RFK Jr.’s confirmation would be a blow to Big Pharma and a big win for health



The Washington, D.C., Beltway publications left no doubt about who stood to lose the most after President Trump nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary of health and human services.

Politico highlighted the uproar, reporting fierce opposition from Washington lobbyists to Trump’s decision to place Kennedy at the helm of the $3 trillion health agency. Kennedy’s proposals — tighter pesticide regulations, re-examining vaccine safety, banning processed foods in schools, and overhauling health and food agencies — pose significant threats to corporate profits. Caught off guard, lobbyists are now scrambling to block Kennedy’s Senate confirmation and leveraging connections to minimize risks.

RFK Jr. has consistently unveiled critical truths and fought for transparency in public health.

As a physician committed to my patients, my community, and my country, I fully support Kennedy’s nomination. His lifelong dedication to health, safety, and medical autonomy makes him the ideal candidate for this vital Cabinet position. President Trump deserves praise for this bold and courageous choice.

The United States faces an epidemic of poor health. Over 80% of adults suffer from at least one chronic illness, while obesity rates among children and adults have reached record highs. Simultaneously, drug prices and health care costs continue to soar. Substance abuse plagues society, and mental illness rates rise every year. The role of secretary of health and human services requires a leader with diverse expertise, a broad perspective, and a deep understanding of both health care and the forces shaping the system.

For decades, Kennedy has worked tirelessly for the health and welfare of America’s children. Despite relentless accusations of spreading “disinformation” and “conspiracy theories,” Kennedy is not “anti-vaccine.” Instead, he has championed transparency in vaccine efficacy and injury data, which threatens powerful profit-driven interests. Even the treatments he promoted for COVID-19, such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine — once dismissed as “discredited” — have quietly and surreptitiously returned to good standing.

RFK Jr. has consistently unveiled critical truths and fought for transparency in public health. He revealed that no double-blind randomized controlled trials exist for childhood vaccines on the CDC's schedule, a fact that demands scrutiny. Kennedy has also investigated disparities in disease prevalence, finding higher rates of autoimmune diseases, neurological disorders, allergies, and autism in vaccinated populations compared to unvaccinated ones, raising questions that require answers, not dismissal.

Kennedy has vowed to end the financial ties between pharmaceutical companies and medical journals, which have eroded research integrity and left physicians without trustworthy sources of unbiased data. He advocates removing harmful additives, such as trans fats, artificial coloring, and preservatives, from America’s food supply — ingredients banned in many other countries.

Kennedy is also committed to ending pharmaceutical advertising on television, a practice unique to the United States and New Zealand, which compromises media independence. His approach prioritizes the four pillars of medical ethics — autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice — seeking to restore medical autonomy, personal sovereignty, and an end to mandates that strip individuals of choice.

I understand that Kennedy’s nomination to oversee the massive federal health apparatus is threatening to many, including those associated with the pharmaceutical industry, doctors and the health care systems that employ them, lobbyists, insurance companies, media outlets that have become accustomed to massive pharmaceutical advertising dollars, and the food industry that maximizes profits by using inexpensive but toxic ingredients. But we need qualified leadership at HHS that prioritizes science, the protection of public health, and the well-being of all Americans. The health and future of our country depend on it.

Change, especially radical change, can be difficult — especially for those who have financially and professionally benefited from the status quo. However, our health care system is desperately in need of radical change, which is why I urge the Senate to confirm Kennedy’s appointment quickly so that he can begin the much-needed work to mend our health care system and to make America healthy again.

Meet Eithan Haim, the heroic whistleblower who’s also — a criminal?



What happens when your personal convictions put you in direct violation of the law?

That’s the question Dr. Eithan Haim, a surgeon in Texas, was forced to confront last year when he discovered some disturbing information about Texas Children’s Hospital, where he was serving his residency.

Despite the institution’s pledge to cease providing transgender medical care to minors in the wake of Governor Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton passing a law that deemed sex changes on minors and puberty-blockers “child abuse,” Haim found that medical staff was continuing to offer services in secret.

