can then revert to the axe throwing, but we'll agree on a mutually... Axe throwing.
Yeah?
Yeah, because I know your practice in that.
Very much.
Yes.
That's an emotion I'm familiar with.
Bobby, thank you so much for today.
I really appreciate you.
I know how hard you're working and I know how, I don't know, I can't imagine how difficult what you're going through is and I pray for you and I appreciate you and I'm really looking forward to seeing you.
Thank you for joining us, Bobby.
God bless you, Russell, and thank you so much for coming to Nashville.
God bless you.
Thank you.
I hope you enjoyed that conversation between Bobby Kennedy and myself.
Please become a supporter of our work if it's within your means.
You get additional content every single week.
You get to participate in meditations.
You get to be a member of our book club.
You get to grow as part of a movement that cares deeply about you and cares about radical and significant change.
We'll be back tomorrow with a fantastic conversation, a story of transitioning from criminality to Christianity and
learning about, in a sense, what I like about my conversation tomorrow with Michael Emmett is to
discover, discuss and analyse different types of criminality.
You will be well aware of institutional global elite is criminality.
And you'll learn even more about that on Friday when we're talking to Dave Martin about the origins, excuse me, of the WHO and the origins of the League of Nations.
Both of those organizations have extraordinarily criminal undergirdings.
And we're talking about good old fashioned, glamorous British criminality tomorrow and ultimately Christianity with Michael Emmett.
Join us tomorrow then, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.