Skip to content
The Joe Rogan ExperienceThe Joe Rogan Experience

Joe Rogan Experience #2454 - Robert Malone, MD

Robert W. Malone, MD, MS, is a virologist and immunologist and an original inventor of mRNA delivery and vaccination as a technology, DNA vaccination, and multiple non-viral DNA and RNA/mRNA platform delivery technologies. He serves on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and is the author of multiple books, the most recent of which is “PsyWar: Enforcing the New World Order,” co-written with his wife, Dr. Jill Glasspool Malone. The Drs. Malone are the founders of the Malone Institute, which focuses on issues related to government, the biological sciences, and medicine. https://www.skyhorsepublishing.com/9781510782952/psywar/ https://www.malone.news https://www.malonebroadcasting.com https://www.maloneinstitute.org https://www.rwmalonemd.com Perplexity: Download the app or ask Perplexity anything at https://pplx.ai/rogan.

Joe RoganhostDr. Robert Maloneguest
Feb 13, 20262h 33mWatch on YouTube ↗

EVERY SPOKEN WORD

  1. 0:00 – 0:02

    Intro

    1. JR

      [upbeat music]

  2. 0:02 – 1:23

    Back after five years: fallout from Malone’s last appearance and what “came true”

    1. JR

      Joe Rogan Podcast, check it out!

    2. JR

      The Joe Rogan Experience.

    3. JR

      Train by day, Joe Rogan Podcast by night, all day. [upbeat music] Yep, we're up. Okay. We were trying to figure out how long it's been since, uh, you came in. It's been somewhere in the neighborhood, close to five years.

    4. RM

      Yeah. A lot of water under the bridge. [laughing]

    5. JR

      [laughing] Your appearance on this show, boy, did that create a lot of problems.

    6. RM

      [laughing] Yeah. Um, yeah, I, I didn't expect you to ever have me on again. I thought maybe Spotify was just gonna say, "Hell no."

    7. JR

      No, you were right! Like, this is a victory dance. Like, it turned out that all your warnings and all the things that you were saying about the problems turned out to be true.

    8. RM

      Well, thanks. And I, I know you've said that on a few shows. Every time you do, somebody sends me a clip and says, "Hey, Rogan said you're- did the right thing."

    9. JR

      What was it like for you? First of all, uh, you know, they were trying to label you a quack and a kook-

    10. RM

      Try

    11. JR

      ... and someone who didn't know-

    12. RM

      Try! [laughing]

    13. JR

      ... what they were talking about. It didn't-- I don't think it worked with everybody.

    14. RM

      Yeah.

    15. JR

      I mean, it, it worked with people that weren't paying attention, but it, anybody that really paid attention to your background said, "No, this guy's very credible." I mean, don't you have, like, nine patents on mRNA vaccine technology?

    16. RM

      Yeah, on the mRNA. Yeah-

    17. JR

      Yeah

    18. RM

      ... a total of about 15, I think.

  3. 1:23 – 3:27

    Why Malone took the vaccine: early risk perception, travel pressure, and adverse events

    1. JR

      Yeah. And you also took the vaccine and had a horrible adverse event.

    2. RM

      A series of them, yeah.

    3. JR

      Yeah.

    4. RM

      That, that at the time, it was so early. That was when the National Guard was still doing it, and that was Moderna. And, um, the-- I was embarrassed, uh, by, to have these experiences, um, and I was embarrassed when I got COVID in early 2020. Um, you know, looking back, uh, there was so much, so much fear, um, so much, uh, oh, anger and a- anxiety and everything wrapped around all of this.

    5. JR

      Mm-hmm.

    6. RM

      A- and in retrospect, it was, you know, it was promoted, but it was also very organic. Uh, you know, it was, it was... You know, looking back, being honest about it, it was a frightening time, what was happening. And, um, and yeah, I, I, you know, I had those experiences. Uh, my, uh, doc, who is a cardiologist, was like: "Why were you so stupid to take this?" Uh-

    7. JR

      Your doctor said that, too?

    8. RM

      Yeah. Yeah.

    9. JR

      In 2021?

    10. RM

      Yeah. Um, she was a-

    11. JR

      Or 2020 or '20 what?

    12. RM

      '20. It was 2021. 2021. Yeah. Um, I was going to a kind of a, a cardiologist that had left, um, traditional medical practice at, uh, UVA and the associated, um, hospitals, and I was going to her for, uh, hormone replacement therapy and, uh, bioidentical hormone replacement therapy. And, um, she was monitoring a lot of things, and, and, um, yeah, that was her response: "Why did you do this?" Of course, I've had that question a thousand times since. You know, "Why were you so stupid? You were the one that should have known." Um, and so I have to answer that still, uh, it's kind of gets a little tiresome.

    13. JR

      What was your perspective on the vaccine before you took it?

  4. 3:27 – 7:31

    mRNA delivery problems in the 80s–90s: inflammation, biodistribution, and formulation limits

    1. RM

      Um, [exhales] to be honest, uh, I was a little-- I was amazed. Uh, I was amazed that the, that the claims that the problems that I encountered when I had been working on it had been solved. Uh, I didn't see how that could be the case, but I knew that a huge amount of money had been thrown at it, so it was possible.

    2. JR

      What were the problems?

    3. RM

      Uh, in my hands, it was inflammation primarily. It was also, you know, the-- it was absolutely not localizable. Uh, it was, in, in the monkey models that we tested, it was incredibly inflammatory. It didn't give long, um, levels, long, prolonged levels of expression. It was hard to make. It was kind of, back then, it was, uh, a l- almost a little bit of witchcraft. You'd drop... I mean, for me, as a graduate student, when I was doing that, it was incredibly scary because it was a couple thousand dollars' worth of reagents in a little tiny tube. And, you know, back in the late '80s, that was real money. And, uh, and it didn't always work, the reaction, so, you know, it was, it was a little bit of a wing and a prayer. Uh, but then, um, as I started working with a- with animal models and with the different formulations, I could come up with a variety of different compounds and formulations that worked pretty well in cell culture, but not so well in animals. And, uh, I spent a lot of time trying to do that, optimize that, and what I ended up with is just seeing that it, it really caused, you know, I'm sorry to use medical jargon, I'm-- that's kind of where I'm from, so that's the language I know.

    4. JR

      No, it's probably better if you do.

    5. RM

      Um, it, it caused a lot of inflammation, uh, you know, white cell infiltrates, really aggressive white cell infiltrates, in my hands, in both mice and monkeys. And I'd abandoned it as, as something that just, uh, you know, was, was useful in, in research, in particularly in cell culture, but I just didn't see it, uh, maturing as a, as an efficient delivery strategy with, uh, low risk, you know, acceptable risk, in animals. And that also became the experience in, uh, at this company that I had first joined, where a lot of the original patents were filed, ViCal. Uh, they, they abandoned the RNA because they couldn't make it. Uh, and, uh, they turned largely to this strange discovery that we had that was a negative control.... that the RNA alone or DNA alone was actually more effective in animal models, mice, for instance, than it was, uh, to use the positively charged fats. This, now people call them lipid nanoplexes, lots of fancy words around it. It was just positively charged fats of various types that were mixed, that bind the DNA or the RNA and, and kind of spontaneously assemble. And a lot of work went into trying to improve that. We did what we could in the '90s, when I was at Davis, to try to advance that technology and develop new lipids. And we had a number of them get patented, and they were marketed by Promega and others, but, uh, could never solve the, uh, delivery in vivo. But this group up in the University of British Columbia that had been banging away at this kind of related liposome tech for years and years, even before, you know, I had known anything about it, uh, were the ones that's kind of came up with the magic sauce that, uh, is used essentially by both the Moderna and Pfizer products, and that's the stuff that we've all been, um, exposed to, those that have taken it.

  5. 7:31 – 11:35

    The ‘magic sauce’ of lipid nanoparticles: UBC’s role, PEG ‘stealth’ design, and trust in experts

    1. JR

      So when you were first experimenting, you said the-- it couldn't be localized. So meaning that in the injection site, it was supposed to be there, and then your body was supposed to produce antibodies because of the injection.

    2. RM

      Yeah, and it goes all over.

    3. JR

      But it went all over the body.

    4. RM

      Yeah, it does.

    5. JR

      But the assertion, what they were telling you when you got the shot initially, was that it was not gonna leave the injection site.

