Detecting language using up to the first 30 seconds. Use `--language` to specify the language
Detected language: English
[00:00.960 --> 00:07.760]  Welcome to the podcast. From middle school to high school, college, politics, society uses the
[00:07.760 --> 00:13.200]  mechanism of debate to hear conflicting positions on a subject and those listening to the debate
[00:13.200 --> 00:19.200]  come away with a determination concerning which position is most credible. But an odd phenomenon
[00:19.200 --> 00:24.560]  has been growing over the last couple decades and it has accelerated considerably over the last few
[00:24.560 --> 00:33.360]  years. That odd phenomenon is experts are refusing to debate their publicly stated positions when
[00:33.360 --> 00:40.800]  challenged by anyone, including other experts. When experts refuse to openly debate their position,
[00:41.440 --> 00:46.800]  my view is every thinking person should understand something shady as a foot.
[00:46.800 --> 00:52.640]  The expert should be considered no longer credible. Let's take a look at a few examples.
[00:55.200 --> 01:01.120]  The Dr. Reality Vodcast with Dave Champion.
[01:09.440 --> 01:16.400]  Let's start with this. Who are we talking about when we use the word expert? In the context of
[01:16.400 --> 01:21.120]  having a reasonable expectation that a person should be able to defend his or her publicly
[01:21.120 --> 01:28.000]  stated position, expert means the following. Those who are highly credentialed in a given field.
[01:28.720 --> 01:33.120]  Those who hold positions in government that affect or have the possibility of affecting
[01:33.120 --> 01:39.440]  the lives of millions of people. Those who hold high-level positions in well-respected institutions.
[01:40.240 --> 01:45.440]  Those who have spent time working in a particular field and assert those years in their profession
[01:45.440 --> 01:49.760]  provide them with special knowledge or insight not generally understood by the public.
[01:50.560 --> 01:56.880]  Those who teach or have taught a subject at an institution of higher education and publicly
[01:56.880 --> 02:03.200]  expressed a position on that subject. Those who have published papers, studies, research,
[02:03.760 --> 02:10.080]  or a book on a subject. Those who have spoken on any show or in any venue as a professional
[02:10.080 --> 02:15.600]  in a given field and put forth a position based on his or her status as a professional in that field.
[02:16.400 --> 02:20.480]  Those who are tasked with overseeing enforcement, public or private,
[02:20.480 --> 02:25.840]  of any policy or law based on the presumption that the facts underlying that enforcement are sound.
[02:26.640 --> 02:32.160]  Okay, now that we know who we are considering an expert, let's have a look at some of those
[02:32.160 --> 02:39.120]  refusals. Because I'm the author of Body Science, which reveals the lies about human physiology the
[02:39.120 --> 02:43.760]  establishment has told you for 60 years and then provides you with the truth that's been hidden
[02:43.760 --> 02:51.040]  from you, one example immediately leaps to mind. Nina Teicholz is a journalist who wrote the
[02:51.040 --> 02:58.720]  groundbreaking book The Big Fat Surprise. In April 2016, Nina was invited to sit on a panel and speak
[02:58.720 --> 03:06.480]  at the National Food Policy Conference in Washington DC. The conference theme was turning nutrition
[03:06.480 --> 03:12.480]  science into policy. The main draw for the conference were three other panel members.
[03:12.480 --> 03:17.280]  As I tell you who they were, remember their names because you're going to hear them again in just a
[03:17.280 --> 03:25.440]  moment. Angela Tagtau, U.S. Department of Agriculture head of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for America.
