Is the MAHA Report a Betrayal of MAHA Moms? Robert W Malone Reacts
01:09:40 Share

You know, you're promoting your book or you're promoting your thing. It's me. I did it. I did it. I did it. All of that is amateur hour. We're up against people.

who are so adverse. They are so, so knowledgeable about human desire and how to manipulate groups of people collectively. And we've got amateur rookie hours complaining about they didn't get a citation in your blog. So I'm sorry. I just, I don't have room and time for that. So I thank you for saying that because that is at the core of this is let's keep our eye on the prize here, guys.

A neighbor's choice.

Well, I'm back with my good friend. He is someone who I enjoy learning from his ideas. He's been a great critic of the public health policy in America and the WHO particular particular Dr. Robert Malone. How you doing, sir?

Pretty good, David. It's Memorial Day today. We need to take a moment to just remember veterans and those that have passed in defending liberty. But thank you for having me on. Yeah, thanks for joining us on this holiday. You know, and that's the thing that people always, you know, they talk about. There's something that they they often say about soldiers is that they they and you'll hear this a lot.

is that they fought and died for your right to say what you want to say, right? And I think about that as it relates to public health policy, too, you know, that there's, man, we've really lost the plot on a lot of foundational concepts of a free republic in which you have bodily autonomy, you know. Instead, we've become, you know, really, really bedazzled by the idea that

We're lab rats and we are to take whatever the government and its oligarchic friends tell us to take. And that's been a disaster. I would say that as I've published on your website, I think the seed oil thing is even bigger than the vaccine thing, you know, because the seed oil thing is so pernicious, so subsidized into all the world's food supply, you know. So, David, you're touching on a red hot button right there. Careful or you're going to get burned.

because the base of Maha is all wrapped around the axle that the only thing that matters is the mRNA products and getting them withdrawn from the market. And there is a, the other day, this morning I was talking to my wife about this and we agreed the term herpes applied. There's a group of individuals, let's say, that are

I'm extremely critical of the Maha report of Bobby Kennedy of Kelly and Casey means and seem to think that this is a one issue election that the only thing that matters here and the only thing that matters to Maha.

is that they take a rigorous position on removing the vaccines from the market, these mRNA-based products. I hesitate to call them vaccines. But they overlook the fact that this Maha report and the initiatives that are in progress right now, while they're...

Addressing aspects of this kind of third rail of vaccine safety that's so risky for anybody in a political position to speak on because it's been so weaponized.

They overlook the importance of all these other things that are going on, just as you say, and the role of pesticides, the role of other toxicants. Even in autism, the progress that's already been made on the petroleum-based dyes in foodstuffs and what they miss is foodstuffs.

What's being geared up here, you know, the most gentle of ways, because it touches on agriculture policy, which is a hot button, is the issue of atrazine and glyphosate or Roundup that is now contaminating so much of our grain and soybean products.

And the potential effects associated with that, they're just like tunnel focused. If you aren't stridently advocating for removal of these products, these mRNA-based products, then you are a traitor to the cause, et cetera, et cetera. It's really, and these people are now turning on Secretary Kennedy in a big way. And I just kind of, I don't get that.

for anybody that's got any political sensibility, you know, that D.C. is, number one, I keep saying politics is a blood sport in D.C. And number two, politics requires nuance, compromise, tincture of time, and socialization of issues with the general population. The general population is not yet convinced that

that these products were as hazardous as they were. Hence, Ron Johnson's hearing the other day on the myocarditis. What did you think about that? How did you think that did? So I was there for the hearing in person together with Joe. Were you the one hollering that when he said, please hold your applause when Ron said that?

I was certainly among them. Uh, yeah. So there, there was, uh, there built up a lot of momentum. Clearly the crowd was, uh, um, supporting Ron and, uh, very concerned about the vaccine products and the myocarditis and were not, uh, um, uh, amused by the, uh,

I forget what his name is, the Democratic. Blumenthal. Blumenthal. Yeah, I just spoke with Dr. Peter McCullough, and he had some real fire-packed lines against him, and I thought it was fantastic. Yeah, Blumenthal made a number of misstatements and intentionally attempted to create a false parallel between

between or a false linkage between measles vaccination and measles vaccination policy and measles vaccine uptake and the COVID products. Right. Because of course, this is all weaponized in the context of the recent West Texas measles outbreak, largely driven by the Mennonite community who hasn't been taking measles vaccines for decades. It has nothing to do with Bobby or Maha or anything else.

But that I knew it as that was coming down, that that emphasis in the press that was going on that was so out of line and the misrepresentation that at least two of the girls that passed away were due to the measles, when in fact they were due to medical mismanagement.

of their pneumonias, of their basically bacterial pneumonias and failure to adequately treat them. But it was clear to me that that was being used politically as a tool to further advance the agenda of supporting vaccines and in particular advocating for continued support of this COVID product.