    6. RM

      Yeah, and I, and I called, uh, my colleagues, uh, um, at University of British Columbia, that I had known back in the day, uh, as I was, um, grappling with whether or not to take the product because I had to travel. And as you recall, back then, forget international travel if you weren't jabbed.

    7. JR

      Even national travel.

    8. RM

      Yeah.

    9. JR

      You couldn't get on an airplane.

    10. RM

      But in Canada, it was even worse. You couldn't get on a train. Um, yeah, so, so I called, uh, uh, Peter and, and had a chat with him, and he said that they had solved the problems of the distribution, that now when you injected it, it would stay local, it would go to the draining lymph nodes, uh, it was much more effective, and that, uh, they didn't have those safety issues anymore. So that was one of the reasons why I decided to go ahead.

    11. JR

      Did you ask how they solved that problem?

    12. RM

      Yeah. Yeah, I, I asked in detail because I knew some of the nature of the formulations. Again, I don't want to get too technical, but, uh, what, what was claimed was that the incorporation of polyethylene glycol, uh, so this is-- you know, you would know that as antifreeze. Uh, but it's in the liposome world, it's long been known as a way f- to create what are known as stealth liposomes, that circulate in your body for a long period of time and make it so that these particles don't get inactivated by extracellular proteins and the liver and stuff like that. And so, uh, he was using, uh... The, the gentleman in particular is named Pieter Cullis. By the way, he's the one that should have got the Nobel Prize for these products, as far as I'm concerned, uh, and, um, got slighted in the pick. But Pieter Cullis said that he had, uh, they had experimented with a lot of different structures of the fat particles, chemical structures, so they came up with some that had these properties of staying localized, and then built the formulations in ways that were similar to what I'd done, uh, with cholesterol and other things, but then also added these, uh, shorter polyethylene glycol molecules attached with a really short organic, you'd call it fat or, or gasoline-like molecule, uh, that, that put the PEG into the liposome particle, and but it- in a way that once it got into the body, it would fall off. And so this is wh- you know, some people have the sensation, as I did with my second jab, of, you know, you get it, and then suddenly you feel tingling in the end of your fingers or things like that. That may be the PEG. But it was those advances in the components, because this i- these are self-assembling particles, uh, that were used, that, um, Pieter, uh, and his group-

    13. JR

      Peter McCall?

    14. RM

      Uh, no, Pieter Cullis.

    15. JR

      Okay.

    16. RM

      Uh, P-I-E-T-E-R.

    17. JR

      Okay.

    18. RM

      Uh, from UBC, and his group, um, built these products with, uh, and this technology, and that was-- They, they had it available, uh, um, their, their choice, uh, because they created companies for this. I mean, a ton of money must have been made, uh, because they licensed it non-exclusively to BioNtech and Moderna. And, uh, that, that's still kind of the core tech that makes this particular category of products work.

    19. JR

      And so this was enough to convince you that they had solved that problem of-

    20. RM

      Yeah, I took his word at it.

    21. JR

      - staying local.

  6. 11:35 – 19:04

    Long COVID experience and early self-treatment: famotidine, quercetin, and repurposed-drug strategy

    1. RM

      I mean, he's, he's an extremely, uh, experienced, knowledgeable, uh, liposome formulation expert, quite senior. He's older than me by another decade at least, and been doing this forever. Uh, and he asserted that he had cl-- he had solved the problems, and I believed him. I needed to travel internationally. And also, there was this buzz going around at the time that, uh, if you had long COVID, which at, you know, at the time, if you think back to then, uh, there was a whole-... cloud over even using the words long COVID.

    2. JR

      Mm-hmm.

    3. RM

      That the idea that you would have these long-lasting effects from getting the infection was controversial and not really accepted, but partially promoted. And there was a narrative, uh, that was, you know, in retrospect, actively promoted, that if you took the vaccines, and you, and if you had this symptom of this chronic malaise, uh, and, uh, loss of stamina... I mean, you're a guy that's- it's important to you to be physically fit. For me, it's been important to be physically fit all my life because I've always been a farmer and a carpenter and, and worked with my hands and my body, and I have farm chores. I still have farm chores every day, and I couldn't do them. I couldn't walk up hills. I just had lost my stamina. I'd lost my pulmonary function, and it wasn't getting better. And nobody, you know, nobody knew anything about this, what was causing it, whether it was even real, but I was experiencing it. Uh, you know, there's, there's a whole cluster of people who say there's no virus, and there's certainly not any long COVID, but I, I experienced it.

    4. JR

      So did you experience-

    5. RM

      And so it was, it was promoted that if you took the jab, and you had this symptom-

    6. JR

      Yeah

    7. RM

      ... then it would kick your immune system up. You'd get more of a response to the spike antigen, and that would allow you to clear these symptoms of long COVID. That turns out, now we have data in, just fairly recently, that, in fact, the opposite is true.

    8. JR

      So this, this idea of long COVID, so you got long COVID from the actual infection of COVID-19 before the jab?

    9. RM

      Yeah, I got infected in, uh, late, very end of February 2020. I was in Boston at a, uh, conference on drug discovery, computational drug discovery, high-throughput stuff, um, very high-tech, MIT, and staying in a, a little firehouse that had been converted to a hotel right across the street from the biotech company where- that, that the initial Boston outbreak was associated with. And I came home sick as a dog. I thought that I had, uh, influenza B, because that was the, what the narrative was that was circulating at the time. And, uh, I was just-- I remember laying in bed just feeling sick as hell, uh, hard to breathe. And my wife came in, "It's just been on the TV. Uh, um, COVID is circulating right there in Boston, where you were." Uh, so, so that was, that was pretty early on, and it hit me pretty hard. So that would have been, um, the, uh, Wuhan 1 variant, and then there was a couple of, of, uh, genetic changes that occurred, apparently in Boston, around that time.

    10. JR

      So how long did this affect you, this, this long COVID?

    11. RM

      Oh, I was, I was sick until I took the jab. Um, you know, just not, not having stamina, just feeling, uh-

    12. JR

      How many months was that?

    13. RM

      I, I had never even thought about it. Many months. Yeah.

    14. JR

      And did you try anything else to mitigate those symptoms?

    15. RM

      Yeah, I did. So, uh, um, what-- my whole story, you know, there's a whole bunch of what I did back then that never gets discussed, and that's okay. But, uh, I... You know, the kickoff was that I got this call from Wuhan. I think it was from Wuhan, from this guy that, uh, used to be CIA, named Michael Callahan, uh, who I'd worked with in the past, and he'd told me- he told me with the call that there was this virus in Wuhan, this coronavirus, that looked like it was gonna be serious. And I ought to pay attention to it, and I ought to get a team wound up to try to address this. So what I'd done, because this is coming off of what I did in Zika, you know, I'm a vaccinologist at core. Uh, but, um, developing a vaccine in the face of an outbreak historically has taken a decade, and, uh, it just isn't a practical way to address an emergent infectious disease crisis. And I had become convinced that the best way to do that was through repurposed drugs. So after I get this call, I put the team together, um, building on the technology that I'd been working with at USAMRIID during Zika, for a rapid identification of, uh, of repurposed drugs, uh, to address a, you know, new crisis. And, uh, this time, we'd really taken a computational approach. So I used some tech out of UC San Francisco to recreate one of the key proteins in, uh, in SARS-CoV-2, based on the sequence that got published from Wuhan in this January 11th, I think, and, uh, of 2020. And, uh, um, we started doing what's called computational docking of very, very large, uh, virtual libraries using, uh, Amazon AWS and, and high-throughput parallel processing, and came up with a list of compounds, and, uh, then kind of screened those against, uh, problems, adverse events, um, that kind of stuff. Uh, more coffee. Good.

    16. JR

      Want some?

    17. RM

      I would. Thank you. And, um-

    18. JR

      [cup clanking] And what was the purpose of the-

    19. RM

      So I had this list. I had, I had this list of compounds, and then I was sick as a dog. And, you know, what you get trained in, if you do clinical research, is docs don't, um, experiment on themselves. That's like breaking the rules.... but I'm lying there so sick that I'm just like: "What the hell? What do I got to lose? I'm probably gonna die." You know, I'd already-- at that point, I'd spent a lot of time already looking into the virus and what it was causing, and what people were saying it was causing.

    20. JR

      And how old were you at the time?

    21. RM

      Um, let's see. I'm 66 now, so-

    22. JR

      So sixty-one

    23. RM

      ... sixty, sixty-one. Yeah.

    24. JR

      So you were in a high-risk group?