[03:26.160 --> 03:31.360]  Barbara Millen, chair of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. The Dietary
[03:31.360 --> 03:36.160]  Guidelines Advisory Committee is a joint project by the Department of Health and Human Services
[03:36.240 --> 03:42.480]  and the Department of Agriculture. And Margot Woutan from the Center for Science in the Public
[03:42.480 --> 03:47.600]  Interest. At this point, I should tell you the conference is sponsored primarily by numerous
[03:47.600 --> 03:51.680]  large food industry players, including the processed food industry. In other words, the
[03:51.680 --> 03:56.320]  conference isn't remotely about health. It's about selling the American people more of the same garbage
[03:56.320 --> 04:00.320]  that over the last several decades has caused America to be the most chronically ill society
[04:00.320 --> 04:05.680]  in all of human history. The unspoken purpose of the conference is for food industry executives to
[04:05.680 --> 04:10.080]  hobnob with key industry shills in the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department
[04:10.080 --> 04:15.600]  of Agriculture who have been purchased by industry lobbyists. These food industry shills lay the
[04:15.600 --> 04:21.920]  foundation for making the American public even sicker than it already is by ensuring the lies
[04:21.920 --> 04:27.040]  about nutritional physiology put out by the government and the food industry continue being
[04:27.040 --> 04:31.120]  the pervasive narrative. And thus, the food industry will continue receiving trillions of
[04:31.120 --> 04:36.640]  dollars selling products that are making Americans sicker and sicker. Let's take a closer look at the
[04:36.640 --> 04:43.760]  three panelists I just mentioned. Angela Tagtow is all about plant-based diets, which are destructive
[04:43.760 --> 04:49.200]  to human health and the environment. Tagtow has stated, quote, If dieticians are empowered to be
[04:49.200 --> 04:53.760]  the nation's food and nutritional leaders, dietetic education and practice must encompass the
[04:54.400 --> 05:00.240]  ecological, political, social, and economic implications of a healthy diet.
[05:01.440 --> 05:06.960]  In other words, the Department of Health and Human Services and the USDA put a completely biased fruit
[05:06.960 --> 05:12.080]  loop in charge of updating the U.S. government's nutritional guidelines. Barbara Millen is the
[05:12.080 --> 05:17.280]  founder and president of a company called HealthMain, which advocates the now scientifically debunked
[05:17.280 --> 05:23.040]  notion that a healthy diet means reducing saturated fat intake. What is the primary source of saturated
[05:23.040 --> 05:28.800]  fat? Animal meat. Anyone who advocates reducing saturated fat intake is either ignorant
[05:28.800 --> 05:35.040]  or has an agenda. What reducing saturated fat intake is not is supported by the results of
[05:35.040 --> 05:40.240]  scientific research. In fact, just the opposite is true. Eating saturated fat is incredibly healthy
[05:40.240 --> 05:46.080]  and has nothing to do with heart disease. Whether Millen is ignorant or promoting an agenda,
[05:46.080 --> 05:51.280]  the Department of Health and Human Services and Agriculture made her the chair of the dietary
[05:51.280 --> 05:57.360]  guideline advisory committee. Margot Woutan was there representing the Center for Science in the
[05:57.360 --> 06:02.960]  Public Interest. That organization was instrumental in convincing fast food restaurants to stop using
[06:02.960 --> 06:09.120]  animal fat for frying. So, with what did the fast food companies replace animal fat? With the
[06:09.120 --> 06:14.320]  commercial version of vegetable oil, which science has known since the 70s causes a dramatic increase
[06:14.320 --> 06:19.680]  in cancer. In short, the Center for Science in the Public Interest pushed fast food chains to stop
[06:19.680 --> 06:25.920]  using healthy frying oil and got them to use a replacement that's known to increase cancer.
[06:25.920 --> 06:31.360]  Despite the name Center for Science in the Public Interest, since its founding in 1971,
[06:31.360 --> 06:36.080]  the organization has always pushed a political agenda. The inclusion of the word science in the
[06:36.080 --> 06:41.200]  organization's name is simply intended to obscure the fact that it is in reality pushing a political
[06:41.200 --> 06:46.560]  agenda. If they could support their agenda with science, this would be the perfect opportunity
[06:46.560 --> 06:52.320]  to destroy the credibility of one of the most high profile adversaries of their agenda. But
[06:52.320 --> 06:58.000]  because their agenda is not supported by science, they couldn't do that. In fact, just the opposite
[06:58.000 --> 07:02.720]  would occur. With those three women being the big names on the panel, it's not hard to understand
[07:02.720 --> 07:08.960]  why they panicked when they heard Nina was going to be on the panel and took the extraordinary step
[07:08.960 --> 07:13.840]  of collectively threatening not to attend if Nina was allowed to join them on the panel.
[07:14.480 --> 07:18.640]  Nina is focused on an accurate and honest assessment of nutritional science
[07:18.640 --> 07:23.120]  and the conclusions for proper human health to which the accurate and honest assessments lead.