But the Blumenthal, you know, made a series of these misstatements and false associations that were unsubstantiated and have since been refuted. He's still citing old peer reviewed articles that have been debunked. And as, as justification for their policies and as support for,

the success of the congressionally backed COVID policies during the Biden era, including the mandates, the lockdowns, the social distancing, and the mandatory vaccination. So it was a fascinating meeting. And David, here's, I think, one of the most interesting things that I experienced there

Of course, all this storyline about the myocarditis harms, et cetera, you and I have known about now it seems like forever. And in my case, it goes back very early, even earlier than Ron was indicating in his timeline, because I was interacting with people at the FDA and the office of the commissioner and the office of the chief scientist that were the ones that first raised the red flag about the myocarditis signal.

as well as the latent DNA virus reactivation signal. So I know that story in detail. So I think this might kind of capture the gestalt of that whole meeting. Jill and I were sitting right behind three corporate lobbyists. I suspect that they were associated, and I don't know this for a fact, with the new mRNA industry program.

lobbying organization that's been established in DC that we've written about previously. But whoever they were representing, they started off when Blumenthal was speaking, sniggering to each other. And then as time went by, they got more and more uncomfortable and nervous, more and more downtrodden. And then when I stepped outside of the meeting,

One of them, the senior guy was on the phone apparently to his constituents for his lobbying organization talking about how they were at risk for losing their advocates. And if they lost their advocates in. Academe, then they would lose their quote eyes and ears. So they went from.

you know, derision, sniggering, laughing at Ron Johnson to towards the end of the meeting, really being quite disturbed by what had gone down. Because I think that that meeting, for anybody that listened in on it, it changed, it kind of changed the whole gestalt. It clearly established that the CDC and the FDA had corruptly

failed to provide informed consent in ways that seem intentional and in ways that they are now attempting clearly to hide. So they were on the phone with who? I don't know who he was speaking to, but it sounded like it was one of his companies or an advocacy group that he was representing. So, you know, little did they know they had the world's most interesting doctor behind them. Yeah.

That was their first mistake. They should have sat a little further away from you. Yeah, I said. They're going to get blasted on the Malone Report and the A Neighbor's Toy Show today, and they're going to be in trouble. The fun thing about this whole, for me, this whole, let's say, matrix of information and people is that the people on our side of the discussion, they've seen me again and again on podcasts and other things like your show.

And they recognize me and they come up to me in airports and all, you know, meetings and whatever. People on the other side of the fence, they don't watch any of that stuff because I'm a purveyor of misinformation. So they don't need to. And so they don't recognize me, which is kind of cool because it means that I can go into their space and they have no idea that I'm actually kind of a spy. Yeah. Yeah.

So you think that was a turning point hearing. And I thought Dr. McCullough did a great job. And I know Jordan Vaughn, I'm familiar with him as well. The other doctor that I recognized on that. I went up afterwards because Peter and I have had our issues.

And I went up afterwards and I shook his hand and I congratulate him. And I told him what a good job I thought he'd done. I wrote to Ron Johnson about what I what I thought was a great job done by Peter. He was very forceful. His his bias towards self-promotion kind of gets under my collar a little bit.

But I think he did a great job in representing the cause and the position and doing what Ron had wanted him to do, which was speak as a cardiologist, as an experienced cardiologist, to the truth of what myocarditis is and its prevalence and its etiology as it relates to these products.

Now, why is it that there is so many... Let's go back to this, because the main theme of this discussion today is the Maha Report, which we can go back to some of the specifics if you want to. But just in general, you brought up a point right out the bat, because...

about the rifts. Why is there so many different factions and egos in the Make America Healthy Again Coalition? You have some people who's, you know, like I'm friends with everybody, but everybody's not friends with everybody else. They're all fighting everybody, you know, and I like the position. I've kind of become like, I guess, like a Forrest Gump of that whole world because I could just be there in every space. Yeah.

And they're like, oh, yeah, we all love David. And that's great because I still get to talk to everybody. Everybody else is like at each other's throats and whatever the hell is going on. I don't know. But why is that the case? I mean, obviously, I understand that from a mimetic, you know, my background in anthropology studying mimetic theory. I understand that from a mimetic level that human beings are the more alike we are, the more off more opportunity we have for rivalry. Right. And so, you know, there's more rivalry within us.

two fellow travelers in a Make America Healthy Again conference than there is between one of them and somebody at the establishment of the, you know, Pfizer conference. Yeah, I think, so it's in, I've written about this at length in the book, Cywar. There's a lot of dynamics going on here. One is truth spirals or moral outbidding.