    25. RM

      Yeah, for sure. And, and I was obese. I don't know if you noticed, but I've dropped about 40 to 50 pounds since we last met. So, uh, so I started taking some of those compounds, and one of them was, uh, this drug that is normally taken for stomach acid, called famotidine. And, uh, I got an immediate response with that. And, uh, so I also tried, uh, quercetin. That didn't seem to make so much

  7. 19:04 – 22:39

    Ivermectin, FDA resistance, and the ‘forbidden’ countermeasure narrative

    1. RM

      of an impact on me, but I experimented on myself. And, uh, famotidine, at higher doses, um, now has been verified to be helpful, and it was one of the first things out of the box that people started taking, um, even prophylactically, before we knew about, uh, ivermectin and other things. And then that went on... I mean, there's a whole thread here. We could go on for an hour about, about what was done with the repurposed drugs. I was working closely with Defense Threat Reduction Agency, um, and, uh, um, I managed to capture a few hundred million dollars, uh, and direct that towards, uh, drug repurposing, um, adaptive clinical trials, et cetera. And, uh, the thing that I zoomed in on, through a collaboration with a doc up in, uh, uh, Minnesota, was the combination of famotidine, another anti-inflammatory called celecoxib, and then the thing that really kicked it into high gear was the forbidden horse medicine- [chuckles] ... uh, ivermectin. And, uh, we got-- I managed to, working with DOD, got, um, over $100 million, uh, set up a contract. Uh, um, it got managed by SAIC, and, uh, we were gonna go after that using a very cutting-edge clinical trial, um, design. And, uh, and remember, this is the DOD. We submitted initial drug applications for using this combination of licensed drugs, well-known licensed drugs, and the FDA just dug in, um, again and again, rejected the application. So long... What they said was, we were gonna have to do cell culture tests to demonstrate the antiviral activity of ivermectin before they would allow us to proceed. Uh, and so in the end, the DOD caved, and they dropped the ivermectin component and proceeded with the, uh, famotidine and celecoxib, which showed some effect.

    2. JR

      Why were they so hesitant-

    3. RM

      [chuckles]

    4. JR

      ... or what was the resistance?

    5. RM

      I-- Your, your guess is as good as mine. I really-- People think that I have visibility into the FDA, and, yeah, I've met with them, and I have a background in regulatory affairs, but the policy decisions that were made during COVID, uh, and still to this day, are perplexing. I just don't understand it.

    6. JR

      But particularly ivermectin.

    7. RM

      Oh, it was, it was, uh, like a high sin.

    8. JR

      Yeah.

    9. RM

      They, they, they deployed, uh... What do we want to call it? Propaganda, psychological warfare, nudge, everything, just like they did after you and I had our little discussion. Um, it was, it was stunning. I mean, the, the-- like, after we had our chat, uh, um, I don't know if you remember, you asked me about, "What is this about a mass formation psychosis?"

    10. JR

      Yeah.

    11. RM

      And it-- I mean, the use-- the term "broke the internet" is overused. It broke the internet.

    12. JR

      Yeah.

    13. RM

      Uh, the search results on Google went nuts, and, uh-

    14. JR

      Well, because it perfectly described what was happening.

    15. RM

      Oh, and couldn't be-- it, oh, it couldn't possibly describe what was happening, even though every single person that heard it- [chuckles] ... knew damn well it did. But it was forbidden. I mean, this was forbidden because-

  8. 22:39 – 34:31

    Mass formation and the ‘psywar’ lens: from Desmet’s theory to digital-era manipulation

    1. JR

      For people who didn't hear our first discussion, please explain mass formation psychosis.

    2. RM

      So since then, I've had a, a shitstorm come at me for using the term psychosis coupled with mass formation. You can't, you know, the, the grief-- You think you got a lot of grief from Spotify and from, uh-

    3. JR

      Spotify was actually great.

    4. RM

      Yeah.

    5. JR

      I had no grief from them. It was from, like, Neil Young and Joni Mitchell, and-

    6. RM

      Oh, I, I-

    7. JR

      other artists.

    8. RM

      So you prob-

    9. JR

      And CNN.

    10. RM

      Then you probably don't know the whole backstory.

    11. JR

      Okay.

    12. RM

      Um, that's-- we should-- That's fun to dive into because it relates to the psychological warfare domain that now I've become a pseudo expert on, um, just in trying to understand what the hell I experienced and what's going on. So, so Mattias Desmet, who's a friend, um, at University of Ghent in Belgium, who, by the way, has been pretty well railroaded in his university now, not allowed to teach his own book on the psychological basis of totalitarianism, where- which is where that book had not come out yet, but it was, uh, the mass formation hypothesis is what was the kind of core of that book that's now published and, and widely regarded. Uh, so, so Mattias, uh, came... Mattias is somebody who, uh, as a PhD, a full professor, had long taught, uh, 20th century, uh, uh, psychology work relating to totalitarianism and thought.... uh, that goes back to Freud and beyond, really, all the way back to Plato and the Allegory of the Cave. And in particular, there was a number of, of philosophers in the 20th century associated with, uh, trying to make sense of Nazi Germany and what had happened to the German people, and really all over the world, uh, but particularly relating to the Germans. And Matias had been teaching this on a regular basis, and the way he tells the story, he had an epiphany one day that, "Oh, my God, the thing that I've been teaching, I'm living. It-- We're experiencing it. We're experiencing this process of the formation of masses," um, and the, the, you could call it crowd psychology. So mass formation, it's kind of awkward, or mass formation psychosis, which is what the term was that was used in the initial podcast that he gave out, so that's why I use that term. Uh, but, you know, it's not in the, the a- the attack was that it's not in the Diagnostics and Statistical Manual, uh, for the American Psychiatric Association, so therefore it doesn't exist. [chuckles] Uh, um, uh, but, you know, all the attacks. Uh, but, um, the core of it is that when people, to make it simple, become disassociated from society and from each other, they become extremely vulnerable to manipulation of a variety of different types. And a leader can come into that environment and, uh, offer, let's-- to simplify it, um, offer a solution to their pain, because being isolated, socially isolated, is associated with pain. We, as human beings, have a need to connect with others. It's a fundamental aspect of being human. It's what you do. I mean, you connect. That's, that's the essence of the Joe Rogan Experience, I think. Um, so we need to connect with others, and in, in certain situations where people are threatened, um, and in particular, in the modern era, where we have all of these things that drive us into isolation, most notably our electronic tools, uh, we become disassociated from our community. And when that happens, we have a strong need to become associated with community, and a, and a leader can come into that environment and basically say: I have the solution to your pain, your psychological pain. And, uh, y- what will happen is a strange phenomena where people will, rather than building social networks, let's say, horizontally to those around them, they'll attach to this strong leader, and they'll get that... They'll get fulfillment for that need to belong by this attach- attachment to that leader and following the edicts of that leader. And this leads to this phenomena that gives rise, you know, enables totalitarianism, but, uh, gives rise to this whole cluster of things that Matias described, uh, that, um, you know, he, he uses the term mass formation. In a way, that's kind of an odd artifact of translation, I guess, from the Dutch. Uh, it's-- an easier way to think of it is a crowd formation. Um, and, uh, and in his, uh, examination of the history of what happened in Nazi Germany, where things, people really went crazy, I mean, mothers were turning their children in. Uh, you know, children were being executed on, on, you know, consequent to mother's testimony, which is really strange when you think about it, just, you know, in a fundamental way. Uh, you know, we had all of this, uh, dear leader kind of stuff, uh, the, the, um, uh, linkage of, of the self and the soul to this central figure in der- deriving a sense of identity and belonging from that, that went on and, and, you know, there's still, uh, people from that generation in Germany that, um, are still caught up in, in a lot of that. That's why the German laws. Uh, and, um, so that's, that's, that's the short version. When we spoke before, I gave a much more technical, precise, uh, definition of Matias's, uh, core thesis. Uh, but, um, this-- once this happens, then people become very, very easily manipulated through propaganda and a variety of techniques that now I have a better comprehension of. I mean, then I was still just trying to make sense, just like all of us, of what the heck was going on?

    13. SP

      Right.

