Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out.

>> The Joe Rogan Experience.

>> TRAIN BY DAY. JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY

NIGHT. All day.

>> Nice to meet you, sir.

>> Thanks for having me. Pleasure to be in

Austin. You know,

>> have you been here? You've been here

before.

>> You know, I grew up in Texas and so we

used to come up here uh for live music.

I went to Baylor and there was no music,

no dancing. If you want to hear some

live music, you came to Austin. So, I've

been here many times.

>> Nice. It's a great spot. Uh so here's

your book, Deception, the Great Coverup.

You were uh a lone voice of reason

during the pandemic that uh you know,

for me, you were extremely valuable and

uh I was cheering you on every step of

the way when you were grilling Anthony

Fouchy. With all due respect, you do not

know what you are talking about. That

that guy was driving me [ __ ] crazy.

It was it was mind-numbing how many

people were going along with it and how

many people just accepted what he was

saying, ignored all the evidence that

pointed to gain of function research,

didn't freak out when it was quite

obvious that he was lying about gain of

function research. And I just thank God

that you were grilling him and at least

it was on the record and we could all

watch it and see it. One of the greatest

tragedies, and we knew this within days,

was that children weren't getting sick,

but that should have been used to our

advantage. Children did not get sick. No

child without a healthy without a health

issue really died.

>> Well, they got sick, but it wasn't

dangerous for them. My kids both got it,

>> right? But most of them had a very mild

illness. And the point is is that we

knew this in China in the first couple

of weeks, and we could have left the

schools open. And some countries left

the schools open. For the most part,

Sweden left their schools open and

treated this completely different and

turned out with a similar everybody

wound up with a similar death rate with

primarily the people dying were people

were older and overweight or both,

>> right? And well, the argument was you

going to bring it home and you're going

to infect your grandma and she's going

to die.

>> All right, that was

>> the argument didn't really hold water

though because everybody got it anyway.

And so,

>> but we didn't know that in the

beginning, right? In the beginning, they

were lying and they were saying that

although we now know that there was no

data that showed that the vaccine

stopped infection and stopped

transmission,

>> but here's another thought. You could

have said, "Yeah, kids could take it to

their grandparents. So, until the kid

has gotten it and recovered for two

weeks, tell them not to visit their

grandparents." You know what I mean?

>> Well, the problem was the people that

live with their grandparents.

>> Yeah, I know. And there would be the

exceptions to the rule. But most of the

people the death rate we already knew in

China was very very small once you added

in the kids. Initially they were saying

it was a 3% death rate which would have

been instead of 1 million people you

know would have been significantly more.

3 million people may have died but they

knew that the death rate was less than

that in China early on. But part of the

reason they thought it was so high is

they weren't counting all the

asymptomatic cases. you know, they knew

how many people were sick and how many

people died, but the denominator was the

number of people who actually were sick

or who actually got the infection, but

they weren't counting millions of

people. And uh but Anthony Fauci denied

this at every step. He denied that

natural immunity would protect you. And

one of [clears throat] my favorite

quotes was from a guy named Martin

Culdorf. He was an epidemiologist at

Harvard who ended up getting fired. But

recently he tweeted out, it was about a

year or two ago. So he said, "Well, we

knew about natural immunity from the

time of the Athenian plague in 436 BC,

and we knew that knowledge until 2020.

Then we lost all knowledge of natural

immunity. But the good news is in 2025,

we're starting to get back that

knowledge." But this was Anthony Fouchy

knew better. You know, he he he couldn't

even read his own basic immunology books

about, you know, the fact that you do

develop immunity. Is it perfect? No. Can

you get COVID more than once? Yes. But I

defy you to tell me somebody who got it

the second time who died the second

time. You know what I mean? People got

it less severely so the second time they

got it, if they got it at all.

>> Much less severely. So I got it twice

and the second time I couldn't even

believe it was actually COVID. Was back

when we were testing every day. We would

test all the guests. We would test all

the staff right

>> before we did the show. And I came in

and I had the sniffles. That's it. And

they said, "Do you have CO?" And I was

like, "This is hilarious."

>> And I understand you did so well because

your personal doctor was Sanjay Gupta.

>> [laughter]

>> That is that clip of you and and he on

the program is my favorite clip of all

time.

>> I don't know what he thought was going

to happen. [laughter]

>> I think he just thought he was going to

come in here and CNN was going to send

their medical mercenary in with all his

knowledge,

>> right?

>> But you can't argue with someone when

you can't use facts,

>> right? So he didn't have any facts at

his disposal and he was working for a

network that was openly lying about me

taking veterinary medicine. Like the

whole thing was

>> surreal. And for someone who is,

>> you know, up until 2020, I mean, I was

reasonably distrustful of mainstream

news, but in a normal way. Like I'm sure

they bend things a little bit or twist

things a little bit. I I would have

never thought I would watch a campaign

against me like that where every night

it was horse dewormer, horse dewormer,

Joe Rogan, dangerous conspiracy

theories, COVID denier, vaccine denier.

I was like, this is fascinating.

>> I think it it brings up a broader

question too that when people tell you

there's a consensus and because the

consensus exists, you cannot object. I

think that's a real danger to openness

to new ideas but it's also a danger in

medicine and and in medicine to say this

is the consensus and we're not going to

do this. So in the first month of this

maybe first or second month Fouchy comes

in and I said you know many people who

die from the flesheating bacteria which

is not the same but it's a serious

illness the what they give them to try

to treat them to prevent death and loss

of limbs is highdose IV steroids and I

had a friend whose life was saved. He

didn't lose any of his limbs and he had

this terrible illness. And so I asked

Anthony Fouchy, I said, "Do you think

there's a chance as they're getting very

very sick and their lungs are filling up

with fluid that we could try highdose IV

steroids like we do in other

infections?" And he says, "Oh, no, no,

we've tried that." Turns out, and we we

mentioned this in the book, the best

treatment when you were just about to go

on the ventilator or on the ventilator

when you have a 50% chance of dying at

that point was IV steroids. An old

generic medicine that big pharma doesn't

make much money off of.

>> Which steroids in particular would they

use?

>> It's it's called solumedrol, but it's

just IV steroids. And it was a 36%

reduction in death, which is pretty

significant when you're in the ICU. The

people in the ICU were very very sick.

It was a a third of them had a reduction

in death by by taking IV steroids. But

he was dismissing it from the very

beginning and already acting like, "Oh,

I know it's not going to work and we're

going to try rem deseed out not to work

very well." Not only that, it gives

people kidney failure.

>> Yeah. Well, I mean, he has a history of

using medicine that has already been

through the approval rating with, you

know, what they did with ACT during the

the pandemic of AIDS,

>> right? And uh that proved to be

horrific, a terrible disaster. It's just

amazing that the same guy ran the same

playbook, you know.