[07:23.760 --> 07:28.320]  In other words, Nina stands for exactly the opposite of what the other three panelists
[07:28.320 --> 07:34.000]  stand for. Worse yet, from the perspective of the other panelists, in the course of her research for
[07:34.000 --> 07:39.280]  The Big Fat Surprise, Nina became a walking encyclopedia of scientific research on human
[07:39.280 --> 07:45.040]  nutritional physiology. That meant that when Nina spoke, she would bring actual science to
[07:45.040 --> 07:49.680]  the discussion and in doing so would destroy the false nutritional claims made by Tag Tao,
[07:49.680 --> 07:55.360]  Millen, and Wutan. Nina would be able to put a spotlight on the fact that these shills
[07:55.360 --> 08:00.640]  were promoting an agenda that is anti-science. In short, Nina was a clear and present danger
[08:00.640 --> 08:05.920]  to their professional reputations. You can imagine the horror these women felt at the thought of
[08:05.920 --> 08:13.680]  having a walking encyclopedia of nutritional science destroy their credibility, live, on stage,
[08:13.680 --> 08:19.120]  recorded for all the world to see. Although the conference was not intended to be a debate,
[08:19.120 --> 08:24.240]  panelists would be able to challenge each other's statements. With all panelists pushing the same
[08:24.240 --> 08:29.760]  agenda, which would be the case without Nina, there wouldn't be any challenges. Having Nina on
[08:29.760 --> 08:34.480]  the panel meant they'd have to publicly defend their false narratives. They knew they couldn't
[08:34.480 --> 08:40.720]  do that and Nina would make mincemeat out of them, thus destroying their reputations. The only option
[08:40.720 --> 08:45.840]  they had was to avoid an open public debate. Considering that the British Medical Journal
[08:45.840 --> 08:52.800]  has estimated 40% of scientific studies are not valid, not scientifically factual, and some
[08:52.800 --> 09:00.880]  estimates are as high as 90%, the vibrancy of debate would seem essential, yet the exact opposite
[09:00.880 --> 09:08.240]  is occurring. Another example taken from today's headlines is Steve Kirsch. Steve isn't a household
[09:08.240 --> 09:14.160]  name, so who is Steve Kirsch? Rather than me tell you about Steve, I'm going to share Steve's own
[09:14.160 --> 09:22.160]  words from his substack introduction. Before I read the intro to you, when Steve references CETF,
[09:22.160 --> 09:26.960]  it means the COVID Early Treatment Fund Steve founded. Steve provided the fund with a million
[09:26.960 --> 09:31.360]  dollars of his own money and had his fellow tech millionaires and billionaires also donate. One of
[09:31.360 --> 09:36.960]  the more well-known donors is Elon Musk. So let's hear Steve tell us about his journey in his own
[09:36.960 --> 09:43.360]  words. Hi, I'm Steve Kirsch. I used to be a high-tech serial entrepreneur before retiring
[09:43.360 --> 09:52.160]  at age 64. I used to believe the FDA, NIH, and CDC were honest organizations. I trusted them.
[09:52.240 --> 09:58.160]  I'm double-vaxxed with Moderna as of March 29, 2021. A month later, I started hearing stories
[09:58.160 --> 10:03.520]  from my friends who reported relatives who died or they themselves became permanently disabled.
[10:04.080 --> 10:10.800]  So I looked into it, and the more I looked, the more appalled I became. On May 25, 2021,
[10:10.800 --> 10:18.480]  I wrote a 250-page article for trial site news entitled, Should You Get Vaccinated? A week later,
[10:18.480 --> 10:24.400]  all the scientists on the CETF Scientific Advisory Board resigned, most of them saying I was a
[10:24.400 --> 10:31.360]  menace to society and never to contact them again. I asked them if I made a mistake. They declined to
[10:31.360 --> 10:37.680]  answer. So much for open scientific debate to resolve differences. That's gone. On May 26,
[10:37.680 --> 10:44.320]  as luck would have it, I was on the weekly CCCA Zoom call where Dr. Brian Brittle presented the
[10:44.320 --> 10:49.920]  results of his FOIA request for the Japanese government on the Pfizer mRNA vaccine submission.