    14. RM

      What's with this crazy? Uh, but now, uh, it's kind of coalesced into an understanding of, of the fact that, uh, modern psychology has been weaponized. It's been intentionally weaponized in the context of military activities in the domain that, you know, one way to express it, the term is used, kind of, term of art in military jargon is fifth generation warfare, or you could call it psychological warfare. And what it distinguishes the present from, say, uh, Sun Tzu and, you know, ancient... Propaganda has always been part of warfare in humans, but, uh, we haven't had the digital world.... we haven't had modern psychology, we haven't had nudge technology, we haven't had all these tools that allow the control of information, thought, um, perception, feelings, emotions, uh, that have become commonplace. And that, you know, is, is, and has, has, you know, this, this suite of technology and capabilities that we saw deployed in all of us, were, uh, built in a kind of a structured way, largely by UK and US leadership in the intelligence community, as a weapon of war to counter these, uh, successful insurgencies that we keep losing wars over. Uh, you know, Vietnam being a notable example all the way through Afghanistan. And, uh, um, so that- that's why it was built, uh, but then that tech, um, got deployed by governments against their own citizens. And this was really launched, uh, in large part, uh, in the United States by a presidential directive from Barack Obama. I'm not making this up. Uh, you can look it up. And by the way, the presidential directive is still in place, that established the, uh, um, nudge technology units in the United States. They were already operating in the UK, and in the UK, it's quite advanced. When you look at UK politics right now and what's going on there with all the censorship and everything, you know, this is no joke. We're, we're barreling right to that endpoint, same as Canada has. Uh, you know, we're just a little bit behind. And, uh, there they-- you know, we have the benefit of the First Amendment and a Constitution, and, um, you know, often on courts, but, uh, there they, they don't have those obstacles. And the government believes in the UK, that once they have won an election, it's perfectly acceptable to deploy this modern psychology and information control technology on their own population. And I argue that once that Rubicon is crossed, the idea of democracy, because the tech is so powerful, becomes completely perverted. And we got a good, hard taste of that during COVID. What, what you and I experienced, what you experienced with ivermectin, what you experienced with, uh, you know, just talking about your own experiences, uh, and the blowback that happened after we did that little hit, uh, um, is, is a super powerful, clear case study in understanding this intersection of modern psychology, uh, warfare technology, and, uh, the digital world, uh, and, and algorithmic control of information, the, uh, creation of digital ava- av- avatars for all of us, the application in now, in present, of artificial intelligence to custom craft a messaging, uh, that gets fed into our digital domains on a regular basis in order to, you know, sell us whatever, uh, but also to shape how we think and, uh, to control what information we get access to all the time. [chuckles] Just to give an example, my wife, who does a lot of our research for our Substack, was talking to me the other day. She, she just gave me a couple examples where, uh, um, stories that were in corporate media in the United States that weren't listing certain key names or whatever, um, she said, "I just go to the Hindustan Times. Hindustan Times is a great source for all the stuff that we're not allowed to see here in the United States." You're now in an, in an environment, in an information environment, where you cannot,

  9. 34:31 – 1:02:18

    Censorship-by-ecosystem: Coca-Cola, GARM, ad pressure, and the CDC ‘banner’ as a nudge tool

    1. RM

      um, uh, rely on... But we all know that. You can't rely on corporate media, but the, but the, the rules, the boundaries that are being set up about information are profound, and they're completely distorting our ability to, uh, process what's happening around us. Can I give you the example of what actually happened? You, you said in, in our example, with the blowback in Spotify, this is documented by a, a report out, um, from the House about COVID and what happened. And that report only carries just through to the early part of the vaccines, and then it stops. They-- for some reason, they didn't really wanna go down the road to the vaccines. They did talk a lot about the, um, events around, uh, the, let's say, lab leak hypothesis, uh, which is allowed. You're, you're allowed in DC now to talk about that.

    2. JR

      Finally.

    3. RM

      Yeah. You're still-

    4. JR

      Absolutely.

    5. RM

      You're... Well, and-

    6. JR

      It was about four years later, you were allowed.

    7. RM

      Yeah, yeah, yeah.

    8. JR

      Yeah.

    9. RM

      Um, uh, so what was documented was that, uh, the, the trail of events was that we had our discussion. That triggered, and now this is gonna sound bizarre, but this is what's documented. That triggered Coca-Cola Corporation to complain to the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, which is created by the World Economic Forum. It is one of these global aggregators that controls advertising. The Global Alliance for Responsible Media, which, by the way, had a dust-up with, uh, Elon Musk and lost, and they closed it down as a nonprofit. It still exists in other ways, but as a structure that could be sued by X, it disappeared when he stood up against it.... but Global Alliance for Responsible Media had a socket with Google AdSense, by the way. So they control the advertising ecosystem, which kind of matters to Spotify. So Coca-Cola complains to GARM, saying, "This guy, Rogan, you gotta shut him down, okay? You gotta put pressure on Spotify." So Spotify gets the message from GARM that, "We're gonna-- We're threatening to pull your advertising," okay? Now, uh, what happens between that and your experience, I don't know. You know, it's not transparent to me what you experienced. Uh, yeah, we all remember the, um, Laurel Canyon crowd saying they were gonna pull their catalogs, which they didn't actually own, right? That was [chuckles] that was another thing. And then they, they went after you, uh, with this, uh, mashup of N-word, uh, historic, uh, events. Um, you know, there was clearly a concerted effort to take out Joe Rogan, uh, much more than to take out Robert Malone. And, uh, so then the question comes, well, why the heck would Coca-Cola be the socket with the Global Alliance for Responsible-- one of the biggest advertisers in the world, right? Why would Coca-Cola give a hooey about what Joe Rogan said to Robert Malone on, you know, on New Year's Eve? Uh, Coca-Cola is really tight with the CDC. Coca-Cola has funded buildings at the CDC. Coca-Cola funds the, um, CDC Foundation, Foundation for the CDC, as does Bill and Melinda Gates, has done all the major vaccine manufacturers, et cetera, et cetera. The appearance is, I can't verify this, that CDC acted through its ally, Coca-Cola. Why are they allies? What's Coca-Cola got to do with CDC? The angle there is that Coca-Cola wanted the CDC to get a WHO to not implement restrictions in messaging about sugar use.

    10. JR

      Hmm.

    11. RM

      Okay? They didn't want those messages. Remember, this is at the heart of the inverted food triangle now.

    12. JR

      Right.

    13. RM

      The, the, the old food triangle was the product of sugar lobby. I mean, the sugar lobby is incredibly powerful because this stuff is addictive. I mean, it's, it's like having the cocaine lobby, [chuckles] right? Um, well, and, you know, that's an interesting, uh, analogy, because, of course, the history of Coca-Cola.

    14. JR

      Right.

    15. RM

      Uh, but, um, so sugar's addictive. Uh, the, the CDC-- Coca-Cola didn't want the CD... Wanted the CDC to influence public health policy to avoid, um, uh, global positions on the risks associated with sugar intake, because it would potentially hurt their market share, wouldn't it? You know, they're a major globalized company. So that's-- that little ecosystem that I just described illustrates what we're dealing with here, and the many ways that, um, all of this kind of influence and messaging and signaling happens in this kind of integrated, horizontally and vertically, ecosystem that we live in right now. And one of the things that came out of that, you'll recall, was that you were asked, as I recall, you, you gave this, you know, "I've, I've had a hostage video." I think that was a close to a hostage video from you back in the day when you were saying, "This is what I'm going to do." Uh, it was like out on your porch or something. Um, I remember I was sitting around a campfire in Maui, quite literally, when somebody said, "Oh, did you just see this from Rogan?" And, uh, a matter of fact, I was sitting around Gavin de Becker's, uh, campfire at that time, somebody that you know. And, uh, so, um, the compromise was that there would be a little trailer put at the bottom of that episode. And by the way, you probably know, that episode, for a long time, became very hard to find. Uh, it was, it was basically blacklisted from the search engines, et cetera, et cetera. But you- it carries, and I'm-- I think it still does, that little banner that says, you know, "You should go to the CDC if you want the true-

    16. JR

      Mm-hmm

    17. RM

      ... true about COVID." And you can still find that, those kinds of banners popping up all the time on YouTube. If you, if you talk about vaccines-

    18. JR

      Right

    19. RM

      ... or COVID vaccines, that will get-- If, if you pass the filters, if, if YouTube will allow that to still be up, um, 'cause you didn't say something, whatever it is, uh, then you'll get the little banner. Okay, that banner is pushed out by the nudge units at the CDC. Okay, that is nudge technology. It is all around us all the time, and it's, it's basically still, uh, public policy consequent to the old Obama presidential directive that still hasn't been rescinded. Uh, you know, I love President Trump. I think he's doing amazing things. I think he's amazingly brave. Uh, I just mentioned our friend Gavin de Becker, referred to Trump the other day when I saw Gavin in, in, uh, Maui, as a once-in-500-year leader, and that's, that's not, that's not nothing coming from Gavin. And, uh, so I'm, I'm a big supporter, but the President has still left in place this mechanism that exists, uh, that directs the federal government to use nudge technology and related, uh, what I assert is psychological warfare technology on the American populace.