>> Yeah. No, it it was really sad. And the

other thing about natural immunity that

needed to be brought up is so all the

people that were declared essential kept

working. Like if you worked in a meat

processing fac, these are hardworking

people. Many of them, you know, they

they're busting their butt all day long

and there'd be like 296 people at a meat

packing place in Missouri. All of them

got COVID. Most of them survived. But

what we should have been telling them is

two weeks after you got it, come back to

work. You don't have to wear a mask now.

You've had it. You have immunity. You

won't spread it to your family. And

guess what? All the unknown about

whether you're going to die or not. You

survived and you're done. But instead,

we told people, you might get it again,

and you still might die, and you got to

wear a mask all day long. When in

reality, we should have been celebrating

the people who recovered and letting

them have their freedom back. Well,

there was also this kooky thing where

after you got over the disease, they

wanted you to get vaccinated,

>> which was strange. It was almost like

you they wanted you to join the team,

like take the blood oath.

>> Yeah. I I met a man in Orange County and

his mom was like 83 and she was very

sick and she ultimately died during

during from COVID probably, but she went

to the hospital with COVID. They

wouldn't admit her until she was

vaccinated for COVID while she had

COVID, which is actually against all

recommendations. And this is the problem

with the mass vaccination thing. If

you're going to Walgreens, do you think

they ask you if you've had COVID

recently before they gave you a shot?

And so really, the the best medical

recommendation for a young person is

one, you don't need the COVID vaccine,

but you certainly shouldn't be taking it

close to when you've had an infection

because you've got an immune response

that's going against the disease. Then

you add in another stimulant to it

that's actually related to an increase

in the rate of the heart inflammation

that comes along with vaccinating some

of the young people.

>> Well, there's also the weirdness of the

what what happened during the Reagan

administration with vaccines where

they're no longer liable for any vaccine

injuries. And when you call this a

vaccine, it's very different than any

vaccine that had ever been used before.

But yet you have all of these injuries

that people have no recourse.

>> Yeah. My dad was in Congress at the time

and voted against you know giving them

the liability protection and he also was

there when they had the swine flu

epidemic and in that more people died

from the swine flu vaccine and I think

there were no deaths from swine flu.

They said oh it's going to take over the

world and you know we're going to lose

you know 5% of our public. Nobody died.

the um epidemic quickly stopped but then

several people got gillon beret and a

few people died from the vaccine and I'm

not against vaccines look there many

miracles to vaccines but they should be

used judiciously and the risks and

benefit for each individual and it turns

out co had an age differential that was

more significant probably than any

disease we've ever seen it really was an

old person's disease

>> yeah an old person and people with

coorbidities

It was really bad for obese people. But

you know, the disease aside, what what

was it like for you to watch this play

being run? Because that's essentially

what it was. It was like there was a

play being run and you had to follow

whatever their narrative was to the tea

or you'd be attacked. You you I mean and

you would see these people that were

acting like soldiers for for the

pharmaceutical drug complex. I mean they

would they would go out there and just

brutally attack anybody who deviated

from the narrative, say the most awful

things, talk about how you there was

blood on your hands and like it was very

strange. Well, the the the belief in the

vaccines and the belief that you should

do it was like a religious belief and

that's the way they treated it. So, if

you didn't believe in it, you were you

someone to be demonized as a

non-believer. You were to be cast out

and you weren't patriotic if you weren't

wearing a mask. And even after I've

already had it, I'm walking down the

hallway, you know, between the office

buildings and the capital and all those

reporters, they're 22 years old. Most of

them are journalist majors. They never

had a science course in their life and

they're lecturing me about why I should

be wearing a mask. And it's like, I

already had the disease. I've been I've

healed up 3 weeks. I don't need to wear

a mask. I'm I've got immunity. Well, how

do you know that? But even in the

beginning when they said they didn't

know, they did know. We had a a outbreak

in 2003. It was a different corona

virus. It was the first SARS virus, but

we knew that those people 17 years later

still had TE-C cells and still had

immunity to it. One of the my favorite

stories and we include this in the book

was there was a woman and she was 102.

She goes to the hospital and they bring

her family in. They're talking to her

daughter who's 85. Says, "We don't think

your mom's going to make it." And she

said, "Have you met my mom?" And they

and she survived. But while she was

there, they decided to test her for

antibodies to the Spanish flu because

when she was six months old, her mother

was coming across the Atlantic. Her mom

died from the Spanish flu. She got it.

survived. They tested her a hundred

years later. She still had antibodies to

the Spanish flu. So, immunity lasts a

long damn time.

>> Wow. That's crazy.

>> But what was it like being

in the government and and seeing all

this play out and that it was illogical?

It it didn't make any sense, but yet

everyone was following the playbook. Um

well people without any kind of

scientific background were lecturing

people. Uh Sherrod Brown, Sheridan Brown

from Ohio I was a senator. He was the

worst. He would stop the proceedings and

start pointing and yelling at me for not

having a mask in the house. They made

him wear the mask and so he got

everybody in there with a mask. I got

the the infection like in March of 2020.

So I got it just as it came over. I'm

all healed up. I volunteered in the

hospital when I was done because I had

immunity. And at that time, you're

right, we didn't know everything and

there were some risks to the orderlys

and nurses. So when they had to rotate

patients that were on the ventilator, I

would go in and help them. So one less

person had to go in the room because I

had immunity. And everybody acknowledged

that I did in my local hospital. They

didn't ask, there was no vaccine at the

time anyway. And so but they all

acknowledged that, oh, this is great.

He's coming in. He has immunity and he

can help take the place of someone else

who's having to to risk being in the

room when we move patients around.

One of my favorite scenes was uh there

was a musical performance where there

was a bunch of flutists and they had

masks on with a whole cutout so they

could play their flute through the mask.

I was like this is wild. I mean

>> well yeah explain to me the science of

that I can eat my peanuts for 20 minutes

on the plane and what my favorite is the

some of the flight attendants were

great. Some of them would actually come

up to me and pass messages. I would get

little folded up message. Thank you for

what you're doing. Thank you for

challenging Fouchy. But then some of

them were Karen's and it brings out the

worst in you. A little bit of power can

bring out the worst in people. And some

of them were, you know, sir, you're not

eating your peanuts faster. Eat your

peanuts faster. You need to put your

mask on in between

>> peanuts on planes anymore. You're dating

yourself.

>> No, they they still do have peanuts.

>> But are peanuts they don't they keep

them off planes because if people have

severe peanut allergies,

>> they do. And uh that's a that's a whole

another story. And have you have you

ever had Marty McCary on?

>> I have not, but I'm trying to.

>> Yeah. He wrote a book. He wrote a book

called Blind Spots. And in it, he writes

about the peanut allergy, right? And you

know how you prevent the peanut allergy?