That is kind of universal. And the big picture, I go back to a dinner I once had with Nigel Farage a few years ago in London. And we were talking about UKIP and the movement for Brexit. And he was giving us as a group advice. And what he said was that

libertarians in general, because they're libertarians, often are extremely independent and it's very hard to get them to agree on anything. And it's just a core problem associated with trying to represent a, you know, if you want to call it free speech or medical freedom or libertarian or whatever words you want to use associated with that.

Those people that are attracted to those types of positions are typically very independent, and they are outspoken about their independence in many cases, and it's very challenging to create political structures within which they will cooperate. And this has been the history of populism. I've written about this also, that the history of populism and American populism is not particularly good.

Most recently, of course, we had the Tea Party movement. A case can be made that the Tea Party movement has eventually morphed under the guidance of Donald Trump into MAGA. I think that's a valid political thesis. But these populist movements have a lot of problems in translating their grievances into policy.

And frankly, we're seeing a fair amount of that. The extent that it's not worse, I think it reflects President Trump's leadership and his style. He can be a little bit autocratic. That's true. But we, you know, a strong leader is necessary in this kind of a populist movement environment. Yeah. And so he's currently providing that leadership to a large extent. There's more, though.

There is this process of moral outbidding where, as one example, if I say the virus was engineered, then some will respond differently.

There's a thread of response that there's no such thing as a virus. Prove that there was a virus. Nobody has sequenced the virus. Nobody has isolated the virus. All that's false, but it's a repeatedly promoted narrative.

And then if you believe in the existence of a virus, then you are not one of us. If you believe in the existence of a virus called SARS-CoV-2, you're not one of us. I mean, it's a whole slippery slope associated with that that has to do with purity spirals or moral outbidding, which tends to occur in these kinds of groups, these aggrieved protest groups that are very active.

There's another thing going on in the case, for instance, of the Casey means issues. Casey and Kelly in particular is which one is the one promoted for center surgeon general. I get the big stuff. Casey is the woman, Dr. Casey and Kelly is the one that currently serves in the office of the white house as chief of staff. And by the way,

was a primary driver of our topic today, the Maha report. So Calley, I've heard from multiple people on the inside that Calley was a major force in, not to the least of which was his chief of staff, a major force in driving this Maha report forward. So, and a meme emerged, kind of a,

one analysis that then got codified by Nicole Shanahan that Casey and Callie means burst onto the scene out of nowhere. Well, that's a false narrative. They actually did multiple Tucker interviews and then a Rogan interview and they wrote a bestselling book that was widely promoted. But to be fair-

you don't usually just pop up on Tucker as your first media hit, which they kind of, that was, you know what I mean? Yeah. You're supposed to do the rounds on the smaller shows and then you get your big break. That, that is, but here they're being promoted, clearly being promoted by a major bookseller, mainstream bookseller. And if they're going to sell books into a mainstream market,

which is the goal when you write a book, you want to sell books, generally speaking. And they took some really quite striking positions in that book, having to do with the food industry and really a lot of the core principles that we now call Maha were represented by them. They didn't come up with them, but the person who is often credited for having tilled that ground for decades, another doctor,

endorsed them and endorses them currently. So I forget his name. I've got it in my sub stack if you want to look it up. But in any case, they were absolutely promoted by a mainstream bookseller. And think it through. If you're being promoted in the health and wellness category by a mainstream bookseller,

for this volume on what is making America sick in terms of diet. And you come out with strong statements that denounce the mRNA vaccine. Back then, you know, this is two years ago, you're going to suddenly lose your audience. You're no longer going to get those interviews. Your bookseller isn't going to pull their backing, et cetera, et cetera. This is not Skyhorse Publishing.

And so the criticism that they, during that period, did not come out with strident comments like I did three years ago in a press conference recorded at Dell Big Tree Studios, where I advocated that these products should be withdrawn from the market because they're neither safe nor effective in all risk categories. That is still not the mainstream opinion.

But it is certainly an opinion that many in our, let's say, subculture buy into. But it is not the position that is being taken by Marty Makary and his new head of CBER in the New England Journal report that preceded this Maha report.

And as you read through the Maha report, it has a section in which it is speaking quite strongly about vaccines, but it is not directly calling for withdrawal of these mRNA products from the market. What people don't get is that this Maha report and all of this buzz around Callie and Casey reflect the political realities of D.C. right now. Callie works for the office of the president.

And while he was a primary driver in the pushing the vaccine language to be as strident as it is, he had to deal with the fact that this report comes from the Maha Commission. It represents the position of the Maha Commission, and it's essentially a threat assessment for children. And the Maha Commission...

is a all of government effort that involves multiple cabinet level and sub cabinet level agencies. And that you can in the report, you can see that a number of these positions were negotiated. For instance, anything that has to do with agriculture, which is why we had Senator Marshall there at the table speaking in favor of the farm industry.