He then stepped into the courageous shoes of a whistleblower, but part of being a whistleblower is providing proof, which in this case, is medical records. However, to share sensitive medical information is a violation of HIPAA.

Haim ultimately decided the risk was worth it and gave conservative journalist Christopher Rufo medical records to prove that the hospital was continuing to provide transgender care to minors.

Now, Dr. Haim has been indicted on four accounts for HIPAA violations.

Today, he meets with Glenn Beck to share his story.

“Thank you for what you’ve done,” says Glenn, praising Haim not only for his courage to speak up but also his willingness to go through his savings and retirement funds to pay for the attorneys — and ultimately for the protection of children.

“[My wife and I] had a decision to make,” he tells Glenn. “Do we try to fight back, or do we submit to the ideology and try to make it all go away? We knew that we were going to have kids someday, and what kind of world would we be delivering them into if there’s not men and women in this world who are willing to sacrifice in order to deliver them to a better future?”

“We’ve sacrificed a lot — everything we have, but what you gain back is so much greater,” he says, noting that his wife is currently pregnant with their first child.

“You raise [children] to have the virtues to have a good and fulfilling life,” but “this government is criminalizing those virtues; the justice system is protecting criminals going after the innocent; the medical system is creating sickness and going after the healthy; the education system is miseducating people. It’s like every institution is doing the opposite of what it’s meant to do,” Haim laments. “People like us have to do something about it even if that means sacrificing.”

We applaud Dr. Haim’s courage to stand up for the innocent and fight back against those who prey on the most vulnerable. To donate to Dr. Haim’s cause, visit givesendgo.com.


— (@)

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Damning study suggests pandemic lockdowns accelerated 'significant' memory and cognitive decline in seniors



The lockdowns and societal restrictions championed by teachers' unions and other leftists during the pandemic were not just ruinous for the mental health of children and teens. A new study out of the U.K. indicates pandemic restrictions also had a deleterious impact on the minds of the elderly.

Dr. Anne Corbett of the University of Exeter Medical School and her team examined neuropsychology data from 3,142 individuals, all 50 years of age or over, who had been participating in a multi-decade dementia study in Britain. The researchers compared data on this cohort collected before the pandemic, early in the pandemic, then once more toward the tail end of the pandemic.

The researchers observed "[s]ignificant worsening of executive function and working memory" in the first year of the pandemic across the whole cohort, the average age of which was 67.5. Working memory continued to worsen across the whole cohort in the second year of the pandemic. By the time restrictions had ultimately been eased, the damage had been done.

According to the study, cognitive decline was significantly associated with reduced exercise and increased drinking across the whole cohort. Depression, another driving factor of cognitive decline, was notable amongst those who contracted COVID-19. Loneliness proved especially detrimental to those with mild cognitive impairment.

"People aged 50 years and older in the UK had accelerated decline in executive function and working memory during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which the UK was subjected to three societal lockdowns for a total period of 6 months," said the study, published in the Lancet journal Healthy Longevity.

The British government, which funded this study via the National Institute for Health and Care Research, not only limited the number of times citizens could exercise outside during the pandemic, but shuttered gyms, golf courses, sports courts, swimming pools, and indoor sports facilities.

"The scale of change is also of note, with all groups—the whole cohort and the individual subgroups—showing more than a 50% greater decline in working memory and executive function and many effect sizes reaching a clinically significant threshold of greater than 0·3," said the researchers.

The researchers further stressed that "[t]hese factors map closely to the population-wide changes in health and lifestyle seen during and after the lockdowns, raising the important question of the effect of the pandemic on cognitive health and risk across populations."

Governments across the West imposed lockdown measures on and off throughout the pandemic despite early indications there would be serious cognitive fallout, particularly amongst the elderly.

For instance, Italian scientists noted in an October 2020 paper in Frontiers in Psychiatry that social disconnection — of the kind all but guaranteed by the closure of voluntary associations, churches, parishes, gyms, and other meeting places for seniors — was a risk factor for dementia and likely to increase the risk of depression and anxiety for elderly people.