>> Give kids peanut butter. Yeah. And now

the recommendation even from the

American Pediatric Association who are

terrible. They're the worst people in

the world on vaccine mythology and

religiosity. But they finally came

around. They said, "Don't get peanut

butter for like a decade. We got all

these allergies." But now they finally,

I think, changed their official position

and I think at 3 months you're supposed

to start introducing peanut butter to

your kid.

>> Why do you think they're the worst when

you said they're the worst on that?

>> Um,

it's a blind notion and it isn't based

on risk benefit an analysis or anything.

It's this devotion that you're a good

person, but you're also a smart person

if you believe. But it's in all

vaccines. And they made the mistake

because sometimes they they had the

first rotovirus vaccine 15 years ago.

they gave they'd take it off the market

because six months later they they

learned that something called

intoception where the intestines go

inside each other which can be a real

problem for a child was happening more

often with a vaccine they had to pull

the vaccine but vaccines are like

anything else it's like you and I would

sit down and we'd talk about your drugs

and I talk about the side effects of

each one what your disease is and what

we can do like I'm not completely like

for example with the COVID vaccine I

don't think children should take it

because I think the risk of the heart

inflam ation is greater than the chance

of the disease. Early on, they said for

old people and overweight people that

reduced hospitalization and death. But

I've been talking to the CDC because I

want to know is that still true. So,

let's do a new study. The virus has

progressively gotten less dangerous. The

community's progressively gotten more

immunity. So, what was true in 2020 may

no longer be true. I want to know if

you're over 65 and I give a thousand

people the vaccine, the brand new one,

whatever it is, and I give a thousand

people no vaccine, is a reduction in

hospitalization and death because this

isn't 2020 anymore.

>> Well, not only that, I mean, when was

the last time you heard of someone dying

or being hospitalized?

>> That's what I mean. It's not happening.

It's not happening. And so,

>> but it's also because the strains, the

variants of

>> the variants have become less, they've

become less dangerous. And we've also

increased our amount of immunity. And

so, we should study this again. Why?

Because big farmer is just making a

gazillion dollars off of still scaring

everybody over 65. And if it still

works, I I'm I'll come on your show and

say, "Take it if you're over 65." But I

don't know if it works. And I doubt that

it works because I don't hear of anybody

dying from COVID anymore.

>> Okay. If your New Year's resolution was

change everything and be a new person,

good luck. So, instead of pretending

you're going to meal prep kale forever

or do morning cold plunges, here's one

actually realistic thing. AG1.

AG1 is a daily health drink that

supports your energy, gut health, immune

health, and helps fill common nutrient

gaps. Just one scoop in cold water each

morning and you're off. It's got over 75

vitamins, minerals, probiotics, and

whole food ingredients in there. So,

instead of guessing whether you need a

probiotic or a prebiotic, or sorting

through 10 different bottles of pills

and powders, you can just do one scoop

and get on with your day. It's great

because it feels like the grown-up move,

but for once, it's actually really easy.

It takes like 30 seconds, and you'll

notice the steadiness that sets you up

for the day. Not wired, not crashing,

just functional human being energy. I

partnered with AG1 for years and if you

want to give it a try, head to drink

a1.com/joan.

And for a limited time, you'll get a

free AG1 duffel bag and free AG1 welcome

kit with your first AG1 subscription

order. Only while supplies last. That's

drink ag.com/joen

or visit the link in the description to

get started. But it's also there's this

weird binary thing where it's like

there's one thing that you could take

and that's it. There's no talk about

strengthening your immune system with

vitamin supplementation and what what

are the other options that you could

have once you actually get sick.

>> Like what can you do? IV vitamins are

fantastic. There's a lot of different

things that people can do that are never

recommended and it's strange. And really

the two things that were controversial

at least among a lot of things but

ivormectin and hydroxychloricquin people

will ask me about it and I'll say I

don't know the government refused to

study it and so it's very difficult

because if you took in let's say 2020

the virus was dangerous and let's say

you took 5,000 people under the age of

50 and you gave them ivormectin and you

did 5,000 people and you gave them

nothing almost nobody died in either

category so it was hard to prove but I

don't think Ivormectin was was harmful I

don't think hydroxy hydroxychloricquin

was harmful either, but they wouldn't

study it and you need a big study. So to

figure out since the death rate was so

low for healthy people, you might need

10,000 people in each arm of the study

to figure out what works and weren't

didn't work. There were some

international studies showing ivormectin

worked and hydroxychloricquin. There

weren't many here, but Fouchy shut them

all down. You know, they started a study

and then he shut it down.

>> How does one guy get that kind of power?

He was there forever. You know, he was

there about as long as J I wrote I wrote

an op-ed comparing him to Jar Hoover.

You know, Hoover was like there for 70

years. Abused the civil liberties of

people protesting for civil rights. He

abused uh the liberty and p the privacy

of people protesting the Vietnam War.

And so Hoover was a terrible person with

his longevity. I think Fouchy ranks

right up there with his disregard for

people's privacy. But even the stuff

about the masks, do you know that we

studied pandemics for a decade? Bill

Gates has been given gazillions of

dollars that he's gotten the government

to spend money. And when we studied

pandemics all the way up until 2020,

there was never a recommendation for

masks among the public.

>> He recommended against Fouchy

recommended against masks in a very

public interview that was a video where

he was talking about, you know, it's not

going to help you and you worse maybe

you'll mess with your face and

>> Yeah. Well, the uh the good one was the

it was that Birdwell woman. She was in

the administration and she writes him a

letter in January. She says, "I have to

go to a conference. Should I wear a

mask?" And he writes back to her, "Uh,

no. We've we've done all the studies and

there's no evidence that for a

respiratory virus it works." And it

turns out almost all the masks, the

cloth masks, you know, you've heard all

this, the pores were bigger than the

virus. The virus goes through them. the

surgical mask a little better, but if

you have these big gaps on either side,

you think the virus isn't going around

the mask and it probably goes through

that mask. Also, the N95 mask, if you're

a doctor or a nurse and you're going in

and out of a room and you wash your

hands and throw away the mask, there

probably is some value. So, in the in

the hospital, they recommended this. But

one of the reasons Anthony Fouchy was

such a danger is what he recommended was

actually dangerous. So, he's wearing a

Washington Nationals cloth mask to show

people that or he's wearing a Black

Lives Matter mask to show people he

cares.

But if that's the advice and you're 75

years old and your wife has COVID and

you're going in her room to take her

food and you wear a cloth mask, you are

risking getting COVID and dying

yourself. He didn't tell. He gave us the

wrong advice and then people thought

they were safe with the cloth mask so

they're actually doing something they

shouldn't do or they're you know 85

years old and they're going to church

but they're wearing a cloth mask. Well

know that you probably shouldn't go to

church. Frankly, you shouldn't be told

you can't go to church but actually the

advice early on to avoid crowds and stay

home if you were older or vulnerable.