    20. JR

      Right. This is from back in, what was it? 2015 or something like that?

    21. RM

      Yeah, it's, it's quite early. Um-

    22. JR

      Yeah.

    23. RM

      And then you had his-- you had Obama's subsequent, like, the notorious speech at Hoover, at Stanford.... where he talks about in order to preserve democracy, we're going to have, basically, he says we're gonna have to have censorship-

    24. JR

      Right

    25. RM

      - uh, in order to preserve democracy or w- whatever democracy is.

    26. JR

      This is, for people that don't know what we're talking about, we're relating to the Smith-Mundt Act?

    27. RM

      The Smith-Mundt, everybody p- focuses on Smith-Mundt.

    28. JR

      Okay.

    29. RM

      Um, but as I examined Smith-Mundt, and we did an essay on this in the Substack, um, you know, like three years ago, uh, 'cause, uh, that was the kind of the narrative that was coming out in, let's say, our side of alternative media.

    30. JR

      Right.

  10. 1:02:18 – 1:09:23

    The repurposed-drug battlefield: hydroxychloroquine, Zelenko, retracted studies, and Cochrane disputes

    1. RM

      They don't understand it, it's off-patent, and it, it-- the response is as if it represents a significant threat to some business interests. It's hard to discern that. And you mentioned Z-Pak, so that's another fascinating one. And to say that it was only ivermectin, ivermectin was the most prominent, but they were actually effective in shutting down, uh, the, the Z-Pak, um, uh, the use of hydroxychloroquine. And hydroxychloroquine has a fascinating story. When you mention Z-Pak, you're talking about Zev Zelenko, and Zev was the one that wrote the letter to the president saying, "Hey, here's this data and this information about this drug that is off-patent. Um, we have a huge, uh, portfolio of experience in using it, um, millions and millions of doses. It's safe in pregnancy. Uh, what's not to like here?" And, and the story of that is, is a fascinating microcosm because it goes back to Ralph Baric. Ralph Baric had published that, um, back years ago, when... You know, he's, he's kind of the guru of coronaviruses, and a good case can be made that he had his fingers all over the engineering of this particular virus. Uh, so he had published that this drug was effective against coronaviruses, and Zev, uh, Zelenko, who's passed away now, um, uh, got engaged in trying to find some way to help his patients in New York with, uh, recovering from COVID and, uh, treating COVID. And he went back, did a deep dive into, into Baric's work, pulled out this drug, hydroxychloroquine, that had been recommended, wrote to the president about it, started-- he got clinical experience with it. Um, and, you know, caveat, um, uh, Mickey Willis is doing a, uh, bio, uh, on Zev now, um, and I'm involved in that, so conflict of interest. But, uh, he was the one that pulled it out, sent the letter to the president with his clinical experience. The president tasked Peter Navarro with sourcing the drug for the... And, and Peter, an economist, went to town. I remember, uh, the company I was working with, Allchem at the time, getting a call from Peter: "Can you come up with some way to make more of this drug here domestically? We want to source it so we have enough doses for everybody." And then, I think it was Lancet, published this paper that had totally made-up data that trashed the drug, said that it's toxic, doesn't work, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. It was all fake, okay? They pulled the paper when it became revealed that it was based on non-existent data, that it was more propaganda published in one of the top medical journals in the United States. But by that time, it was completely crushed. So they didn't have to go after Z-Stack. They'd already killed Z-Stack. Ivermectin, though, that was a new threat, and one of the reasons why it was a threat was there was a, um, meta-analysis that had been done at the Cochrane. So the Cochrane Institute in the UK is like, you know, w-w-w, the holy grail for analysis of drugs, uh, and biologics and, uh, this process of meta-analysis. They kind of, they kind of wrote the rules for how to do it. And they had done an analysis that showed that ivermectin was quite effective. Uh, and, um, then something happened, and, uh, there was some influence exerted, and suddenly that meta-analysis got quenched, it got squashed. Um, there were two investigators that, uh, were involved in building that. Um, one kind of went underground and, and got a big grant and carried on as an academic. The other one got so pissed off that she created this organization called the World Council for Health. That's Tess Laurie. And, uh, she really objected to what happened. But ivermectin-... you know, there was a signal there. There was a clear signal there, there was data supporting that signal, and then something happened to cause that meta-analysis to be restructured, and certain studies that were showing how effective it was to be thrown out, and then the suppression of the data coming out of India. You remember that?

    2. JR

      Mm-hmm. Uh, Uttar Pradesh.

    3. RM

      And, and Uttar Pradesh, and, and, uh, and it, I guess it had kinda-- it's like the cat was out of the bag, and they had trouble putting it back in, so they just... My sense is, they turned up the amplitude on the, on the, uh, propaganda and the censorship in order to try to overcome this. And, and I'm pretty sure-- Remember, who was it that held the original patent? Merck. Now, I was involved, um, as an observer on behalf of, of DTRA, to the active trials that were going on under the Foundation for NIH, which is sponsored in a significant way by Merck, and which is now headed up by the former head of Merck Vaccines, Julie Gerberding. Uh, Bobby can't get her out. It's the rules. Uh, and they were running these clinical trials, including the clinical trial that essentially by tweaking the dosing, et cetera, made it so that they came up with a result suggesting that ivermectin is not effective. There, there was a whole lot of manipulation, and the why part, still s- the best explanation I've heard is that it had a lot to do with, uh, the risk that if there was an effective countermeasure, then the utilization of the PREP Act and the emergency countermeasures, uh, um, uh, to a process to enable fast-tracking of these vaccines, uh, using this new technology, uh, would no longer be valid. 'Cause those are the rules, is if there's an existing countermeasure, then you can't, uh, implement those clauses.

    4. JR

      So it's all about emergency use authorization.

    5. RM

      It, it, it's the... I don't know that that's the case-

    6. JR

      It's the only thing that makes sense.

    7. RM

      It's- it is. It's-

    8. JR

      The only thing that makes sense when you see how much profit they made, like-

    9. RM

      Which, which was enormous.

    10. JR

      Enormous. So it was effective. And-

    11. RM

      Yeah

    12. JR

      ... all that propaganda, regardless of how much exposed them and exposed their methods, they made hundreds of billions of dollars.

  11. 1:09:23 – 1:21:17

    Profit, power, and the COVID wealth transfer—plus the ‘safe and effective’ messaging machine

    1. RM

      Uh, uh, it- well, and, and that, that the ugliest part of all of this, I mean, people, the big, big picture when I talk to people that are still kind of on the fence trying to make sense out of it, you know, there's still a lot of those folks out there. The, the thing that kind of gets into their brain is the greatest upward transfer of wealth in modern history occurred during COVID.

    2. JR

      Yeah.

    3. RM

      It wasn't just the vaccines; it was the whole enterprise. And-

    4. JR

      With the lockdowns.

    5. RM

      Lockdowns, all the, the, what was done to small businesses-

    6. JR

      Yeah

    7. RM

      ... what was done, uh, to the economy, the stimulus packages, they're still digging out of all of that fraud. Uh, it, it, you know, i- in retrospect, uh, for, for average folks, uh, that are just trying to put food on the table and pay their rent, uh, to look at, in retrospect, what was, l- you know, quite literally done to them, the middle class was hollowed out in, like, on hyperspeed. Uh, this... So yeah, I'm still pissed off about this. [laughing]

    8. JR

      Well, you should be. The thing is, not enough people are, and so many people let it go. And part of the reason why not enough people are pissed off about it is because they took the vaccine, and they want to justify their decision. And you will talk to a lot of people that make this blanket claim, "The vaccine saved millions of lives," and they'll just say that.