"Lockdown could affect disproportionately the mental health of old people, whom relatives contracted COVID-19, people who live alone and whose only social contacts take place outside home, and people who do not have close relatives or friends and rely on the support of voluntary services or social assistance," said the paper.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Yet another de-transitioner comes forward, suing doctors who she claims cut her up at 16 after two appointments and a single consultation: They 'affirmed that chaos into reality'



A Nebraska woman who underwent a sex-change surgery at the age of 16 is suing the medical practitioners who cut off her breasts, left her in a constant state of pain, and likely rendered her infertile.

Luka Hein's complaint, filed Wednesday in the District Court of Douglas County, Nebraska, accuses University of Nebraska Medical Center and UNMC medical practitioners Dr. Jean Amoura, Dr. Perry Johnson, Dr. Stephan Barrientos, and therapist Megan Smith-Sallan of malpractice, alleging their "misleading descriptions and false claims" pertaining to sex-change mutilations were in violation of the state's Consumer Protection Act.

The lawsuit contends that Hein, put "on the fast track" for mastectomies at 15 years of age, ultimately had her breasts removed "when she was not old enough to understand the ramifications thereof or consent thereto" and after her "parents had been manipulated into consenting."

Prior to her delusion-affirming treatments, Luka was reportedly having suicidal thoughts and harming herself. To further compound her anxiety and confusion, Luka indicated her parents were getting a divorce and she had been "groomed online and preyed upon by an older man out of state."

According to Hein's complaint, inside an hour into her first therapy session at the UNMC Gender Clinic, her therapist "diagnosed Luka with gender identity disorder and began steering her toward transgender medical treatment with Defendant Amoura at the gender clinic."

The suit blasts UNMC and those who savaged Hein's body not only for "using surgical means to treat a mental health disorder" but for failing to "wait and see if Luka's gender dysphoria would resolve with time"; "to develop a different diagnosis"; "to warn Luka that the mental health of patients does not improve with surgery"; "to obtain a proper pre-operative mental health evaluation"; and/or "question Luka's self-diagnosis of trans-identification before amputating her breasts."

Harmeet Dhillon, the founder and CEO of the Center for American Liberty, is representing Hein in the case. Dhillon has previously represented other victims of gender ideology, including de-transitioner Chloe Cole.

Dhillon told the Daily Mail, "Coercive methods were used to coerce the family into agreeing to it, such as a false representation about the mental health fallout from not doing it. 'Your daughter will commit suicide if you don't agree to this,' was communicated to her parents."

"Doctors should not behave to vulnerable children or families in this manner, period. Doctors should not be mutilating and permanently disfiguring children, period, without some medical necessity, which did not present itself in this case," added Dhillon.

The Center for American Liberty noted, "No child should have to go through the irreversible trauma that UNMC doctors put Luka through. And if she wins her lawsuit, perhaps no child will."

Hein, originally from Minnesota, told the Daily Mail, "I was going through the darkest and most chaotic time in my life, and instead of being given the help I needed, these doctors affirmed that chaos into reality."

"I don't think kids can ever consent to having essentially full bodily functions taken away at a young age before they even know what that means," continued Hein, who is also bringing a $2,250,000 tort claim against the Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska. "I was talked into medical intervention that I could not fully understand the long-term impacts and consequences of."

Besides the scars on her chest, the suit notes that the testosterone treatments Hein was subjected to over the course of four years "caused the disruption of her endocrine system, heart damage, deepening of her voice, pain in her vocal cords, joints, lumbar spine, hands, wrists, elbows, and pelvic area, as well as permanent dysregulation of her reproductive organs."

Hein is one of a growing number of victims to take legal action against the medical professionals and institutions who hacked away various parts of their bodies to remedy feelings of body dysphoria.

TheBlaze reported in March that Layla Jane took action against the Kaiser Permanente hospital system, which began giving her puberty blockers at the age of 12 and amputated her healthy breasts the next year.

Chloe Cole filed a suit against the Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals who performed, supervised, and/or advised transgender hormone therapy and surgical intervention on her between the ages of 13 and 16.