But the kids should have just gone to

school and tried to stay away from, you

know, people. But eventually it happened

anyway. It went everywhere. There was no

stopping this virus.

>> Well, there's never been a respiratory

virus. It's stopped with a vaccine

anyway, right?

>> No, the the flu vaccine doesn't really

stop with it either. And I'm trying to

get more statistics on the on the flu

vaccine as well to see if it's accurate

because I think they lie to us every

year about, you know, they say, "Oh,

well, it was a, you know, it wasn't this

it wasn't even the same category or

type, but you're getting some crossover

effect." I think most of the time that

is um being inflated. What they're what

they're telling you is not actually

true. And I'm trying to get them at the

CDC to study all of this again because

they have the power and the numbers to

look at large numbers and let's be

objective and tell people, you know,

what is the odds next year the flu

vaccine will work for you. And we used

to say, well, it may not work, but if

you're at risk, go ahead and take it.

So, it used to be over 50 or over 65.

Now, they want everybody to take the flu

vaccine. And it probably is probably

better unless your child has an immuno

deficiency disease to go ahead and get

these and develop immunity over time.

>> And what do you think is going on? Like

why are they recommending this? Is this

purely a profit thing?

>> Um I think if they were here they would

argue that it's it's it's science and it

isn't for profit. But they argue

vigorously against revealing if they're

receiving money from big pharma. So what

I ask is if you're on the vaccine

committee and you're going to recommend

that every child get a COVID vaccine,

shouldn't you have to release whether

you get royalties, you know, from big

pharma? And Anthony Fouchy in committee

said, "We don't have to do it. The law,

and he quoted the law, says we don't

have to do it." So for two, three, four

years now, I'm still trying to get this

passed. I've gotten all the Republicans

to agree to it, and I've gotten all the

Democrats, but two or three. And I'm

still trying to get it passed

unanimously. But it would say if you're

a government scientist and you get

royalties from Fizer or from one of the

big companies, you have to actually uh

list it on a form and really you should

be then recused from voting.

>> Yeah. Well, also why why are doctors

allowed to be financially incentivized?

>> Yeah. That that should be that should be

considered to be unethical or

inappropriate. We did change some of the

things with pharma and gifts to doctors

about 10 years ago. It is better than it

used to be as far as gifts to doctors

except for then they don't call this a

gift. I think this should be under the

gift ban. You should not be getting paid

to use certain uh choose certain things

because I I think it's really I think

it's actually malpractice to give

children the COVID vaccine.

>> Are you aware of uh Mary Tally Bowden?

>> Yep.

>> Yeah. You know her story?

>> Not a lot. I've met her before. I think

>> she told me that if you know she has a

small practice that's in like a strip

mall I believe outside of Houston. She

said that in her small practice if she

had vaccinated everyone she would have

been compensated $1.5 million.

>> It's it's a significant amount of money.

Yeah. And that people have listening.

>> Yeah. No, it's insane. And it's the it's

it's the one sort of exception to we

have all these things preventing

kickbacks to doctors except for vaccines

and that's somehow exempt. Um so yeah.

Now, we've looked at whether legislation

could fix this, and I don't think we

found a good answer, but I have

definitely looked to see if there's a

way Congress could try to fix this.

>> What's amazing to me is how many people

in the general public are not skeptical.

How many people in the general public

will hear this kind of conversation and

immediately their hackles get up and

they want to argue against this vaccines

save more? Vaccines are so important.

They get and there's they have no

information. They have they've done no

research. They've never looked at it

objectively. They don't understand the

whole history of compensation and and

what happened with the the immunity.

>> So in the in the book I tell the story

of George Washington. One to let people

know I'm not against and the smallox

vaccine was amazing. And in George

Washington's day it was actually live.

So that what you did is if you'd had

small pox and you were doing pretty well

and you survived and you didn't have a

bad case, you had a minor case, you had

four or five pox, not a lot as you were

recovering that open a scab, take pus

from your arm, stab somebody else's arm,

and take the pus from your infection and

stick it into someone else. That's a

live vaccine. That's that's crazy. But

and they did have some people die from

it. But the death rate from smallox is

one out of three. And when it would show

up in Boston, you'd have like 20,000

people die and the whole town would get

it. It was terrible. And so people

actually chose, but people weren't being

forced to do it. But the George

Washington case is very instructive.

Martha wants to come visit him at the

camps at the war camps. And there were

more deaths in the Revolutionary War

from disease than there were from

bullets. He says, "You can't come until

you're vaccinated for smallpox." It

wasn't vaccinated. It was called

inoculated because you're getting stuck

with a disease, not a vaccine. And uh

but people say, "Well, I guess

Washington took it too if he believed so

much in this." Well, like no, because

he'd already had smallox. He got smallox

when he was 15 in Barbados. They

understood immunity. We have understood

immunity for thousands of years. And yet

it just went out the window with Anthony

Vouchi saying, "Well, we just don't

know. We just won't. We just don't

know." We do know. We don't always know

how perfect it's going to be, but we do

know that nobody got CO the second time

around and had a worst case the second

time around. Well, one thing we do know

is that when Biden left office, he was

granted this very bizarre pardon where

he got a pardon that goes back to 2014

for crimes he was never accused of,

>> never convicted. I mean, is that it's

got to be one of the first times that

anybody's ever been pardoned.

>> And I think it should be challenged. And

so we have um under the Biden

administration, I sent criminal

referrals for Anthony Fouchy to Meritt

Garland um twice and I sent them

evidence that he had lied to Congress,

which was a felony. They just ignored

me. I've been working with Bobby Kennedy

and he's been very helpful on this. I

have good relationship with him. He's

given us a lot of information and we've

looked at the communications and in

Anthony Fouch's communications, we now

have evidence that he was telling people

like Francis Collins, read this and

destroy it. Well, you can't do that. The

executive branch when they communicate,

they're required to keep their

communications and they're required to

do it on government devices. So, we have

this evidence and I've summarized it

again in a criminal referral to uh

Trump's attorney general and I still

haven't gotten action, but there's a

couple reasons we should do it. one that

he shouldn't get away with lying. He

shouldn't get away with destroying

records. But two, we should check the

pardon. Is it an autopin pardon valid?

And is a pardon a retrospective pardon

back 10 years that doesn't mention a

crime? Can you can you give people a

pardon for everything they did in

10-year period? I can't imagine. And I

think the court might narrow that, but

it doesn't happen unless the the Trump

Justice Department will do something.

And I've I've been sending them

referrals and I can't get them to do

anything. Um, I can't guarantee they'll

win. They might lose, but they ought to

go to court. Take this, take it to

court.