We had the secretary of ag there at the table speaking very prominently. We had the language relating to pesticide use and glyphosate and desiccants really tuned down.

Because this had to be negotiated with other cabinet level secretaries and their constituencies. What is the, what are you? Yeah. It's remarkable that it came out as strong as it did. Well, they're trying, but see that what they're trying to do is they're like, okay, we've got to get, you know, it's a classic, you know, PR tactic. It's like, okay, we own this government, the cartels, these food company cartels or anything. We've got to get ahead of this.

We've got to get buy-in with these guys or they're going to keep causing problems for us. So you get in there and you find some, you give them some. And it's funny how they give them like the old classics. Like they've given us fluoride after decades of those poor fluoride conspiracists, conspiracy theorists. Just they battled that thing. I mean, they did that for decades.

And they're like, all right, what are we going to give these these rubes here? What are we going to throw them? We're not going to give them seed oils because that's going to look at all those Iowa farmers are going to get to destroy Trump and all of his buddies. We can't do that. We've got a trade war with China. So we've got to make sure that their seed oils are nice. So the president, the president was really quite work. His words were quite strong.

Did he say we've got to get rid of the seed oils? Huge. It's huge. No. Did he say that? No, he didn't. No, what he said was that we are not going to allow the lobbyists to influence our decisions. So remember, again, this report is a threat assessment. The next report that's due in 100 days is the action items. That's the one that matters. Yeah. So getting back on threat, though,

You were talking about industry response. Yeah. And one, let me just, this is a fact, this thread that I'm about to speak about. Right. And it was something that was also discussed at length in the Maha report meeting. The SNAP program, Special Nutrition Program, Ergo Food Stamps,

The Bobby Kennedy came out with a statement, you'll recall over a month ago now, about getting sugary colas and other high sugar, high fructose based products out of the SNAP program and out of the school lunch program. And what happened was the soda industry set up. This is documented.

The soda industry set up AstroTurf nonprofits and also to lobby against this, to ostensibly act as if they are true grassroots organizations when they're not. They're just shell companies that have been set up by the soda industry making claims. And you'll recall these claims that were out on social media as a blizzard, that this is an infringement of free speech and the rights of individuals to make their own decisions about their diet.

And that parallels what I had said back at the last CPAC in D.C., that what we didn't want Maha to become was another bureaucratic nanny state operation that would be telling us, and the example I used, was not to eat McDonald's and drink Coca-Cola. And the reason why I said that, of course, is because that's what the president does.

So I didn't have to invoke Donald Trump. I could just say McDonald's and Coca-Cola and everybody knew exactly what I was talking about. Right. So that was how the industry framed it through these astroturf organizations. And then they also paid. Here's the key. Conservative opinion leaders, a thousand bucks, a tweet, good money to to make statements that

against withdrawing sodas, sugary sodas from the food stamp program. But come on guys, if you and I and the other taxpayers are paying for food stamps, this is not a free speech right. We have the right and the government has the right to say, look, you can buy all the Coca-Cola you want on your own nickel or $1.20, but we're not gonna subsidize you for food stamps

Buying and consuming things that are going to damage your health. That seems like common sense. Here's where I'm going with this. So that triggered a prompt really cyborg campaign by the soda industry. Nice plug there. It's another example. I mean, the examples abound.

But it's another example of how that works and how the psychological warfare technology pioneered by the military for offshore combat has become part of modern corporate marketing, particularly in pharma. So here's where I'm going with this. We saw that really clearly in the case of the SNAP program and the SODIS. I believe, based on what I am seeing in terms of the amount of traffic

from what are clearly bots low complexity accounts that have a few followers they're relatively recently set up they don't have blue checks all the characteristics of bots um those bots are coming into this space of the base the maha base and are actively uh encouraging these divisive messages

that Bobby has abandoned us, he's abandoned his core principles, he's not sufficiently anti-vax. You know, the movement that happened at FDA in terms of policy having to do with vaccine policy and the criteria for the next wave of boosters

they have abandoned us, they have stabbed us in the back because they didn't just withdraw the products from the market. And that is all being encouraged as is this messaging that Kelly and Casey means are somehow Manchurians. They're somehow propped up surrogates representing some other agenda.