[10:50.560 --> 10:55.840]  There, for the first time, we learned that the vaccine doesn't stay in your arm but transits
[10:55.840 --> 11:01.200]  to all parts of your body to create inflammation and blood clotting everywhere. I was the one who
[11:01.200 --> 11:06.480]  tipped off Robert Malone. On June 10, I appeared on the famous Dark Horse podcast with Brett
[11:06.480 --> 11:12.080]  Weinstein and Dr. Robert Malone talking about what we had learned, which was the launching point for
[11:12.080 --> 11:17.200]  both of us. As censorship has increased on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, the conversation
[11:17.200 --> 11:23.680]  about the safety and efficacy of vaccines has moved to Substack, Telegram, and Gap. On my Substack,
[11:23.680 --> 11:28.000]  I post timely articles about what is going on. I have no conflict of interest and I cannot be
[11:28.000 --> 11:32.640]  intimidated. They cannot take away my license to practice medicine because I'm not a doctor.
[11:33.200 --> 11:40.720]  I'm worse. I'm an engineer with two degrees from MIT. Close quote. The first thing of which we
[11:40.720 --> 11:47.040]  should take note is, despite Kirsch explicitly asking the 12 scientists who collectively resigned
[11:47.040 --> 11:54.160]  from CETF to engage with him about the science of the matter, they refused. They were angry,
[11:54.160 --> 12:00.400]  or at least feigned being angry, calling Kirsch a, quote, menace to society, while at the same time
[12:00.400 --> 12:05.440]  refusing to provide even a shred of evidence supporting that accusation. The collective,
[12:05.440 --> 12:10.400]  simultaneous resignations were obviously meant to send a public message, yet they refused to
[12:10.400 --> 12:16.640]  publicly back up that message by participating in open discourse with Steve. On his Substack page,
[12:16.640 --> 12:21.120]  Steve often mentions that at one time Google ranked him as the world's number one spreader
[12:21.120 --> 12:26.880]  of medical misinformation concerning SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, and the vaccines. He recently mentioned
[12:26.880 --> 12:35.520]  he's now in the number two position. Today, Steve has a standing offer of $1 million to debate him
[12:35.520 --> 12:39.200]  on various points pertaining to the mRNA vaccine's safety and efficacy.
[12:39.920 --> 12:46.400]  An independent committee will decide the winner. There have been no takers, which I find really
[12:46.400 --> 12:52.640]  odd. For the better part of three years, we watched a parade of so-called experts appear across every
[12:52.640 --> 12:57.760]  form of news outlets almost hour by hour, sanctimoniously representing themselves as professionals
[12:57.760 --> 13:04.400]  everyone should listen to. How many of these so-called experts were little more than spokesholds
[13:04.400 --> 13:10.960]  promoting the establishment narrative? I ask because equally credentialed professionals who
[13:10.960 --> 13:15.280]  disagreed with the establishment narrative never appeared on any mainstream outlet.
[13:15.840 --> 13:21.920]  The only ones given a voice were the ones parroting whatever the government said. Numerically speaking,
[13:21.920 --> 13:29.120]  how many of these so-called experts appeared across the media? I'm guessing between TV, radio,
[13:29.200 --> 13:34.800]  online appearances, podcasts, and print media, the number is almost certainly in the thousands.
[13:34.800 --> 13:40.960]  So we have thousands of so-called experts who told the public the establishment narrative was factual
[13:40.960 --> 13:46.560]  and everyone should be obedient to it. Yet not a single one of these experts wants to earn a
[13:46.560 --> 13:51.760]  million dollar payday by debating a man Google has asserted was the number one COVID misinformation
[13:51.760 --> 13:58.400]  spur in the world. If the narrative they were pushing was true and what Steve discusses is false,
[13:59.120 --> 14:02.320]  should be a walk in the park for them to win the debate and take Steve's money.