>> When you were having that conversation

with him about gain of function

research, which clearly gain of function

research was being done at the Wuhan

lab,

>> right?

>> What and he was just standing in front

saying that under the definition of gain

of function research that that does not

qualify.

>> But

>> what was that like?

>> We all knew he was lying and he was

parsing words. he was uh trying to have

a semantics type of argument. But one of

the reasons we know he's lying and one

of the things that I've presented as

evidence is there was a group uh text

chain on February 1st of 2020. So you

have all these viologists who are saying

privately it came from the lab and

publicly it didn't. You have them all

communicating. But one of the things

Anthony Fauci says about the Wuhan lab

is he says, "We know it's we know it's

um it's it's dangerous and possible

because we know they're doing gain of

function research. So we're funding

them." He would never admit we're

funding them because we were funding eco

health, this intermediary. So he said,

"Oh, we're not funding them." Well,

we're funding them through eco health.

It's not gain of function except for

then he says the experiments they're

doing are gain of function. And so I

think everything about it was dishonest.

He got away with it because people in

the scientific community still to this

day defend him and people on the left

made it a partisan. I don't know why

this is a Republican Democrat issue, but

all of the main networks still defend

him. You know, he was given a million

dollar prize. Some nonprofit uh gave him

a million-dollar prize. A How's a

bureaucrat to accept a a million dollar

prize while they're working for the

government?

>> You tell me. you work for

[clears throat] the government.

[laughter]

Then when he leaves the government, he

gets 24/7 limo service and security.

He's got people in front of his home

stopping traffic like you do for a

president getting in the car, which I'm

okay for former presidents, but that's

about it. You know, Anthony Fouchy

should have never got this. I will say

that Trump ended it, you know, and

everybody said, "Oh, he'll be he'll be

killed." And it's like, you know, I

guarantee a lot of us have more threats

than Anthony Fouchy has. And none of us

have a limo picking us up every day.

>> Well, I'm sure he has threats.

>> Um,

>> I'm sure Anthony Fouch [clears throat]

has threats and I think he probably, you

know, should be concerned,

>> but so yeah, but

>> based on what everybody knows,

>> right? But the government doesn't, you

know, you're a famous person. Government

doesn't pay for your limousine, right?

>> He shouldn't have a limousine paid for

by the government with 247.

>> No, no, I agree. I mean, it's also, how

much money did he make?

>> Do we know? We know he got the

million-dollar prize. We know he made

more than the president towards the end.

He was making $450,000 a year. But his

wife, if he ever had an ethical problem,

you know, he went to his wife. His wife

was charge of uh bioeththics for the

NIH. So if there was a question of

whether or not his royalties were a

conflict, he would ask his wife to find

out if he was acting unethically. She

made about 250. So they're really making

a combined 700, which I don't I'm not

against money. You work hard, people pay

you money, I'm all for it, but I am

against the government paying

bureaucrats that kind of money. And so,

and he really there there should be term

limits for people in those positions.

You shouldn't be there for 40 years. So,

he appointed all the people beneath him

and he stacked the deck. And you know, I

asked the question and this was an email

from Francis Collins to Anthony Fouchy.

He says, "Take them down." talking about

Jay Badacharia the head of the NIH now

talking about Martin Caldorf and then an

epidemiologist from Oxford take them

down and so when I have scientists come

before my committee I'll ask them first

question have you ever or would you ever

send another scientist a note saying to

take down a fellow scientist you

disagreed with my goodness what kind

that sounds like the mafia or something

doesn't sound like someone who's

supposed to be above the fray objective

scientist.

>> Were there any other avenues for revenue

for him because of the creation of the

vaccine or any other medications?

>> Um that

>> I don't think with this with the current

one we we don't know um all of his

royalties. He would say, "Oh, I got $25

or something." That's not it might have

been true for a year, but there are

years in the past that he was getting

more. the um I think open the books or

the open secrets that group has gone

through and through freedom of

information has gotten information that

um like 1,500 doctors got 1.5 billion or

1500 scientists got 1.5 billion in

royalty. So it's not an insignificant

amount of money. It's a lot of

scientists. And once again, I'm not even

sure I'm for forbidding it. I just want

to know if any of them are on a

committee voting for the drug that they

got money from that particular drug

company.

>> The woman that was appointed for the NIH

under Biden and never got approved.

>> Um, you know, she may well be an ethical

person, but I think she done research

grants of $231 million from Fizer and it

was listed. It doesn't mean she's a

dishonest person, but I wonder how she

could be objective with Fizer if through

her career and all that money didn't go

to her. It was grants that she oversaw

and some of the money went to her. That

doesn't mean it's illegal or unethical,

but I think it's hard for her to judge

objectively a company that has been the

main financer of her entire career.

>> Well, it certainly incentivizes her to

be more favorable towards them. Clearly,

like you follow human nature. I mean, it

just makes sense.

>> Now, Bobby Kennedy has put, you know,

and the left-wing people hate all the

people he's put on there. I think he's

doing a good job of getting the people

out who were so provaccine that it was a

religion for them. And I think they have

better people. And I've noticed as they

go around the room, I don't know if

you've seen this, when they vote, they

start by saying before they vote, I have

no conflicts of interest. They are

verbally announcing I have no conflicts

of interest, which is a big improvement.

But I really want to see all the

scientists, who they get it from, how

much, and then let you know part of

oversight's not just Congress, it's the

public. It's it's people who analyze

these issues looking in and seeing how

much they made and what do they oversee.

Is there a conflict of interest?

>> What is like what is the tone like in

the government

uh now in comparison to when the

pandemic was going on?

>> Um I'd say it's a calmer tone. There was

hysteria that sort of ruled the day. And

I think that, you know, and this was

sort of the problem and how Anthony

Fouchy became so prominent. You know,

there was, you know, the president was

outsp speaking and the president speaks

off the cuff and doesn't always say

things that are always

exactly accurate, right?

>> And so as he was saying stuff, many of

these uh sort of establishment senators

were saying, "We need somebody else. We

need a scientist at those press

conferences." So it was actually many of

my colleagues who pushed Anthony Fauci,

pushed them through Pence and pushed

them through the president to accept

him. And one of the things that's still

inexplicable to this day is that as

Anthony Fouchy leaves government,

President Trump gives him a gold medal,

a presidential medal of honor, you know,

as he leaves, which, you know, knowing

what we know, I think is um should have

never happened.

>> Yeah.

um the people that were so vehemently

opposed to your position and the people

that were so pro- vaccine and prom like

a lot of them are still in the

government.