    9. RM

      Yeah, because when you say-

    10. JR

      And when you say-

    11. RM

      That's the propaganda, along with false-

    12. JR

      Right

    13. RM

      ... with safe and effective, that was a promoted narrative, and-

    14. JR

      Right

    15. RM

      ... that was, by the way, the rationale given by the Nobel Prize committee to award to Karikó and Weissman, was that these products, which they had, uh, the thesis is they had been playing the central role. I disagree. I think Pieter Cullis is the one that should have got it. If you're gonna give it for, if you're gonna give it for these vaccines, it was Pieter Cullis and his team at UBC that really was the enabling tech. But be that as it may, the decision's made, and the committee said, basically, uh, "You know, millions of lives have been saved, and by giving this Nobel at this time, we are- we hope that it will promote more people to accept this product."

    16. JR

      Hmm.

    17. RM

      That, that was explicitly the logic given at the time, and that reflects what was really a thrust vector. W- Joe, I, I've... You know, it's quite a bizarre world since we met. [chuckles]

    18. JR

      Very.

    19. RM

      Uh, and, and so I've been sucked into, uh, to call it the center right of Europe is a little bit of a misnomer because they're all socialists, as far as I'm concerned, Giorgia Meloni and everybody else. But, you know, compared to the far left, uh, they're labeled as neo-Nazis. But I've been traveling to Europe, interacting with these people. You think it was bad for us? The European Union and the UK and the Canada were an order of magnitude worse. That we, we, we should be so grateful that we live in this country at this time, and that we still have something like a functioning constitution with a First and Second Amendment. Uh, look at the poor suckers in Australia-

    20. JR

      Yeah

    21. RM

      ... and New Zealand.

    22. JR

      Yeah.

    23. RM

      ... uh, you know, it, uh, remind yourself, it could be a heck of a lot worse here, and it has been a heck of a lot worse in, in Europe. I've got buddies in Romania, in the leading, uh, um, alternative party, you know, calling it center right, let's say. But, um, uh, that, uh, you know, recently, I think it was the vice president that came out and said specifically that that last election was stolen. It was in, in Romania. Georgescu, uh, they tried to put in jail, and the logic was that, uh, I think it was TikTok, supporting his campaign had been sponsored by the Russians. It was the same game that they played against Trump of Russian collusion. They played that same book in Romania successfully. But in the European Union environment, under the European Council, they, they don't, you know, they ain't got a constitution, and they can just step right in and, and throw you in jail, inactivate your candidacy, do whatever, if you represent a populist threat to the existing structure. We talk about the deep state, but it's- it, it doesn't, you know... Yeah, it's a problem here, but and, and thank, yeah, Mike Benz, I defer to-

    24. JR

      Yeah

    25. RM

      ... as, as a notable expert in that space. But, uh, it's, it's a lot worse in Europe and Australia and Canada and the UK, and, uh, I think, you know, we're, we're in a, in a perilous time here in the United States where, you know, we have the midterm coming up, but, but people like Bobby are making progress. And these dissident physicians that have risked so many things, uh, and I'm just one. You know, people- I hear people saying: "Oh, Robert, Robert, they've been so mean to you." I'm like: "Come on, guys, um, you think they've been mean to me? Then look at what they did to Bobby." And then i- if, if, you know... And then look, I don't have a nick out of my ear, you know? Look at what they did to Trump. What they did to me is just... I'm, I'm nobody compared to that, and they're willing to deploy that kind of capability against me. Uh, think about what's really going on at the higher levels, where, where the big games are being played. And, uh, you know, at least we can see it now. At least we have s- for those of us that have our eyes open-

    26. JR

      Yeah

    27. RM

      ... we have some ability to be aware. But what, what I've spent the last two years mostly trying to convince people about, I hardly ever talk about RNA. I sit, um... Oh, I- Joe, I gotta give a caveat. Um, forgive me. Um, the opinions I'm expressing here are my own, and not those of the US government, the CDC, or the ACIP. There, I said it. [chuckles] Okay. Um, but you know, we- we're in a moment where we're seeing this, how the levers, the gears of how all this works.

    28. JR

      Yeah.

    29. RM

      Give you an example. Tomorrow, Friday, February 13th, what could possibly go wrong? Uh, um, hopefully, my plane flight out of here works okay- [chuckles] ... and they don't have a drone attack or something, [chuckles] right? Um, so tomorrow there's a lawsuit, uh, filed on behalf of the American Academy of Pediat- Pediatrics, that seeks to shut down the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and, uh, the changes that Bobby's implemented there, uh, and, uh, force all of that to go back to the way things were when it was functionally controlled by the professional societies, and particularly the American Academy of Pediatrics. They, they, they- we talk about this, you know, propaganda and weaponization and, and, uh, lawfare, and those things, and we talk about it as if it only happened in the last administration. It's, it's still ongoing all the time, and it is gonna go big time if, if the House turns, which I think it probably will. I mean, there's a good chance that they've already drawn up articles of impeachment against Secretary Kennedy. They're talking about articles of impeachment against President Trump. We're about to go into another two years of stagnation, uh, and s- and, um, you know, functional, uh, what do we call it? We can't call it civil war. Um, uh, you know, um, war by other means, uh, is, is where we're heading right now. But at this moment, uh, I'm seeing major movement. You know, Kennedy is doing great stuff. The President is doing great stuff. We're seeing a transformation in America's global reach, uh, totally restructuring global politics. And on the health side, the Make America Healthy Again movement, you know, there's, there's some pushback against that, and a heck of a lot of propaganda being deployed against it.

    30. JR

      Well, it's this old quote that seems sort of abstract for most people most of the time, but rings kind of true, but you're finding it true more and more: "Money is the root of all evil."

  12. 1:21:17 – 1:30:15

    Building an independent media livelihood: Substack, shadowbanning claims, and why audiences shifted

    1. JR

      And you can't control... Like, one of the things that did happen during COVID is these places like CNN, people stopped going to for information. They don't believe them anymore. There's just too much bullshit, and no one got in trouble for spreading that bullshit. There was no corrections, no redactions, no, no apologies.

    2. RM

      Yeah.

    3. JR

      And so-

    4. RM

      No acknowledgement

    5. JR

      ... people now, more than ever in my lifetime, mistrust mainstream media, and polls show that. The polls show that the trust of mainstream media is at an all-time low, for good reason. They did it to themselves. They prostituted themselves out to the pharmaceutical drug companies. They had to say what they had to say on television. People knew what they were saying was incorrect, and now no one trusts them.

    6. RM

      So to this thread, uh, about four years ago, I, I read a, a report from the Trusted News Initiative. You remember the TNI?

    7. JR

      Yeah.

    8. RM

      It was launched by the BBC-

    9. JR

      Right

    10. RM

      ... uh, to counter Russian disinformation-

    11. JR

      Hmm

    12. RM

      ... and then repurposed to counter vaccine disinformation. Uh, and they-- And I read this report about... I'd gone on your show.

    13. JR

      Mm-hmm.

    14. RM

      So I was a little bit of a fan. Uh, forgive me. [chuckles] Uh, and, um, so I'm reading this report, and they're talking about threats to the industry, because TNI is basically another trade organization. It's another guild.

    15. JR

      Mm-hmm.

    16. RM

      Uh, it's a global, uh, major media guild. And, uh, so they're, they're doing this internal analysis and reporting, and, and they're talking about the risk vectors that they face. And they had a whole great big section on Joe Rogan.

    17. JR

      [chuckles]

    18. RM

      Joe Rogan represents, uh... That, that was, that was their, uh, threat. That, that was the major threat to their business model, is you and what you represent, you as a metaphor for this new information economy, and by God, they called it right. It's, it's... And, and when I-- This, again, this has been part of my journey. When I realized what I was experiencing and what it meant to come on your show and have that, um, event occur, which w- by the way, blew up my subscribers on Substack. Thank you so much.

    19. JR

      Congratulations.

    20. RM

      I still get a wave every year about in the, in the month following, so January, I get a big bump in revenue, because-

    21. JR

      Well, it blew up our subscribers on Spotify, too. During the heat of it-

    22. RM

      [chuckles]

    23. JR

      ... we gained, in one month, we gained 2 million subscribers.

    24. RM

      I had-

    25. JR

      What are we at now, Jamie?

    26. RM

      I had, I had... Oh, yeah, please, share.

    27. JR

      What is the, the, what's the Spotify subscribers? I never even... I know YouTube is over 20, 20 million. What is Spotify at?

    28. RM

      So while he's looking that up, I had this bizarre experience. You know, I'm just an old gray-haired guy with a, with, you know, about to have my 47th wedding anniversary.

    29. JR

      Congratulations.

    30. RM

      Thank you. Um, I'm proud of it. Um, uh, I would have 20-year-olds come up in the street and fist bump me.