[14:02.960 --> 14:07.760]  Yet not one of them is doing that. It's almost as if when they appeared before the American people
[14:07.760 --> 14:12.240]  they were just playing a role like an actor without actually knowing the underlying facts
[14:12.240 --> 14:16.960]  of the science. I should point out that on the list of experts who appeared in the media telling
[14:16.960 --> 14:22.400]  America the establishment narrative was factual and everyone should be obedient but haven't stepped up
[14:22.400 --> 14:29.440]  to claim Steve's million dollars are Anthony Fauci and Rochelle Walensky. Remember when Fauci
[14:29.440 --> 14:35.440]  said quote a lot of what you're seeing as a tax on me quite frankly are tax on science close quote
[14:36.400 --> 14:41.120]  then it should be a breeze for Fauci to take Steve's money as well as vindicate himself in
[14:41.120 --> 14:47.040]  terms of the loss of credibility he experienced in the eyes of many Americans. But he's not doing
[14:47.040 --> 14:52.480]  that. Not a single expert in the country or the world for that matter is stepping up to take
[14:52.480 --> 14:58.160]  Steve's money. It looks a lot like they know Steve has the facts and the science on his side
[14:58.160 --> 15:02.960]  and no one will debate him even for a million dollars because they know the outcome will be
[15:02.960 --> 15:08.560]  they won't get the million dollars and when the public sees Steve decimate them their professional
[15:08.560 --> 15:16.880]  reputations will be in shreds. Before I continue let me encourage you in this era of big tech
[15:16.960 --> 15:23.440]  censorship to share this presentation with anyone and everyone you can. I urge you to not just watch
[15:23.440 --> 15:31.040]  it and move on but watch it and share it. I prefer not to speak of myself in these presentations but
[15:31.040 --> 15:38.560]  in terms of so-called experts refusing to debate I have a truckload of personal relevant experience.
[15:39.120 --> 15:42.720]  As you may know I'm the author of Income Tax Shattering the Mist the best-selling book in
[15:42.800 --> 15:47.120]  America revealing the truth that Congress has never imposed the income tax on ordinary
[15:47.120 --> 15:51.360]  hard-working Americans and the only reason most Americans believe that is they've been
[15:51.360 --> 15:57.840]  brainwashed by the U.S. government's massive 60-year disinformation campaign to convince you
[15:57.840 --> 16:03.280]  to believe a lie. As you can imagine there are quite a few so-called tax experts in both
[16:03.280 --> 16:10.560]  government and the private sector who say I'm wrong. Great! Then let's debate and see who the
[16:10.560 --> 16:15.920]  public finds credible. Isn't that the way we're supposed to do it in a free country where knowledge
[16:15.920 --> 16:21.040]  is imperative for proper governance? Yet in two decades not a single one of these so-called
[16:21.040 --> 16:26.080]  experts has agreed to meet me in public debate. To be clear I'm not talking about some random
[16:26.080 --> 16:29.520]  accountant at a business down the street I'm talking about people at the pinnacle of the
[16:29.520 --> 16:36.000]  income tax industry. I've invited in writing the following people to debate me concerning to whom
[16:36.000 --> 16:43.280]  the income tax actually applies. The U.S. Secretary of the Treasury. The Commissioner of the Internal
[16:43.280 --> 16:48.960]  Revenue Service. The Assistant Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service. The Chief
[16:48.960 --> 16:55.520]  Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service. The National Director of the IRS's Criminal Investigation
[16:55.520 --> 17:01.440]  Division. The U.S. Attorney-in-Charge of the Department of Justice's Tax Division. David
[17:01.440 --> 17:06.320]  K. Johnson who at the time of the invitation was the tax beat reporter for the New York Times
[17:06.320 --> 17:10.880]  and numerous CPAs who have written commentaries disparaging the truth of the income tax.
[17:11.920 --> 17:19.280]  In 20 years not a single taker. Why? Because just as with Nina Tycolle's and the National Food
[17:19.280 --> 17:26.160]  Policy Conference or Steve Kirsch and his million dollar offer these so-called tax experts know I'd
[17:26.160 --> 17:31.280]  utterly destroy them in the debate and once the recording was made public they'd be the laughing
[17:31.280 --> 17:36.880]  stock of their industry and their careers would effectively be over. There's also another reason.