Teen who detransitioned had ‘oh shoot moment' after growing older | CUOMOyoutu.be

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Unhinged leftist Stephen King dares readers to give his new work of anti-conservative propaganda a 1-star review



Stephen King is a prolific writer who made hundreds of millions of dollars telling stories about ghosts, curses, and violence against children.

Extra to penning best-sellers like "The Green Mile," "Carrie," "It," and "The Shining," the geriatric author has also moonlighted online as an unhinged leftist, mocking conservatives, firing off identitarian missives, peddling political conspiracy theories, downplaying the crisis at the southern border, demanding that others wear masks, and calling for those with whom he disagrees to be silenced.

No longer willing to compartmentalize his passions, King has reportedly produced a work of anti-conservative, pro-COVID-vaccine propaganda.

In a recent interview with Rolling Stone, the the 75-year-old Democrat acknowledged that "a lot of people are not going to like" his new novel, "Holly," particularly not critics of COVID-19 vaccines and supporters of former President Donald Trump.

Rather than wait, King pre-emptively dared "people on the other side of the COVID issue and the Trump issue" to tank his new book's ratings, telling those who might be inclined to "give it one-star reviews on Amazon," "'Knock yourself out.'"

The titular character of King's new work of agitprop, recycled from his other works, "Mr. Mercedes" and "The Outsider," spends much of the book investigating the disappearance of a young woman. Along the way, she hypes the author's worldview.

Holly rejoices at Biden's 2020 electoral victory, weeps on Jan. 6, 2021, and makes sure to repeatedly advertise the fact of her mRNA vaccination and booster status, according to a review in the American Thinker.

The author made no secret of his intention to cram his political views into the novel, particular on the topic of COVID, telling Rolling Stone, "There's this constant story that thousands of people are dying of heart disease because of the vaccinations. It's not true, but it's gained a lot of credence. So there's a lot of that. And I tried to put that in the book."

King, who made a point of telling people to "get the damn vax" during the pandemic, kills off Holly's pro-life mother for having refused to get the mRNA vaccine after first attending an "anti-mask rally," where she waved around a "MY BODY MY CHOICE" sign.

The author further suggests in the book that nursing home deaths — which were especially bad under Democratic leadership in New York — were the result of vaccine hesitation, again on the part of his ideological foes.

Whereas the protagonists in "Holly" are reportedly all women, minorities, and/or homosexuals, the villains are pair of old racist white people who don't trust vaccines and eat people.

King makes his antipathies abundantly clear, going so far as to have a Christian family gang-rape a lesbian black vegan for the "sin" of not eating meat. The lesbian later kills her unborn baby.

NPR noted that "Covid-19 pandemic, racism and homophobia, the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, and Donald Trump's effect on the country's zeitgeist and political discourse are all very present in the narrative," adding, "Holly is one of his most political novels to date, and it'll surely anger all the right people."

The "right people" who might be keen on taking King up on his recommendation to give his book a one-star review on Amazon can also follow suit on Goodreads.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Don't Let Them Put That MASK Back on Your Face!

Don't Let Them Put That MASK Back on Your Face!

Medical establishment hypes lockdowns while mask regime signals a return



As fall approaches and another election season nears, there is renewed interest amongst various state and private organizations to resume the coercive COVID-19 protocols of yesteryear — this despite the fallout of the last go-around, the various outstanding doubts about efficacy of such measures, the CDC's estimate that 96.7% of the population over the age of 16 has antibodies, and the non-severity of the so-called "Eris" variant.

According to The Hill, among the organizations now reintroducing masks requirements are: Hollywood movie studio Lionsgate, per the insistence by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health; Kaiser Permanente at its facility in Santa Rosa, California; Upstate Medical's University and Community General hospitals; New Jersey's Rutgers University; and Georgia's Morris Brown College.

The Daily Mail reported that there has also been some indication that the Transportation Security Administration under President Joe Biden's Department of Homeland Security is considering reintroducing face-mask requirements on airplanes, although the TSA has suggested the "rumors are false."