  13. 1:30:15 – 1:33:24

    Inside government now: ACIP role, vaccine policy fights, and challenges to entrenched systems

    1. RM

      We, we can talk about whatever we want, and yeah, now that I'm pseudo government employee, I'm a special government employee without pay. Whew! Boy, that's like the worst of both worlds.

    2. JR

      [chuckles]

    3. RM

      Um, 'cause, 'cause there's-- I have... The, the truth is, um, I have guardrails that, that constrain me in a way that I didn't used to be constrained, uh, for talking about some things. You know, I, I have to, uh, live in this world. I interface with, uh, the secretary and, and with the deputy chief of staff and other people, and now I'm s- working with the State Department more. Uh, and, um, so, you know, I have to, I have to be more mindful.

    4. JR

      What is your function? Like, what, what do you do over there?

    5. RM

      At State or-

    6. JR

      Yeah, both. When you're working for the government-

    7. RM

      S-

    8. JR

      ... like, how do they use your services?

    9. RM

      So, um, I-... the special government employee category is a designation from the executive branch. It's the one that Elon had. I like to say I'm in the same category as Elon was, only without all the money. Um, uh, so, uh, he was a SGE without pay. I'm an SGE without pay, and, uh, because I serve on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the CDC, which is this, uh, they call it, it's a FACA committee, Federal Advisory Committee Act, that advises the director of the CDC, that's its only job, on vaccine policy. Okay? Um, so I'm the vice chair, which is largely honorary. What that means is that if the chair isn't there, I draw the short straw, and I have to chair those bloody meetings, like the last one for hepatitis B, birth dose, which was, uh, just a, a slugfest. Ugly. The worst meeting I've ever had to adjudicate my entire life. Um, but for the most part, I sit on the subcommittees. I sit on the COVID Working Group subcommittee. Um, I'm not supposed to talk about the next meeting, I was told, uh, um, uh, two days ago. Uh, so, uh, that's one of my, my guardrails.

    10. JR

      Right.

    11. RM

      Uh, but, uh, stay tuned, uh, for what is gonna come down if the AAP lawsuit doesn't prevail, and we're allowed to actually have the meeting. Uh, but so that's that. I'm also the chair of the Influenza Working Group, uh, stay tuned for that. Uh, and now I am-- So, and I-- From time to time, the secretary asks me to help him sort out some issue. You know, I'll get a phone call. [chuckles] I once got a phone call on, um, on the Big Island. Uh, I did this recent series of rallies to try to, um, w- you know-- To recap, the whole reason why that we did that first hit was to try to publicize the Stop the Mandates rally in DC. That was the, that was the subtext for that, as you'll recall, and I forgot to even mention it. We had to go back in to, to do another shoot for that, remember? I'm still fighting that same battle of trying to stop these mandated vaccines. So I'm sitting

  14. 1:33:24 – 1:57:35

    Animal disease policy and ‘lab leak’ fears: bird flu culling, resistant breeding, and Spain’s swine fever case

    1. RM

      there in Hawaii, I'm going to another one of these rallies. I get a call out of the blue from one of Bobby's people, and they want some advice about a topic having to do with the decision he has to make about spending money on another, uh, biodefense initiative. Um, so I get that kind of stuff. Uh, he called me soon after he was confirmed to get my opinion about what was going on in the chicken industry and all the slaughter-

    2. JR

      Mm

    3. RM

      ... that was happening for bird flu.

    4. JR

      Right.

    5. RM

      And I told him, "This doesn't make sense. It's not good policy. There's no way you can get rid of bird flu doing this. It's in the wild bird populations, and this is just nonsensical what they're doing."

    6. JR

      Why do you think they did that?

    7. RM

      [inhales] Okay, so that's, that's interesting, that now we drive into a kind of public health and vaccinology. Uh, you're asking the why.

    8. JR

      Yeah.

    9. RM

      And it's been a long-standing policy-

    10. JR

      'Cause they killed millions of chickens, right?

    11. RM

      They do it every time.

    12. JR

      Every time-

    13. RM

      Uh, it's-

    14. JR

      ... there's a bird flu.

    15. RM

      Yeah. I- it's, it's in, in any other outbreak. So right now, in Spain, I just wrote an essay about this. It was the maybe the biggest reveal on what's going on in Spain right now. There's a Spanish research lab that's been collaborating with the USDA that is investigating swine fever virus, and they're actually doing gain-of-function research on swine fever virus. Swine fever virus, African swine fever virus, kills pigs like crazy. Um, and already China has locked down and will not accept Spanish pork, and it is a lab leak.

    16. JR

      Really?

    17. RM

      And, and there was a bunch of dead hogs last November around this facility, and now it's the, the Spanish and the European Union are, are, you know, blowing a circuit over this, um, because, uh, um, it's really compromised the Spanish pork industry. So, so this kind of stuff, when, when this happens, the, the reaction is: We just have to kill all of them. We have to kill all the potential carriers. And this has been the "wisdom," quote, uh, of in, in this kind of, uh, um, agrarian animal husbandry world for a long time, in the context, in particular, of factory farming. So the logic is that if you were to vaccinate these birds with a leaky vaccine, which, you know, COVID was a leaky vaccine, influenza is a leaky vaccine, if you give the birds a leaky vaccine, what you'll get out of that-

    18. JR

      Variants

    19. RM

      ... is precisely vaccine-resistant flu.

    20. JR

      Right.

    21. RM

      Okay? And so we, we have no choice, has been the logic, but to exterm-- You know, like the ostriches in Canada. You remember that story?

    22. JR

      Yeah.

    23. RM

      That was shocking.

    24. JR

      Yeah.

    25. RM

      Okay, there was no logic behind that. It's, it's gone-- It's become entrenched as policy, as kind of this reflexive knee-jerk thing, that if we have an outbreak, what we do is we kill, because we can't control the virus, and the things that we could do to control the virus aren't really gonna control it, and it's actually gonna make things worse.

    26. JR

      Is there any logic to that?

    27. RM

      Well, uh, y- we, we can argue-

    28. JR

      When you kill-

    29. RM

      ... at the margins. We can argue at the margins, but when you got something that... If you had something that didn't have a natural reservoir, uh, then, then you can make the case that, that you could eliminate it in that geographic population and keep it from spreading outside. But when you have a natural reservoir, like-

    30. JR

      Explain that.

  15. 1:57:35 – 2:23:55

    Biotech acceleration, artificial womb debate, and the ethics of a ‘Gattaca’ future

    1. RM

      I mean, what we're talking about-- So I, I wrote an essay about, um, uh, uh, low-risk, high-impact events, which is what we're talking about. Uh, another example of a low-risk, high-impact event, uh, is gene drive technology that Gates is promoting to exterminate the mosquitoes, for example.

    2. JR

      Mm.

    3. RM

      You know, gene drive technology can be used to exterminate a species, particularly ones that have a high reproductive rate. And, uh, you know, it's another one that is a CRISPR application. Uh, but there's a whole school of thought that gene drive tech should never be let out of the box into the environment, because in, in the, uh, what's-- You know, there are those that are actively promoting its use, uh, and, uh, to eliminate bad stuff. And, uh, you know, we're all for eliminating bad stuff, uh, um, uh, you know, organisms, insects, worms, uh, flies, stuff. Uh, and yet it... And, and we can do experiments where we say, "Oh, we'll cultivate this kind of fly together with that kind of fly, and only these flies are gonna have gene drive, and we're gonna look for whether or not it gets over into these flies. And if it doesn't, then we can conclude that it's unlikely." But as Brett would tell you, um, we're dealing with ecosystems here, really complex ecosystems. And the, the risk environment now that I think grown-ups have to acknowledge coming out of COVID, you know, the big lessons, we can, we can, we can talk about these egregious things that we've all experienced that have been put on us. But the big picture is, this thing came out, and I'm convinced it was engineered. I'm-- I, I believe the most likely hypothesis is not that it was intentionally released, I still think that's a possibility, but that it was an unintentional, uh, release, uh, an infection of, of a lab worker or something like that, that let it get out, because that's what happens again and again in these-