[17:37.440 --> 17:40.800]  As things stand today the government's disinformation campaign has been
[17:41.760 --> 17:46.880]  incredibly effective. Most Americans have bought the government's false narrative about income tax
[17:46.880 --> 17:53.840]  hook line and sinker. They really believe the tax applies to them. So why would these establishment
[17:53.840 --> 17:58.960]  experts rock the boat when everything is going their way? What would happen to the government's
[17:58.960 --> 18:04.320]  false income tax narrative if, as an example, the chief counsel of the IRS couldn't effectively
[18:04.320 --> 18:11.680]  respond to me revealing what the law really says and ended up looking like a big fat liar in a
[18:11.680 --> 18:17.920]  debate with me? What would happen when that video went viral? As things stand today hundreds of
[18:17.920 --> 18:23.360]  thousands of Americans have safely left the income tax scam behind with the information in income tax
[18:23.440 --> 18:29.920]  shattering the miss. A public debate with me in the internet age would almost certainly and quickly
[18:29.920 --> 18:36.080]  drive that number into the millions. At this point it may be prudent to ask why these so-called
[18:36.080 --> 18:42.720]  experts consistently refuse to debate those with opposing views. The answer is multifaceted. The
[18:42.720 --> 18:47.600]  most significant reason is media outlets agree to the terms under which a guest's appearance takes
[18:47.600 --> 18:54.240]  place. News outlets need so-called experts their viewers and readers will see as credible,
[18:54.240 --> 18:58.800]  and of course they can't have the same expert on night after night, so they need a stable to
[18:58.800 --> 19:04.240]  draw from. Keeping the stable full requires that outlets never challenge anything experts say.
[19:04.800 --> 19:09.840]  If a network were to begin challenging experts on the air, that network would soon find its stable
[19:09.840 --> 19:15.360]  empty. Then we have the fact that on topics such as SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, and the vaccines,
[19:15.360 --> 19:20.160]  the media is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the government. So outlets only book guests
[19:20.160 --> 19:25.520]  who will say what the government wants said. Professionals that are able to play the role of
[19:25.520 --> 19:30.720]  expert on a broadcast are interviewed in advance to ascertain their position on the subject.
[19:31.280 --> 19:37.200]  Only those who will reinforce the government's propaganda are selected to speak. Those whose
[19:37.200 --> 19:42.240]  positions do not support the government's propaganda are passed over. In this way,
[19:42.240 --> 19:46.880]  an outlet's viewers or readers are given the false impression that all the experts agree
[19:47.520 --> 19:52.480]  when in reality the networks are intentionally hiding from their viewers or readers the fact
[19:52.480 --> 19:58.400]  that there is a significant difference of opinion among the experts. Yes, news outlets are
[19:59.040 --> 20:04.640]  intentionally hiding the truth from you. Then we get into high ranking government officials.
[20:04.640 --> 20:08.720]  They only appear in two circumstances. One is a press conference where they know
[20:08.720 --> 20:12.800]  none of the media outlets will ask any tough questions because the outlets don't want to be
[20:12.800 --> 20:18.320]  excluded from covering future press conferences. Virtually every administration in the last 25
[20:18.320 --> 20:23.920]  years has banned a network or outlet from press conferences for asking questions the administration
[20:23.920 --> 20:29.280]  didn't want asked. Those occurrences appear in the news for a day or two and then the network
[20:29.280 --> 20:34.320]  quietly agrees that its reporters won't ask any more tough questions and the network's reporters
[20:34.320 --> 20:39.920]  are then allowed into press conferences again. The other setting is in media interviews in which
[20:39.920 --> 20:45.840]  the questions that will be asked and not asked are discussed in advance. Media outlets love to
[20:45.840 --> 20:51.760]  claim they don't do this and that's a lie. If a guest is considered a big ratings draw as, for
[20:51.760 --> 20:57.440]  example, Fauci, an off-the-record discussion takes place between Fauci's media liaison staffer
[20:58.000 --> 21:02.240]  and a producer of the news show. The producer gives the staffer examples of the kinds of
[21:02.240 --> 21:07.280]  questions the network wants to ask and the staffer puts forth questions and topics that
[21:07.280 --> 21:12.560]  are out of bounds. If they can't come to an agreement concerning the questions to be asked
[21:12.560 --> 21:17.840]  and not to be asked, the government official won't appear on the show. That said, since Fauci's
[21:17.840 --> 21:21.680]  people wouldn't even bother having that discussion with an outlet that wasn't perceived as
[21:21.680 --> 21:28.160]  friendly and safe, the discussion is really just a formality between allies. Or maybe instead of
[21:28.160 --> 21:33.360]  allies, I should say co-conspirators because the goal is to ensure these government officials are
[21:33.360 --> 21:38.480]  never challenged on the accuracy or factionalness of what they say. When a government official
[21:38.480 --> 21:44.080]  appears in the media under that sort of agreement, it is, in a very real sense, nothing more than an
[21:44.080 --> 21:50.400]  assault on the American people with propaganda. Freedom of the press allows the media to engage
[21:50.400 --> 21:56.400]  in hard-hitting journalism that showcases the truth for the American people and freedom of the
[21:56.400 --> 22:01.760]  press also allows the media to choose to serve as the propaganda arm of the United States government.