This sudden desire to hide faces is the result of four new hospital admissions for every 100,000 people nationwide in the week ending Aug. 12, reported CNN.

That 0.004% of the population is going to hospital with what is in the vast majority of cases a nonlethal respiratory issue has prompted doctors like Robert Wachter, professor and chair of the Department of Medicine at the University of California San Francisco, to state, "If you're trying to be careful, it's time to whip out the mask again."

Dr. Jonathan Reiner, a cardiologist and professor at George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, said, "If you’re a caregiver for somebody who is at increased risk of complication following infection, then I think you should also consider putting a mask on in public places."

A peer-reviewed meta-analysis of various studies published earlier this year in the highly esteemed Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews called into question the value in whipping out masks again.

In a review of 12 trials comparing wearing medical masks with wearing no masks to prevent the spread of illnesses like COVID-19, the researchers determined that "[w]earing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness compared to not wearing masks."

While the researchers noted that the evidence suggested N95/P2 respirators were better at protecting against influenza-like illnesses than medical masks, this evidence too was placed in doubt.

The researchers concluded with some certainty that the "pooled results of [randomized controlled trials] did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection."

These findings appear to run contrary to former CDC Director Robert Redfield's September 2020 claim that masks are the "most important, powerful public-health tool we have," or his successor, Rochelle Walensky's November 2021 claim that mask-wearing "reduc(es) your chance of infection by more than 80%."

Regardless of the efficacy of masks, there may be greater resistance to their adoption this time around, even by medical professionals.

Dr. Albert Ko, a professor of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, told ABC News, "I don't see that as something that we're likely going to be adopting."

The chief infection control officer for Tufts Medicine, Dr. Shira Doron, made clear that the fearmongering is unwarranted based on current COVID-19 infections, stating, "An upswing is not a surge; it's not even a wave. ... What we're seeing is a very gradual and small upward trajectory of cases and hospitalizations, without deaths really going along, which is great news."

"My hospital has had between zero and three patients who have tested positive for COVID any given day since May," Doron told ABC News. "So, all week, it's been one. If tomorrow, there were two, you'd call that a 100% increase, which sounds so big, but ... it's not appropriate to use percentage terms when you're talking about increases that start really small."

As masks make a comeback, albeit presently in isolated instances, the Western medical establishment appears to be putting a positive spin on lockdowns.

Britain's Royal Society just put out a report singing the praises of lockdowns, social distancing, school closures, and limits on gatherings, calling them the "most effective" form of non-pharmaceutical interventions.

The report concluded that "there is every reason to think that the application of combinations of [non-pharmaceutical interventions] will be important in future pandemics."

Whereas the Cochrane Review suggested that the downsides of mask-wearing were not altogether clear — although studies have revealed the adverse impact they have on toddlers, particularly on their communication skills — there is overwhelming evidence that lockdowns had a devastating impact, especially on youths.

A peer-reviewed 2021 article in the journal Frontiers in Public Health noted that lockdowns were five to 10 times "more harmful to public health ... than COVID-19 can be" at a time when the virus was more potent.

Lockdowns have had a calamitous impact on: the economy; eating behavior; physical activity; academic achievement; and on mental health, especially among children and teens, whose suicide rates, a recent study indicated, are "closely tied" to in-person schooling.

Just the News highlighted how the Biden administration's April announcement that it was pouring $5 billion into developing additional COVID-19 vaccines and treatments did not mention masks or social distancing, but nevertheless signaled the Department of Health and Human Services was still focused on the virus.

Some lawmakers in Washington have speculated more statist alarmism is on the way.

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) tweeted, "I keep hearing whispers of COVID restrictions coming back. Nope, not going to happen. We're not complying with that."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

MSNBC's mask-monger is back, stressing it's 'time to bring them out again'



MSNBC medical contributor Kavita Patel, a former policy official in the Obama White House, appeared bare-faced Tuesday on "José Díaz-Balart Reports" to tell Americans to once again don their masks.