And I'm going to pull my punches, but I am very aware that some of the leading voices in this are subsidized by a company. By who? By a company. I'm not going to say the company.

but, uh, they're not a sponsor of my show. You can say it. It's okay. Uh, no, I, I really, this company and its CEO has sent me in many other positions, a very aggressively worded cease and desist letter. Oh, okay. I see. Um, so I'm not going to mention the company, but many of these people that are speaking stridently along this, these lines about the means, uh,

who, in the case of Cali Means, apparently there's a perception by this company that Cali Means' own company is somehow in competition with them. So my point is this, that as you see this splintering that's occurring within the Maha base, just constantly have in the back of your mind

and awareness that some of this is being promoted. Some of this is organic from people who wish to promote outrage and conflict because outrage and conflict translates into clicks, likes and follows. And if you want to build your following, that's one of the best ways to do it is to attack people and make strident statements. And some of it is being promoted by big industry groups.

And some of it is being supported at a minimum by a, by smaller corporate actors in that ostensibly are in this medical freedom space and advancing their own corporate interests. Have you seen any evidence that some of the fighting in fighting between these smaller alternative health groups could be stoked on by the big food companies that are laughing all the way to the bank? Like,

Because that's a classic tactic, divide and conquer, you know. Well, that's exactly what I'm saying, okay? So divide and conquer, and I wrote a whole essay about divide and conquer and splintering on the internet. And, you know, this new term, the splinter net, that the splintering of the internet right now is an advanced stage and it is going, it's like AI, it's inevitable. It's sweeping over the entire internet right now

and the splintering is occurring at the micro level, and it's also occurring at the macro level by nation states. In a sense, in a world in which the European Union, for example, is establishing these policies about misdis and malinformation and implementing major fines against social media companies if they don't toe the line with EU edicts for what constitutes misinformation.

And of course, we have players like the CCP that have basically already cordoned off Chinese space in terms of internet information. And we already are cordoned off in a major way. You can't go interact with Russia Times. It's a challenge to get the Indian newspapers, which in my experience are among the best right now. Everything is being balkanized.

And in a sense, the United States may be forced into a position where we put up even more formal internet boundaries around US IP addresses because of the policies that are being enacted in the UK, in the EU, and elsewhere.

that are criminalizing free speech. If we wish to maintain free speech, we're going to be forced into a situation where our ISPs and our social media companies are firewalling off other parts of the world

Because otherwise, their businesses will go broke because of all the fines. And we will, the other alternative is that they will impose the restrictions on freedom of speech and the policies about malinformation and misinformation that are originating in the EU on Americans. We will have no choice. And then, so that's the macro level splinter net. But then in the micro level, we are, because of these algorithms, right?

And small rooming, we are all being forced by the likes of you and I, and everyone else in this world are being forced into small rooms where we're only allowed to speak. To our immediate followers and the people that interact with us on a routine basis. For instance, in theory, I have 1.3M followers.

But most of those I never reach. They can never reach me. I can't hear what they're saying. They can't hear what I'm saying because the algorithms have small roomed me and small room to all of us. That is that is so now we all exist in echo bubbles. And that's another thing that's happening with the Maha base is they think because they're in a algorithmic bubble.

that the whole world believes as they do, because that's all they can hear is their friends and colleagues that agree with them. And so they get more and more strident because they feel that this is the way it is. So Tim Pool makes the case that this phenomena was intentionally exploited to drive Candace Owens into such an extreme position regarding the Gaza conflict.

that she effectively took herself out of even mainstream conservative media. Because one of the things that's done in this ecosystem is this process that I was talking about, where people, if an influencer posts something that is, let's say, slightly more strident,

than the allowed Overton window. The Overton window is a powerful idea as you're thinking about all this. The window of allowed political discourse. And so an influencer posts something slightly outside of that window, thinking perhaps, acting based on their own personal opinion.

Alex Jones, a great example. Alex Jones doesn't recognize the Overton window. Alex Jones is just, he says, he goes straight brain to the microphone, right? With no editing. So somebody, an influencer, says something that's slightly outside of the Overton window. And what's done is, and you can follow this,

they suddenly get instead of 10 likes or 100 likes, they suddenly get 1,000 likes or 10,000 likes. They have a whole bunch of new followers. They don't question whether or not those new followers are real people. But then they say, "Oh, I must be onto something. Look how my audience is reacting." I should really take the filters off on that topic and start really speaking out about these issues because that's what my base wants.

And so they get more. And by use of bots, bad actors that want to delegitimize an influencer can drive that influencer to taking extreme positions that then result in them being deplatformed or isolated, censored, delegitimized. And it is going on all the time.

Just like on the left, a lot of these platforms, including Facebook, and Substack, they want to have more voices from the left. They've been having too much influence from the right, they believe. So they'll small room people from the right, and they'll large room, amplify people from the left so that they get more followers and more likes and more attention, and they can grow as influencers.