>> Yeah. And a lot of them are still in the

in the news media too. I was called all

kinds of names by people

>> and it turns out that almost everything

I was complaining about turns out in

retrospect I was right about most of

them. the mask really most of them

didn't work and even the ones that work

a lot of people don't realize this an

N95 mask works to a certain degree but

once you've touched it you've

contaminated it and also after you've

worn it for four hours the moisture from

your breath uh gets rid of the

electrostatic charge and it doesn't

really work very well so the doctors

don't reuse them they might use them a

couple times really getting in your own

bacteria

>> yeah the doctors throw them away and

wash their hands after every if you can

do that there's maybe some value or

someone's sick in your house. But for

the general public, riding in a car,

particularly when you ride by yourself

in a car and N95 masks does not help

you. I hate to tell the Democrats.

>> I like when they do it. Yeah.

>> I [snorts] think it's important. It's

important when people drive with a mask

on because it lets me know who's out of

their [ __ ] mind.

>> But it also you don't have to ask them

what party to register. It's it's

automatic.

>> Yeah. I said it was a Democrat's MAGA

hat.

>> Yeah. If you're if you're hiking the

Appalent Trail and you see someone out

by themselves and they have an N95 mask

on, um,

>> you can probably guess their party

registration

>> 100%. Yeah, it was a strange time to go

through. Um, it's interesting. Most of

the people that were at CNN are gone

now, except Brian Stelter. They got rid

of them and then that's how bad the

talent is out there. They had to bring

him back.

>> Well, yeah. One of them called me oblo

bloviating ass and I haven't been back

on since then about four years ago and

said I was so awful to Anthony Fouchy

and that everything I said was dangerous

and I was endangering lives but I was

right about the masks. I was right about

natural immunity but I was also right

about this six feet of distance. It's

actually the opposite of what they told

you. So, let's say you were 80 years old

and you and I were coming together in

March of 2020 and well, let's say even

worse. We're going to go to a choir

practice, but we're going to spread out

six feet apart. Is that safe for an 85

year old to go? No. They should be

staying at home. That's the best advice

for them. Stay at home in March of 2020

because guess what? The virus goes 30

feet, 40 feet. You know, if you're in

this room, it's just made up.

>> Yeah. It was made up, but it was made up

in the wrong direction. So what he did

is encourage people to stay six feet

apart from people, go to a crowded room,

go to choir practice, and just stay away

from people. But if you're at risk, you

shouldn't be a choir practice. Not by

law, but by advice. So he actually gave

you unsafe advice on the masks. Cloth

masks don't work. So he's giving you

unsafe advice to go help and feed your

wife or your husband with a cloth mask

on. Natural immunity does work. And he

told you it doesn't work. It was the

opposite of everything he told you. But

he also never got, and I kept saying

this in the hearings, he needed

humility. Humility to know that there's

a possibility he's wrong in what he's

saying. And it should be advice. And

this is what they don't get about

public. If if I were the public health

doctor and a new pandemic came up, I

should give advice, not mandates. Advice

based on the best things we know. And

other doctors should give advice because

there might be other doctors that

disagree with me on it. So you can

choose. That's it's sort of the idea of

getting a second opinion. You go to your

doctor and you think something's not

quite right and he or she wants to

operate on my leg and maybe I want to

wait another three weeks, see if my leg

feels better in three weeks. You get

another opinion or you go home and wait

3 weeks and see if you get better.

>> What when you're an opthalmologist,

right?

>> Right. uh when you're one of the rare

people that's in the government that

does have a background in medicine and

at least in medical training and you're

experiencing all this illogical [ __ ]

like what is what is that like for you?

Did you do you did you try to educate

your

>> you you you try but most of them aren't

willing to listen and you wonder now if

they've even gotten it. Um, but my

favorite is sort of the response you get

because the internet is full of trolls.

And so one of the favorite insults, if

you'll read insults of me, oh, you know,

he's just a failed dental assistant.

[laughter] It's like, well, not quite,

but um,

>> why how' they come up with that one?

>> I don't know. I don't know. They somehow

think I'm a dentist or an optometrist

and I fit glasses or something. No, none

of that's really true. But um,

the people, it takes a long time for

people. I think slowly some of them like

I think half the Democrats actually

think it may have come from the lab now.

They're not real outspoken about it,

>> but

>> only half

>> maybe the elected one. Yeah, this is

maybe

>> the other half still believe in a

natural spillover.

>> Three years into this, the doctor of the

Senate was still recommending there are

16 year olds that are pages, they're 15,

16 years old that they get three

vaccines.

And I absolutely steadfastly think that

that's malpractice and a risk to them.

So I fought it and I would come to the

floor and this is weird. No one's ever

done this. I would ask on the floor of

the Senate for unanimous consent to pass

a rule of the Senate that they don't

they can they can opt out of this

program. You know they can listen,

write, check something and opt out

because it turns out that the

myocarditis

increases in prevalence the more you

take. So if you take one COVID vaccine,

it's less likely you get myocarditis. If

you take a second one, it's a little

more likely a third one. So it's the

opposite of what you should be telling

children. And the death rate for a

healthy 16-year-old really is

essentially zero. I mean, it is so close

to zero. Somebody might be able to find

a healthy year old that died at 16.

Almost everybody that was on CNN, not to

keep mentioning CNN, but they would put

these people on there and they would

hide the fact that they had terminal

cancer. And it is sad that a child dies

anytime, but they were dying from their

cancer and they just happened to have

COVID, you know, and it was dishonest

because they were trying to scare

regular people. Don't send your kid to

school. The teachers union is right. We

should never go back to school. We need

another year out, which was just crazy.

And damaged.

>> It's also there's a giant incentive that

in this country and in New Zealand,

they're the only two countries in the

world where they allow pharmaceutical

drug companies to advertise.

>> Yeah. And it's it's a problem. I very

rarely watch regular television, but

every now and then I'll just go, "What

are these [ __ ] crazy people up to?"

And I'll watch MSNBC or CNN

number of drug ads is staggering. And

the weirdness in those ads, the calm

tone of their voice as they list off

these horrific side effects. Well, and

the thing that's hard to imagine is

there's sometimes for a disease that

like 5,000 people in the country have a

disease that as a physician, even though

I know the names of most of the

diseases, I'll be kind of uncertain now

that I don't remember seeing anybody

ever with that disease and yet it's

being advertised on MSNBC. And then the

question is, do you think that affects

what the the newscasters are saying on

the news? And it does. That's why

they're they're so allin with this. Um,

but you're right. It's not. They're not

trying to use those ads to sell those

drugs. They're using the money by

putting those ads up to make sure that

those

>> pundits don't talk badly about the

pharmaceutical drug company.

>> It's probably more about shaping the

news than it is getting sales.

>> Well, the the proof is in the pudding.