Díaz-Balart led into the segment, saying, "If you’ve noticed more of your friends, neighbors, loved ones are testing positive for COVID, you’re not alone. According to the CDC, COVID-19 hospitalizations are up 12% from last week, and while we’re nowhere near previous levels, it’s still raising concerns."

The CDC indicated that between July 16 and July 22, there were 8,035 hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the U.S., a nation home to well over 335 million souls. The bulk of the hospitalizations appear to have been in parts of Texas near the southern border; southeastern Oklahoma; Mohave County, Arizona; four counties in southern Nebraska; northeastern Oregon; and Colquitt County, Georgia.

Patel, a staunch supporter of coercive vaccine mandates, acknowledged in her introduction that "we are not seeing anywhere near the dramatic rises that we saw in previous summers or previous years ... because a large part of the population has either been infected and vaccinated or both several times."

As of November 2022, an estimated 94% of the American population had already been infected with COVID-19 at least once.

Despite intimating that the population now enjoys herd immunity, Patel stressed that it was prudent to "keep people on alert."

To this end, Patel — who suggested in April 2022 that people should still wear masks on airplanes and foist them on fellow passengers despite the expiration of the TSA's mask mandate — attempted to drum up fear over going out in public.

"When you're in those crowded spaces, think about the cost of colds," said Patel. "Sometimes, many people don't have any symptoms. A mask can be your best friend. Keep it."

Patel told Díaz-Balart it was "time to bring them out again, especially as the school season starts," adding, "We don't want to see kids missing school for things we could have prevented."

— (@)

Despite Patel's invocation of kids' well-being — greatly undermined by the school closures teachers' unions supported in recent years — children have faced an infinitesimal likelihood of succumbing to COVID-19, even early in the pandemic when the virus was ostensibly far stronger. Even if there was more than a nominal risk, studies have indicated that the masks commonly used by the public might be ineffective.

A comprehensive Cochrane analysis of scientific studies concerning the efficacy of masks in reducing the spread of COVID-19 and other respiratory illnesses, led by Oxford epidemiologist Tom Jefferson and published in January, concluded, "Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks. ... Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks."

Jefferson told journalist Maryanne Demasi, "There’s still no evidence that masks are effective during a pandemic."

The Centers for Disease Control's own peer-reviewed journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases, published a study in May 2020 that found "no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks."

The researchers stated, "There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza."

Also early in the pandemic, Dr. Michael Klompas of Harvard Medical School's department of population medicine and others noted in the New England Journal of Medicine, "We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. ... [T]he desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic."

Dr. Brendan Jackson, the CDC's COVID-19 incident manager, told NPR last week that the CDC presently has no plans to encourage widespread masking again.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Tucker Carlson tours South Central Los Angeles with Ice Cube, discusses his vaccine stand and the sham of BLM activism



Rapper and entrepreneur O'Shea Jackson Sr., better known as Ice Cube, toured South Central Los Angeles with Tucker Carlson on a special episode of the former Fox News star's show subtitled, "Stay in Your Lane." The viral episode presently has over 6.5 million views.

Driving down memory lane and past the ravages of decades of failed Democratic policies, the two broached various subjects, including the COVID vaccine, exploitative activist movements, and unaccountable politicians.

Disenchantment with politics

"Three decades and billions of dollars later, it's still a tough place," Carlson narrated ahead of asking Jackson, "How do you think politicians in Los Angeles have done running this city?"

"It's pretty much the same people running it the same way," said Jackson. "Politicians only really pay attention to the people that give them money. Everybody else is kinda an extra in their movie. ... Politicians have hidden agendas. They owe a lot of people a lot of favors. The more money you give them, the more you're listened to."

When pressed on whether he had "fallen for a politician" in the past, Jackson recalled hopes and dreams previously dashed. He indicated, for instance, that former President Barack Obama's election had filled him with pride, "but then you look around, years go by, and not much changed for people I know, people I care about."

Carlson cut to clips indicating that race relations suffered a precipitous decline under Obama and "race riots" had spiked.