    4. JR

      Right

    5. RM

      ... facilities. Uh, the, these low-probability events can have extremely high impacts, and as we've seen, global impacts. And we have to rethink how we're managing risk, which is, as I mentioned, Retsef's kind of core competence. And, and that logic runs up against this belief that, "Well, it hasn't happened so far, and I'm an expert, and I have the right to play around in this, in this sandbox that I've helped develop. I know more than you do. How can you tell me that I shouldn't be doing that? You don't have the right to tell me. I'm the expert in this space." And, uh, to come into that environment and say, "Look, guys, you're playing around with stuff that could have a very high impact, even though it hasn't happened yet, and you've got to, to rethink, uh, what is acceptable." And, and I think that, that... You know, we were talking a moment about the State Department and, uh, um, uh, weapon control. We're now in an environment where the speed of, of, um, growth, of the power of biotechnology is accelerating. It's going exponential, just like what we saw with semiconductors. And, uh, w- our bioethics, our regulatory structures, our, our way of thinking about those risks is completely inable, unable to-... keep up with the pace of the advance, and that is creating a, a whole new threat scene. Not to scare people. I mean, I, I- as I was thinking about coming on here, I was saying to myself: "Okay, Robert, just take a deep breath. It's only Joe Rogan. He's a human, and, uh, you wanna stay positive." And I, I don't wanna go dark and just scare people, but we've got to take, um... We've got to recognize that, uh, this is a different world now. We have all of this digital tech and, and what it means, and information control, and, and suppression, and manipulation psychologically, uh, basically programming, customized programming, uh, through avatars and all of this power. But we also have, in parallel, this world of rapidly advancing biotechnology that is, you know, for, for the likes of Yuval Harari and those that are imagining a future of transhumanism. Uh, and all of that means, uh, we're, we are moving very rapidly into a world, uh, that we can hardly even process. One of the big thrust vectors in Silicon Valley right now relating to reproductive rights has to do with the development of artificial wombs. You know, these, these wealthy, um, privileged people don't wanna carry their own babies, and I guess surrogates are too cumbersome or risky.

    6. JR

      So they're really talking about-

    7. RM

      It's not talking

    8. JR

      ... a baby that-

    9. RM

      It, it's not talking. They're, they're- we're gonna run an essay about this soon. They already have a lamb that they have g- grown de novo in an artificial womb.

    10. JR

      Oh, God!

    11. RM

      We're, we're, we're there, okay? And, and these people see it as freeing. This, this is, this is, um, more women's rights. Uh, you know, we, we don't need to, uh, have the organic process of carrying a baby, and that's a good thing, they believe. It, you know, completely disregarding that there is a whole lot of subtle, complex interactions that occur between mother and fetus-

    12. JR

      Yes

    13. RM

      ... in the womb, okay, that gives rise to-

    14. JR

      Right, you're-- who knows what kind of humans you're gonna develop with no interaction with the mother at all-

    15. RM

      But-

    16. JR

      ... the entire nine months where they're developing?

    17. RM

      But that-

    18. JR

      The exchange of hormones.

    19. RM

      But for the sake of convenience, we wanna do that.

    20. JR

      Oh, God.

    21. RM

      Okay? And that, what that w- you know... Zoom in on that, okay? That has all kinds of implications. It has implications for organ transplantation. My friend Jan Jekielek, I don't know if you know Jan, if you've ever had him on, you, you might want to sometime, interesting character. He is the Washington bureau chief for this, uh, newspaper that is defamed all the time, ridiculed, Epoch Times.

    22. JR

      Mm-hmm.

    23. RM

      Okay, which I think is, like, the only print newspaper left in the United States that's worth reading, that ascribes to classical journalism. But he's just come out with a book about, um, organ harvesting in China and organ harvesting on demand, documenting that they are using live prisoners, and keeping them in compounds, and testing them for their genetic background and characteristics, and then harvesting them when necessary to provide organs for transplantation, largely to Westerners, because it is enormously profitable, and also to leaders in the CCP. This is what all this brouhaha was about the open mic event with Putin, about, uh, we can use transplantation to let us live another 100 years. That... Remember that little clip? So th- this- in, in a world in which we can have artificial wombs, um, we can grow our own clones to provide donor tissue, to buy- provide an insurance policy.

    24. JR

      Oh.

    25. RM

      We, we are right at the doorstep of that, okay?

    26. JR

      Again, demonic. It sounds demonic. I mean, is a soul a real thing? Just because it can't be quantified by science, you can't measure it... I mean, the concept of the soul-

    27. RM

      Thank you

    28. JR

      ... has always existed. If that's a real thing, w- who knows what you're doing, creating a human being from an artificial womb? Who knows what kind of processes are happening?

    29. RM

      Thank you.

    30. JR

      We, we know that stress on the mother imparts all sorts of unwanted characteristics in children. We know that. We know, like-

  16. 2:23:55 – 2:33:22

    From UAPs to microreactors: speculation about next-era physics—and closing reflections

    1. RM

      I mean, you're the, you're the, uh, um, uh, UAP, [chuckles] uh, guy here, which, by the way, is another fascinating domain that I'm learning-

    2. JR

      Yeah

    3. RM

      ... more about, more about.

    4. JR

      It's bizarre. Um, that's a rabbit hole you go down, and like, "Oh, this isn't empty." This is not an empty rabbit hole. There's a lot of money behind this, and it seems like there's been a lot of black funding and-

    5. RM

      Business.

    6. JR

      Yeah.

    7. RM

      Business.

    8. JR

      A lot of business. Defense contractors involved.

    9. RM

      Yeah, yeah.

    10. JR

      It seems like there's some inventions that sort of emerged out of nowhere, that supposedly are connected to back engineering programs.

    11. RM

      I'm-- And so for- so I'm, I'm now, uh, I'm now of, of the belief that there exists a capability that transcends, uh, uh, physics as we know it, let's say Einsteinian physics, uh, and is more aligned with, uh, Hawking's physics, uh, that, um, we can't- we don't comprehend right now. Uh, and it has to do with extremely high-energy systems, and, uh, I, I, having... I mean, I've had some of these guys, because I'm now known worldwide as a nutcase, I guess, and, and- [chuckles] ... a conspiracy theorist. I've had them on my farm, uh, you know, staying at our, in our guest house and, and, um, shooting the bull. And me trying to understand their world and what they're seeing and what they've experienced and, and observed, and the information. Um, and, uh, I'm, I'm of the b- There's a lot of different models for what the hell is going on here, and maybe it's all us, right? That's one model.

    12. JR

      Mm-hmm.

    13. RM

      It's all us, uh, with, with, uh-

    14. JR

      Secret technology.

    15. RM

      Yeah.

    16. JR

      Yeah.

    17. RM

      Um, that's one model for the, what do they call it? Tic Tacs and-

    18. JR

      Mm-hmm

    19. RM

      ... Uh, I'm, I'm increasingly convinced by the logic that there is a physics beyond the physics that we know, that is the physics of extremely high-energy systems.... and in high-energy systems, a lot of the rules about motion and, uh, tr- and, uh, transportation and matter, uh, and the ability to cross between matter states, that w- is repeatedly observed, uh, and reported by responsible people, uh, military folks that have, you know, strong disincentives-

    20. JR

      Right

    21. RM

      ... for saying this stuff, and yet still they're saying, "That's what I saw." Okay? And, and-

    22. JR

      Transmedium devices that can fly and then go underwater-

    23. RM

      Water

    24. JR

      ... as fast as they're flying.

    25. RM

      A- and, and-

    26. JR

      No ripples.

    27. RM

      Yeah.

    28. JR

      Yeah.

    29. RM

      Um, so I, I-- one of the models of that is that this has to do with, uh, having some extremely high-energy source, uh, in a very small package. And, uh, is that possible? We're now moving into a new fusion world, right? We're, we're talking about these microfusion reactors that are gonna be powering our data centers all over the world, transforming the whole energy, right? I mean, there's this logic in, crossing over into the, the economics, Bitcoin, or kind of space. Uh, there's this logic that it all comes down to energy. Uh, energy is, is the one, uh, thing that, uh, fuels economic development and, and everything around us. And, uh, the, uh... I'm, I'm not a physicist, but I listen and learn, and, and it sounds to me like these, uh, microreactors and the, the technology that was involved, strangely, in this assassination. Remember that bizarre assassination in, in Boston that happened? Um, there was two competing companies.

    30. JR

      Yes.

Episode duration: 2:33:22

Install uListen for AI-powered chat & search across the full episode — Get Full Transcript

Transcript of episode qFwiXyZHYbU

Get more out of YouTube videos.

High quality summaries for YouTube videos. Accurate transcripts to search & find moments. Powered by ChatGPT & Claude AI.

iOSAndroidClaudeChrome