There have absolutely been horrific side

effects of a bunch of different pharm

pharmaceutical drugs. You don't hear a

peep about any of that stuff on CNN. And

you wonder who's buying a drug when they

say, "Well, you could die. You could

become paralyzed. You could have a

stroke. You could have a blood clot,

>> explosive, bloody diarrhea, [laughter]

you know, loss all your memory, suicidal

ideiation. It's just they just list them

off and they list them off like this.

Consult your doctor.

>> They're protecting you so you can take

ambient, but god forbid you take a a

hemp gummy, they will put your ass in

jail if you take a hemp gummy. And

they've just recently outlawed all the

hemp stuff. And I've been fighting this

for the last two months, but all the

hemp products, I know Texas actually has

a lot. They're all going to be banned

within one year now.

>> Now, how did that get passed?

>> Mitch McConnell.

>> How is that guy still around when he

just freezes up every now and again? He

locks up like Windows 95. [laughter]

>> He is uh very very powerful and a lot of

people owe him. you know, he raised

money for decades, hundreds of millions

of dollars, passed it out to the lesserk

known senators, and helped them get

elected when they would get challenges.

And so then they all owe him. And so I

forced an amendment. And it's funny,

then the people on the internet go, "Why

are you doing this? The government shut

down. Why are you gumming up the works

with a vote on on hemp?" Because they

stuck it on the bill to reopen the

government. It's not my choice to talk

about hemp at that time. That was my

only choice. And so I brought forward an

amendment. I got like 20some votes. 70

of them voted, but they voted to set the

limit and to change the the amount of

THC in the plant. So, all the plants are

illegal now. All the seeds are illegal.

There's a real industry of farmers who

grow this. Um, and the thing is, who who

are we to tell somebody who can't sleep

at night that an ambience better for

them than than taking a hemp gummy to go

to sleep at night? or a veteran who

could take percoet or some kind of

psychotropic drug or who has anxiety or

post-traumatic stress and we're going to

tell them they can't take a he company.

I I think it's uh insane and very much

uh you know this presumption that we

know what's best for everyone.

>> Is this the alcohol lobby? Like what

what is the motivation?

>> There was a little bit of the alcohol

lobby and the cannabis lobby. The

cannabis people hate the hemp people.

>> The cannabis people hate the hemp

people. Well, it's complicated. The

cannabis industry developed state by

state, and you really can't make a

marijuana product in Colorado and sell

it in Kentucky. It can't go across state

lines. The hemp, because it was

legalized nationally,

um they they were selling it across

state lines. So, we have big uh

companies now that sell the hemp

gummies. You can order them through the

mail across state lines until this law

came about. And McConnell always felt it

was an unintended consequence and some

of the growth might have been but I

don't think it was there were some bad

products out there and all of us and

including the hemp industry said all

right let's let's regulate this let's

not have 100 mgram gummies the more

traditional is sort of like five

milligrams that's in a drink or in a

gummy that people will take

>> reasonable

>> yeah and and and I think I haven't taken

it I'm for the freedom to take it but I

just I I sleep pretty good but uh so

it's not really something I can attest

to exactly how it works, but people who

do take it to me that have one of the

drinks say it might be like drinking a

beer or maybe not even drinking a beer

when you drink one of these uh THC

drinks. So, the cannabis businesses in

the states where it's legal don't want

it legal nationally because then it

would interfere with their business

because you'd be able to order it

through the mail.

>> Well, they'd probably accept it if we'd

legalized cannabis nationally and then

they would compete with hemp. What was

going on is we haven't legalized

cannabis nationally. We've legalized it

state by state,

>> but I don't think even if your state has

legal adult use and another one does, I

don't think you can transfer it across

the state law.

>> You're saying hemp, but you really mean

THC.

>> Uh, that's for marijuana.

>> CBD and THC, correct?

>> Yeah, CBD has a little bit of THC in it

and so do the hemp gummies have some THC

in it. And then the drinks do. It's

about 5 milligrams in a lot of the

different do. They're different doses,

but that's

>> And so all of those are going to be

illegal.

>> Yeah. The the the McConnell language

says you can't have more than 0.4

milligrams, which is such a low number

that I don't think it'll have any

effect. I mean, frankly, the THC is the

effect, you know, and so if you make the

THC number so small, uh I don't think

people will take them. Um the CBD oil,

people might still take some of that,

but I assume if there the effect that

people are getting from the CBD oil, if

they rub it on has to be the THC.

>> No. No, CBD itself with no THC has a

beneficial effect. There's there's CBD

balm that you can use for like

arthritis.

>> That may still be legal. The plant

though, the D, the definition of the

plant that the CBD oil comes from. So,

they're going to have to rehybridize all

these plants. What I was going to say

was um my mom or my not my mom rather,

my wife's mom um uses uh CBD with THC

and she's found that that's more

effective for arthritis and aches and

pains than CBD without it. She's done

both and she says the CBD with with THC

is more effective.

>> And there are some people and once again

I'm not here to tell you to take it or

not take it. I'm tell I'm for the

freedom for people to make their own

decision. There's some people with

children who have seizures who take

medications and the kid still has a

hundred seizures a day, which isn't good

for your brain and for the child. And

that some of them have added some CBD

drops they give to the child of CBD oil

with the THC, right? And they think it

slows the seizures down some.

>> Yeah. I have a friend whose child has

severe autism and sometimes has seizures

and the only thing that stops the

seizures is uh CBD with THC.

>> And the best way to think about it is is

I'll never forget this. This was in I

think 2007 when Romney was running for

president. My dad was in fact I know

somebody who was a supporter of my dad

in 2007.

>> But anyway, they go up to Romney and

it's a person in a wheelchair with MS.

And they said, "Would do are you in

favor of making it illegal? I take

marijuana at night to sleep. Are you in

favor of making that illegal for me to

take it? I have MS. Would you would you

be for making it illegal?" Romney looked

right at him and said, "I sure would."

And it's like, what kind of person says

that? What kind of person is so

presumptuous of their moral position

that they're going to tell you it's

immoral to take that, but fine to take

some, you know, anti-csychotic drug or

some kind of narcotic that the pharmacy

pharmaceutical companies sell, but we're

not going to let you use marijuana?

Well, it's ignorance. You know, it's

people that have never consumed it and

have these preconceived notions of what

it actually does versus what it does. I

mean, you'd be surprised at how many,

you know, little old ladies are taking

CBD with THC in it for, you know, to

help with their aches and pains and help

them sick.

>> My joke when I tell people who's opposed

to this, like McConnell, you know, who's

older than um

>> older than dirt, is that they all

watched Reefer Madness in 1937

[laughter] at the matinea and they'll

never forget what happens if you get

that Reefer Madness. and uh some of them

probably were alive in 1937 could have

actually seen the movie. But uh that's

it. It's an irrational sort of fear. But

on the other side of this, we're on a

program that a lot of people will hear.