This is all being done algorithmically on a real-time basis. So this kind of infighting that's occurring within the Maha base, I think it's really important to maintain perspective. This is, as I wrote, a tempest in a teapot. A lot of this stuff, I'm not in any way saying that the issue of whether or not these products should be on the market is important.

a Tempest and a teapot or it's illegitimate. It's my belief that they should have been off the market, but that and 250 will get me a Starbucks, right? It's who cares? You know, a small number of people care about what Robert Malone thinks. A large number of people think, care about what Donald Trump thinks, but even they may still be in the minority on any one issue. And so until we can, and this is the brilliance of what Ron Johnson did.

And by the way, I know for a fact that this is his strategy. I spoke to him about it three or four months ago. His intention was once he got in to the subcommittee on investigations as chairperson, he would have power of the subpoena for the first time. And he would, so long as the Republicans maintain control of the Senate, which is on a knife's edge,

And he would subpoena these records that have come back through FOIA as redacted. And he would subpoena these gubbies that have been complicit in what's been going on. And he would take that information, assemble it, and deploy it in a staged fashion in a series of these meetings in an attempt to move the national consensus on FOIA

the quote vaccine products and their harms. And this myocarditis meeting that he just held was the first salvo in that. He basically picked the lowest hanging fruit. The myocarditis story is really straightforward. The damage done is clear as a bell and the manipulation of information, the failure to provide informed consent by the government is crystal clear. And so he led with that.

And I think he got a big bump. And the socket here between that and the Maha Commission is that the Maha Commission will not take a more strident position on these products until they see that there is a much broader public consensus that something has to be done. Because right now, sorry to say,

for the Maha base that is focused on this issue. They are by far the minority. What about the seed oils? Did they say anything about that in the report? I didn't read it. I don't recall seed oils specifically being called out, but one of the- You call them vegetable oils, maybe? Let me, I can search the report because I know that's your particular topic. I did get ultra processed fats. I'll read it.

Over the course of the 20th century, U.S. dietary fat shifted from a minimally processed animal-based sources like butter and lard, rich in fat-soluble vitamins A, D, and E, supporting brain and immune health, to industrial fats from refined seed oils, such as soybean, corn, safflower, sunflower, cottonseed, and canola.

Industrial refining reduces micronutrients such as vitamin E and phytosterols. Moreover, these oils contribute to an imbalanced omega-6, omega-3 ratio, a topic of ongoing research for its potential role in inflammation. So yes, it was specifically called out. As someone who in 2018-

I was talking about seed oils alone in the political context on I heart radio media across major markets and FM and AM radio to go from 2018. I was the only voice to 2025. It's now a white house commission report. That's a pretty good move. That's a pretty good movement we've had on that issue, but it's not enough. We've got to keep going, but I've got to just check the temperature for a second. It's good. So I had a, uh,

One of your colleagues who asserts to me that she was one of the original researchers behind this information on C-1. Dr. Kate Shanahan, probably, right? Yep, Kate. That's right. She's great. So she was invited to the Maha Commission announcement in the White House. Good. And she came up to me afterwards and complained that our substack hadn't attributed her for her work. Okay.

And so I said, well, I'm very sensitive to people not getting credit for their own work for some reason. And that's a little tongue in cheek. And I said, I invite you, please write up your own version of this story and your role in it. And we will be glad to publish it. Yeah, well, good. Good for her.

She's not by far the first at all. Dr. Ray Pete was doing this in the 80s and the 70s, who was a biologist, and he spoke at college campuses and everything. But the point here is this. I try to be a big picture tank guy, a big tank guy. And in every issue you do, whether it's the vaccines, whether it's the existence of viruses, whether it's the existence of this particular virus, whether it's the role of...

oils or the role of sugar, you will always have this kind of, you know, you're promoting your book or you're promoting your thing. It's me. I did it. I did it. I did it. All of that is amateur hour. We're up against people.

who are so adverse. They are so, so knowledgeable about human desire and how to manipulate groups of people collectively. And we've got amateur rookie hours complaining about, they didn't get a citation in your blog. So I'm sorry. I just, I don't have room and time for that. So I thank you for saying that because that is at the core of this. Yeah. Is let's keep our eye on the prize here, guys.

And, uh, remember that we are Bobby. Yeah. Bobby Kennedy, who is not a spring chicken. Yes, he is very fit, but, uh, he is not a 30 something. He's not even a 40 something. Uh, and he has been committed to these causes and children's health. Yeah. His entire adult life ever since he got, uh,

assigned a public service as a remedy for his bust for heroin when he was in college. And that's what set this all on this track is community service that he had to give, uh, consequent to his arrest. And that's what got him involved in, uh,

In water keepers movement, that's what led to his sensitization about mercury and fish. This mercury and fish that brought him into the vaccine space and mercury and vaccines and into children's health defense and his commitment to children's health in general. And and the issues around the vaccines and vaccine safety and the. How do we call it gently shell game?