Gallup revealed in 2016 that the plurality of black respondents (39%) and majority of white respondents (51%) indicated Obama's presidency had made race relations worse, noting, "It is clear that the optimism Americans initially had for a black president's ability to improve race relations and the situation for blacks has long since faded."

Jackson emphasized that this was par for the course: "It didn't change with Bush, it didn't change with Clinton, it didn't change with the other Bush or Reagan, Carter. ... At the end of the day, it's still the same results."

Race hustlers

Carlson noted that in the wake of George Floyd's death, "we were told" to expect a "second civil rights movement."

Playing footage of derelict buildings and homeless encampments, Carlson stated, "If there was going to be liberation in the wake of the Floyd riots, this is where you would see the effects," alluding to the billions reportedly raised by corporate America for BLM and related groups.

"Three years ago, a bunch of big companies put hundreds of millions of dollars into Black Lives Matter," said Carlson. "Did that improve the neighborhood you grew up in?"

"Whenever you do that, most of the time, it's a lot of people siphoning that money off the top," said Jackson.

TheBlaze previously reported that BLM paid its co-founder Patrisse Cullors' baby daddy nearly five times more than it gave to the Trayvon Martin Foundation.

In April 2022, it was revealed that the BLM organization allegedly used funds donated to the cause to purchase a $6 million home in southern California with cash.

Financial statements also revealed that board members spent lavishly and blew money both on pricey consulting firms and expensive properties internationally.

"The kicker is a lot of people say they're gonna give the money, but they don't even give the money," said Jackson. "They just get the article wrote, everybody think they're great, and they never even give the money."

The costs of independence and submission

Jackson said, "I wouldn't be here if I stayed in my lane. ... I never wanted to be controlled."

The rapper indicated that those seeking to pressure him into a particular way of acting or thinking have often attempted to do so indirectly, prompting those in his circle to bring him around. The example he raised was the COVID-19 vaccine, which he refused at great personal cost.

TheBlaze previously reported that Jackson was slated to star in a comedy movie alongside Jack Black, for which he would have been paid roughly $9 million. There was one catch: he would have to get the COVID vaccine.

Jackson said on a podcast in November, "Those motherf*****s didn’t give it to me because I wouldn’t get the shot. I didn’t turn it down. ... They just wouldn’t give it to me. The COVID shot, the jab … I didn’t need it. I didn’t catch that s*** at all. Nothing. F*** them. I didn’t need that s***."

Asked by Carlson why he didn't submit to the vaccine demand, Jackson said, "I'm not real good with direct orders."

Jackson added, "It wasn't ready, you know? It was a six-month kind of rush job, and I didn't feel safe."

Carlson responded, "But they told you you were safe."

"I know what they said," said Jackson, laughing. "And I heard 'em. I heard 'em loud and clear, but it's not their decision. There's no repercussions if they're wrong, but I can get all the repercussions if they're wrong."

Jackson noted it wasn't a tough call to reject the dictates of the medical establishment, saying, "I wanted to be an example for my kids. You know, really make sure they didn't take it either. Show them that I want to stand by convictions and that I was willing, you know, to lose $9 million and more because we probably lost more since then."

The rapper indicated that he knows people injured by the vaccine who "suffer every day and it's hard to watch," adding, "suffering in silence is not the answer all the time. Sometimes you gotta let people know what's going on."

The duo agreed that "there's no penalty for lying, no one's ever punished for lying. It's only telling the truth that gets you in trouble."

— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'He caused a lot of injury': RFK Jr. says he would prosecute Fauci as president and 'not hold off' if 'crimes were committed'



Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. put Anthony Fauci on notice during his interview with Jesse Watters Monday, stating that as president, he would sic his attorney general on the retired National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director "and not hold off" if criminality on his part could be demonstrated.

The Fox News host first raised the matter, saying, "You think Fauci is the devil. Would you prosecute him if you ever got to the White House?"

"If there were crimes that he committed, of course," said Kennedy, currently trailing President Joe Biden by nearly 50 points in the polls. "I would tell the attorney general to prosecute him and not hold off."