[22:02.720 --> 22:08.240]  I leave it to you to determine which one the media does most often. What happens when a government
[22:08.240 --> 22:14.960]  official deviates from that formula? In February 2022, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky took a step
[22:14.960 --> 22:21.120]  outside that safety zone and appeared on Fox News. While Fox didn't ask her any tough questions,
[22:21.680 --> 22:30.560]  they asked her to distinguish how many Americans died from COVID versus with COVID. Walensky gave
[22:30.560 --> 22:37.200]  a non-responsive rambling answer that ended with the words, quote, those data will be forthcoming,
[22:37.200 --> 22:44.400]  close quote. Rasmussen reports referred to her appearance on Fox as, quote, a shatteringly bad
[22:44.400 --> 22:50.320]  outing outside the protected zone of friendly networks, close quote.
[22:51.760 --> 22:58.800]  Outside the protected zone of friendly networks. That is exactly what we're talking about. These
[22:58.800 --> 23:05.440]  so-called experts won't make an appearance unless it is in a protected zone. A quick side note,
[23:05.440 --> 23:09.520]  as I'm recording this, it's been a year since Walensky said the data would be forthcoming
[23:09.600 --> 23:15.120]  and CDC hasn't released that data to the public. Whether it's Nina Tycolle's invitation to the
[23:15.120 --> 23:20.160]  National Food Policy Conference or Steve Kirsch's million-dollar offer to debate him
[23:20.160 --> 23:26.640]  or my debate challenge to a slew of so-called tax experts, the reason the experts always
[23:26.640 --> 23:33.520]  run like hell is they're lying and stepping outside the protected zone will reveal them to
[23:33.520 --> 23:39.680]  the public as the liars they are. Given all we've discussed today, is it any wonder most
[23:39.680 --> 23:45.120]  Americans have no clue what they're talking about on many issues? As far as I can tell,
[23:45.120 --> 23:50.400]  the vast majority of Americans blindly believe whatever high-ranking government officials say
[23:50.400 --> 23:56.000]  when speaking in a protected environment, such as a press conference. They also blindly believe
[23:56.000 --> 23:59.920]  so-called experts who appear in the media without being challenged on anything they say.
[24:00.880 --> 24:06.080]  I don't think Americans even realize these experts and high-ranking government officials
[24:06.080 --> 24:10.640]  only speak in protected settings where they won't be challenged. I mentioned that I'd
[24:10.640 --> 24:16.160]  challenged quite a number of tax experts to debate me without a single taker. Even as income tax
[24:16.160 --> 24:20.320]  shattering them has spread the truth of the government's income tax scam far and wide across
[24:20.320 --> 24:29.680]  our country. Allow me to be blunt, every American should know this truth. Further, after knowing for
[24:29.680 --> 24:34.880]  a fact that the government is committing the largest financial crime in world history, you
[24:34.880 --> 24:40.640]  should be telling every other American about it. Do you know why the scam remains successful?
[24:41.360 --> 24:46.960]  Because the government's disinformation campaign has been incredibly successful coupled with the
[24:46.960 --> 24:53.200]  fact that the American people largely remain silent about it. Who is the founding father to
[24:53.200 --> 25:01.760]  which you find you most relate? Is it Jefferson? Washington? Madison? Samuel Adams? Thomas Paine?
[25:02.480 --> 25:09.680]  John Adams? Tenchcock? Alexander Hamilton? Take a moment to recall the founder you most respect.