associated with the clinical trials, failure to include true placebo controls. All of that has been his focus now for decades. And this false narrative that he's going to somehow abandon all of this. Because why? Because he suddenly has power at his age when he is taking on

the most powerful entrenched interests in the world. And people are busy shooting, you know, circular firing squad. Shooting at him from below is so ridiculous. And there's a balance to this. I want to be clear. There's a balance here, okay? Because on the one hand, you have to be wise to how the game works,

and be smart about it. But on the other hand, you don't want to become a sycophantic community that's so well-trained to never speak. You know what I mean? So there's a balance there that has to be obtained, and it's not really something that is – there's no science to it. It's an art. It's a kind of a vibe, right? And that's it. You and I have to grapple with this on a daily basis. Every sub-stack I put out, and I put out –

an essay supporting, uh, the surgeon general appointee Casey means. Uh, and then I put out another sub stack in which I, uh, reported on the, uh, concerns that were being raised. Right. Uh, and, uh, reported on her company and, uh, what, what, uh, the concerns are there. And, uh,

I got a lot of attaboys from the White House when I was there for the first essay supporting her and for the essay that I put out supporting her brother. They didn't mention the other one where I was alerting my readership to these other issues. I think it's, I completely concur that the, for me, the rubber hit the road when I was on Abandoned podcast.

um uh with uh i think her name's not maureen that's his uh daughter uh the uh young woman that broadcasts with him sometimes yeah and uh she put me on the spot as early on in the uh presidential appointments that were going down and she asked me whether i supported all these appointments relating to hhs

And knowing how sensitive Susie Wiles and Donald Trump are to criticism and how closely they track what people say in media, I, I, Natalie, right? So I, I said, Natalie Winters, right? Natalie put this question to me and I had, I, there's a, there's some blank airtime there where I'm thinking to myself, okay, I,

I got to be really careful here because anything I say that is criticizing the president and these appointments will get back. Yeah. It's going to go to a dossier and it could well have an impact. Yeah. And, and at the time there was still buzz about me being considered for various positions. So I, I had this moment of truth where I had, I was saying to myself, okay,

I have to be really careful here, but I have to be honest and true. That's my brand is to speak plainly and speak truthfully about my opinions about things. And so I did carefully say that I was disappointed by the surgeon general appointment who's since been withdrawn.

Uh, and, and I spoke about my enthusiasm for cash Patel, by the way, that enthusiasm is a little diminished, uh, by his position on the suiciding of Epstein Epstein. Is that your, is that your MRNA product for him? Uh, you know what I mean? You know what I mean? Everybody's got a, everybody's got a truth telling moment. They want to get out. Right. Yeah. Yeah. So, so, um,

Jay Bhattacharya has got his strengths and his weaknesses. I like to say that he's probably the nicest director of the NIH in my entire career, bless his heart. Marty at FDA, I was less enthusiastic about him initially, but I hadn't realized that he has had a Fox News contract for a number of years now. He is a trained media professional. He's not just a Hopkins professor.

And that's a double-edged sword. And we saw that come out in the Maha Commission report announcements. He is extremely well-spoken. He can convey message very, very well, better than Jay can. But he's also influenced or nuanced in those positions that he takes. He's not coming, in my opinion, he's not conveying message.

a strictly scientific opinion, he's also mixing that or melding that with a political position. Who's this other guy they hired recently as a czar who's critical of the vaccines? What's his name? I saw the story on Daily Mail. He's another doctor. I'm not sure you're talking about. Is it Hatfield? No, it's somebody has it's a psalm or something.

Oh, Mahatra is not. So that was based on a UK. I know Asim well. He's a UK cardiologist. Okay. He has been quite critical. He believes that his father was killed by the product. Yeah. Has he been brought on to something to do with the administration? No. Okay. That was, I think it's a Daily Mail article that was quite misleading. Okay. Okay.

What Asim has done is he has joined Del Bigtree's Maha 501c4 organization. Okay. And so that's another thing that's happened, by the way, David, is that we now have a Maha Institute that is separate and is an outgrowth in many ways of the larger of the...

Super PACs that was set up to support Bobby. Headed up by Tony Lyons is co-president of that. There is the Maha Action, which is the 501c4. It's headed up by Dell Big Tree. There's IMA, Independent Medicines Alliance or Medical Alliance, which is the rebranding of FLCCC.