"Do I think that he committed crimes? I think he caused a lot of injury ... particularly, by withholding early treatment from Americans. You know we racked up the highest death count in the world? We only have 4.2% of the globe's population but we had 16% of the COVID deaths in this country and that was from bad policy."

"There's countries that did the opposite of what we did, that provided Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, other early treatments to their populations, and had 1/200th of our death rate. So there are many things that we did wrong in this country," continued Kennedy. "Some of the things that were done by public health officials at that time that they knew that they would be harmful."

Kennedy has made no bones in recent years about his conviction that Fauci has played a leading role in the "global war on democracy and public health."

The presidential candidate's book, "The Real Anthony Fauci," came out in 2021, detailing how, contra to the notion manufactured by the "pharma-funded mainstream media" that Fauci is a hero, "He is anything but."

In the book, Kennedy accused Fauci of various misdeeds and failures, including:

  • championing an approach to "ending an infectious disease contagion [that] had no public health precedent and anemic scientific support" that was "grossly ineffective," as reflected in "the world's highest body counts";
  • working to suppress and smear viable alternatives to COVID-19 vaccines that were reportedly relatively inexpensive and historically safe;
  • wielding "formidable power to fortify the pharmaceutical industry's explosive growth and its corrosive influence over our government regulatory agencies and public health policy" for five decades;
  • managing the NIAID "much more like a drug company than any sort of agency to advance science";
  • treating American and African children "as collateral damage ... in pursuit of profitable pharmacological solutions for steadily declining public health"; and
  • promoting purported remedies such as quarantines "often more lethal than the diseases they pretend to treat."

RFK Jr. further indicated to Watters that the Biden administration has been reluctant to punish China over the alleged Wuhan lab leak because American institutions helped bankroll the deadly research in the first place and transferred NIH-funded bioweapons to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, reported the Daily Caller.

TheBlaze previously noted that federal documents recently obtained via a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit revealed that the NIAID under Fauci and the United States Agency for International Development funded an EcoHealth Alliance subcontractor's work on coronaviruses to the tune of $41 million.

That subcontractor was reportedly Ben Hu, who ran lead on gain-of-function research on SARS-like coronaviruses at the Wuhan lab and was one of the first infected with COVID-19 in November 2019.

The Wall Street Journal reported that much of Hu's research "focused on modifying coronaviruses so they could bind to human cells. The stated purpose of the research was to identify viruses that could lead to a pandemic and facilitate the development of a vaccine."

Fauci told Congress in May 2021 that the National Institutes of Health "has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology" and made similar denials on multiple other occasions.

Then-Principal Deputy Director of the NIH Lawrence A. Tabak appeared to undercut Fauci's denial, writing to Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) on Oct. 20, 2021, that EcoHealth’s "limited experiment" in Wuhan tested whether "spike proteins from naturally occurring bat coronaviruses circulating in China were capable of binding to the human ACE2 receptor in a mouse model."

These mice "became sicker," according to Tabak, who added, "EcoHealth failed to report this finding right away, as was required by the terms of the grant."

Records recently obtained by the Republican-led Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic further revealed that David M. Morens, a top adviser to Fauci at the NIH, was admittedly trying to keep Fauci's "fingerprints on origin stories" amidst an apparent effort by the NIAID director and his colleagues to downplay the possibility that a leak at the lab they funneled taxpayer money to might have been the epicenter of the pandemic that killed millions of Americans.

After Kennedy suggested to Watters that the CIA was involved in the research at the Wuhan lab and that "USAID ... was functioning as the CIA surrogate," the Fox News host asked the 69-year-old son of assassinated former U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and nephew of assassinated former President John F. Kennedy whether the CIA still has the ability to execute political assassinations.

"I couldn’t say yes or no to that question. I think that there is — I couldn’t say. Even with my uncle’s assassination, you can't really say the CIA killed John F. Kennedy. You can say members of the CIA, people working for the CIA were definitely involved. People like E. Howard hunt, David Atlee Phillips. David Morales. People who have confessed to it. Many of them death bed confessions. They may have been operating on a rogue basis, rather than the CIA doing it," answered Kennedy.

— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!