[25:11.120 --> 25:17.040]  Got the name? Now ask yourself if that founder would have kept silent about the executive branch
[25:17.040 --> 25:22.000]  of the federal government committing massive fraud against the citizens of the union.
[25:22.960 --> 25:31.120]  If the answer is no, he would not have remained silent. Why would you? So many Americans hold
[25:31.120 --> 25:38.720]  the deplorable notion that preserving liberty is someone else's job. It's not. There are 332 million
[25:38.720 --> 25:46.640]  of us and the only reason liberty is slipping away is far too many are weak and lazy, asserting that
[25:46.640 --> 25:53.200]  upholding liberty is someone else's job. If you care about this country, if you care about the
[25:53.200 --> 25:59.360]  ideal of personal liberty, you have a duty to speak out. Freedom isn't free, makes a cool bumper
[25:59.360 --> 26:04.000]  sticker and all, but it works a lot better if you get off your ass and do your part. I'm not talking
[26:04.000 --> 26:08.320]  about marching in front of your legislator's office holding a sign. I'm talking about knowing
[26:08.320 --> 26:14.000]  the facts and then making sure as many of your fellow Americans as possible also know, which
[26:14.000 --> 26:19.360]  requires you to tell them about it. John Locke, one of the great enlightenment thinkers and the
[26:19.360 --> 26:24.560]  man who perhaps most influenced Thomas Jefferson's thinking on liberty said, quote, Whenever the
[26:24.560 --> 26:29.360]  legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people or reduce them to slavery
[26:29.360 --> 26:35.760]  under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, close quote.
[26:37.360 --> 26:43.200]  Endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people. That is exactly what the U.S.
[26:43.200 --> 26:48.880]  government has been doing since 1913. And to be clear, it is not an oopsie. The government is
[26:48.880 --> 26:54.560]  knowingly, willfully and intentionally committing the largest financial crime in history and it's
[26:54.560 --> 27:01.920]  doing so against the American people, against you. And most Americans are sitting on their ever
[27:01.920 --> 27:08.000]  widening asses doing nothing about it. I'm not asking you to pick up a rifle as did the founding
[27:08.000 --> 27:13.520]  fathers we discussed a moment ago. I'm asking you to read a book and when you know the truth,
[27:14.160 --> 27:21.120]  tell others. How hard is that? This illegal theft of your property under the false pretense of law
[27:21.120 --> 27:27.040]  can and will end when enough of our fellow citizens know about it and that requires you
[27:27.040 --> 27:31.680]  to be a part of the solution. Can you think of a time the burden of defending liberty was any
[27:31.680 --> 27:39.600]  lighter than reading a book and telling others the truth? Go to drreality.news. Drreality.news.
[27:39.600 --> 27:45.120]  Take a look at the reviews. The direct link to the store is in the notes. See what readers have
[27:45.120 --> 27:50.560]  said about income tax shattering the mess. Then put it in the cart and check out and your copy will
[27:50.560 --> 27:57.680]  be on its way to you within 24 hours. While you're there, take a look at body science which explains
[27:57.680 --> 28:02.720]  why the United States is the most ill society in all of human history and how you and your family
[28:02.720 --> 28:07.040]  can steer clear of that mess. Just yesterday I was on a business call and the first thing the
[28:07.040 --> 28:14.720]  gentleman said to me was thank you for his parents becoming amazingly healthy and getting off 100%
[28:14.720 --> 28:22.080]  of the big pharma meds they were taking before reading body science. I can't tell you how great
[28:22.080 --> 28:28.560]  that makes me feel. That is exactly why I wrote body science. I want my countrymen to know how
[28:28.560 --> 28:34.400]  they've been lied to and manipulated into being sick and with that revealed how simple it is to
[28:34.400 --> 28:41.280]  leave that crap behind and get amazingly healthy. To get income tax shattering the mess and or body
[28:41.280 --> 28:48.800]  science go to drreality.news. Drreality.news. Lastly, by purchasing a copy of income tax shattering
[28:48.800 --> 28:53.440]  the mess and or body science, you help me to continue to be here for you with these
[28:53.440 --> 29:04.640]  thought-provoking presentations. Thanks for being here. Take care.