And they also have a dog in the fight as it relates to Maha and advocacy of that agenda. And I ran into the woman that actually sat next to me when we were listening in the White House is involved in the creation of a new lobbying organization that basically reflects the Maha Moms movement, which, by the way, is the one that President Trump, the Maha Moms movement,

Maha moms were emphasized by President Trump again and again and again and by Bobby. What that teaches to me as I was sitting there listening, watching the dynamics here is that the talk about splintering, the splintering of the Democrat base during the prior election and the breaking away of moms that are now being labeled as Maha moms.

from the Democrat base and realignment towards the Republicans and particularly MAGA under this kind of global banner of make America healthy again is perceived as a key constituency by President Trump as he's going into the midterm elections. He clearly wants to support the interests

and position of Maha moms. He wasn't talking about Maha in general. It was Maha moms again and again and again that he was focused on. The other one- Because they need support with their suburban, the women voters. That's what they're trying to get at. Precisely. And the other one that was specifically identified was the farmers, the agriculture base,

And so you had Senator Marshall there who was identified as a key supporter of the farmers. President Trump specifically talked about the farmers, Iowa State farmers have supported him through all three elections overwhelmingly and how important that is to him and how he is not going to turn his back on those people. And then you had the Secretary of Agriculture

spending just almost as much time as Bobby in her talk. And you had Bobby repeatedly calling out that this Bob commission report was aligned with the interests of the farmers in America. That's all subtext. You know, that the underlying message behind all of that is that we're not going to take away your pesticides and herbicides.

Anything we do here is going to be incremental and it's going to be done in such a way that it doesn't compromise your financial interests. And that specifically they called out that seven out of every 10 years of operations for the majority of farmers, they lose money and that that has to stop and that they have to make, basically, they were saying they have to make farming great again.

that they have to support the profitability and sustainability of the American farm. Amen for that. But what that illustrates very clearly is that this Maha Commission report is a compromise between multiple interests across all the cabinet level secretaries. And if you don't, if you can't see that,

and you're going to discount this report because it has built-in political compromises, then, like I say, if you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch, guys. If you don't understand modern politics and the politics of D.C. enough to recognize that it's necessary to compromise in some areas in order to get your broader interests and objectives moved forward, then...

You don't belong in this discussion as far as I'm concerned. Now, the counterpoint to that is promoted by some of these influencers that I've been avoiding mentioning their names, is that this represents, in my words to this effect, represent the attempts of the patriarchy to shut down dissident women who have been raising a lot of these concerns in the Maha base right now.

And I believe that that is why if there is outside bad actors egging them on, the reason would be that these are women that are speaking very strongly against Maha, against Callie and Casey Means, against Bobby Kennedy.

And they will have undue influence on the very cohort that is so critical here in this Maha coalition, which is the Maha moms. That's the threat that they represent from a purely political calculation. That's the problem is that these folks that are becoming so strident in their single issue advocacy that they're turning on the secretary are

There's appearance that they may be being played. Dr. Malone, I appreciate you coming on the show. Can you share with us anything you'd like to leave us with? I know that malone.news is your blog, and that's where you kindly publish some of my articles. I appreciate you doing that. David, it's been a pleasure. Your articles are high quality. Your scholarship is excellent. Your leadership is outstanding, and it's an honor to be

publish those articles in our sub stack Malone news formerly who is Robert Malone, but that seems so yesterday. Yeah. So thanks for mentioning that. It is what supports us primarily, particularly the paid subscribers, but you don't have to be a paid subscriber, but please consider it. And then of course, there's the book, the two books now, and we're working on the third met with Tony Lyons the other night and

after the commission report, and he really wants us to go ahead and put together a homesteading for health book. Yeah, when are we going to get Malone wheat berries that we can buy, huh? Well, actually, so to that point, it has not been a traditional part of small gardening to produce wheat. And yet we now know that so much of our wheat is contaminated by glyphosate, atrazine, and these desiccants and other things.

And that many people can't tolerate American wheat, but they can tolerate Italian wheat, for example, which is free of these contaminants. So we decided to buy high quality organic wheat berries and we plowed up a horse paddock, put a ton of horse manure in it, rototilled it in and seeded it with those wheat berries of hard red and white wheat.

And as an experiment, and those that seating is now there, they're now coming to heads. And it looks like we may get a good little crop for a couple of old folks. And now the question is, can we rekindle some of the old methods that were used back in the day before we had big combines?

And is there a role for a small wheat plot, a quarter acre wheat plot for the modern homestead for people that want to become self-sufficient or preppers? And I, from all I see, I think that may be the case. So stay tuned for that and consider at least the audio book for Cy War enforcing the new world order. It's, it's kind of every single announcement, everything that Mike Benz says is,

seems to support the central thesis of that book. And it's intended to be armor for the reader to better understand all of these dynamics that you and I have been talking about

And how they're being actively weaponized against us by all kinds of people, not just the government, W. H. O. with. United Nations, but also down to the level of even small to midsize corporations, certainly large corporations like pharma, big egg. Big food.

et cetera. So thanks for the chance to do a little marketing there. I appreciate your time. Thank you, sir. We'll talk again soon. Thanks, David. Bye-bye. The world's a world we

I took the bull.