I don't want people at home thinking I

want everybody and every 15year-old out

there smoking marijuana after school. I

think there are some some side effects

to smoking marijuana all the time,

particularly for the brain. And I'm not

here to encouraging drinking alcohol.

Same thing.

>> I'm for personal choice for adults. And

the the problem with the whole reef for

madness thing, I'm glad you brought that

up. Do you know the whole story behind

it?

>> No.

>> William Randph Hurst. William Randph

Hurst was responsible for this whole

terrifying craze of of people thinking

that marijuana was driving people nuts

and jumping out of buildings. In 193

something, I forget the year. They they

came up with a new product called the

Decorticator. And it was in Popular

Science magazine, hemp, the new

billiondoll crop. Because they had this

new machine that allowed them to

effectively process hemp fiber. William

Randph Hurst owned Hurst Publications,

but he also owned paper mills. Hemp was

a far more effective and far more uh

durable form of paper. He was going to

compete with hemp. And he had forests

that he was using for his paper where

they were, you know, for paper mills.

>> And hemp was going to replace all that.

It was a competitor. So they were they

were arguing against it as a commodity.

Marijuana was never a name for cannabis.

marijuana was a name for a wild Mexican

tobacco. And so they started saying in

his newspapers, they started printing

these fake stories about how blacks and

Mexicans were taking this new drug and

raping white women. And that's where

Reefer Banditis came from. And they call

this new drug marijuana. This episode is

brought to you by Paleo Valley, 100%

grass-fed beef sticks. I live a super

busy lifestyle. I'm always running from

one thing to the next and Paleo Valley

is the perfect onthe-go snack. These

beef sticks are legit. No junk, no

garbage ingredients, just pure clean

protein fermented the old school way.

So, they're shelf stable without

chemicals. That is huge. And the

fermentation part, it's actually good

for your gut. Most people don't even

think about that, but if you care about

performance, you have to care about your

gut health. And tastewise, they're

awesome. They've sold over 55 million of

these things. That's not just hype.

That's people coming back again and

again because it works. Right now, you

can get 20% off your first order. Just

go to paleo valley.com/rogan

and use the code roan. I know this is

going to be shocking to you, but that's

the story of government.

>> Yeah. Most things that come out in

government, if you look beneath the

surface, they all have pretty names.

They have acronyms say patriotism, the

Patriot Act, how you must be

anti-patriotic if you're not for the

Patriot Act. But most of the things they

say it's the opposite or someone has put

something forward that really is about

like let's say it's a banking

regulation. You say this is going to

protect the poor people. But it turns

out the banking regulation is easier

paid for and absorbed by big banks. And

so what happens to your small local

bank? You say how come all the small

banks get gobbled up by big banks? It's

because you put regulations on that who

favored the big banks favor the

regulations because it puts the small

bank out of business. They get absorbed

by the big bank and then the new banks

trying to come in can't afford the

compliance cost. Um right now one of the

extraordinary things we're doing with

with banks and I don't think many people

know this. The Federal Reserve is now

paying interest to big banks on keeping

reserves at the Federal Reserve. There's

$3 trillion there. Last year, the big

banks, primarily the big banks in New

York, got $187 billion in interest.

Previously, that interest would go back

to the Treasury to offset the debt.

That's about 10% of our debt. So, our

debt is 10% worse because we're now

paying and we never did this. Before

2010, we never paid interest on on

reserves. And what it means to pay

interest on reserves is that it's an

incentive for the Fed just to leave it

there. Why loan it to you if you're

expanding a business when I can just

leave it here and get 4%. It also keeps

interest rates from going down because

if the Fed pays the big bank 4%, are

they going to loan it to you for three

and a half when it can just sit at the

Fed and gain four? So, it's it's kind

of, you know, President Trump always

wants what he wants. And sometimes he

wants good things, but, you know, may

not go about it the best way. He wants

interest rates to be lower. I think most

people do. But one way to make interest

lower is tell the Fed they can't pay

interest to these big banks. Have you

ever had a conversation with him about

this?

>> I've been trying for like three months

to get out a conversation with Bessant

and I held up one of their uh with the

secretary of treasur. I held up one of

their appointees last week, which is one

of the things you do to get the

attention of the people you want to talk

to. And they've agreed to meet with me,

but we're already, you know, halfway

into January. But I'm trying to get a

meeting with Bent to talk to him about

this idea of paying interest because

they said, "Oh, it'll only take $30

billion to set up the system." Then it

was a trillion. Now it's three trillion.

And I think it just keeps growing and

growing, but that money really isn't

being productive. And it's a gift to

these big banks.

>> When it comes to this uh this THC thing,

what can be done?

>> Trump's been good on some things. You

know, the whole idea of changing it from

schedule one to schedule three is an

improvement. It's still illegal without

a prescription, but a lot of the

research with marijuana didn't happen

because schedule one's just almost

impossible. you got to have like safes

and guards and everything to deal with

with a schedule one drug. And so very

little research occurred on marijuana

over time. And um so lowering the

schedule is a good idea. Um state by

state has kind of worked in the sense

that it's allowed people to see what

it's like and get used to it. Um but

some of the states have have backtracked

and some are worried that they went too

far. Um, [snorts]

it's harder to determine, I think, acute

intoxication if someone's driving under

the influence to do a test. I I would

guess the technology should be out

there, but I don't know that it's widely

available.

>> Maybe it would have to be a blood test,

right? I I don't know if you're if

you've consumed an edible, you're not

going to be able to get something with a

breathalyzer.

>> I don't I don't know that for certain.

Your your breath is amazing what it

actually has in it. So, I I don't know

the answer to that. If

testing is not

>> Yeah. Which reminds me, there's a guy in

California I've met just you meet

extraordinary people. He's actually

studying uh contents of what you exhale

to look for cancer markers.

>> So, I mean, they're really minute, but

he's going to try to diagnose things

like, you know, you'll hear of a friend,

you know, is like 45 years old, has

pancreatic cancer, or actually we have a

former senator right now, Ben Sass, who

says he has stage four pancreatic

cancer. And the reason it it spreads

before you know you have it, but he's

trying to get a and he has a test that

measures markers just from what you

exhale to try to pick up on cancers

before they be detected.

>> So there's a possibility that they come

up with some sort of a detection method

to find out if you're intoxicated.

>> I think probably and I I don't know the

technology that well.

>> Uh but it's either way just for

responsible use for adults. It just

doesn't make any sense that they would

change it from what it is now and make

it more restrictive,

>> right? I don't think any states have

gone backwards. Most states have gone

forward. We finally in Kentucky, we

don't have adult use, but we have I

think we've just legalized the medical,

but the way medical works, it's still

strictly by state. So, you have to have

physicians who decide to prescribe it,

farmers who decide to grow it, and it's

a little bit of a niche industry. And

you know, like most industries in our

country, one state gets really good and

they export it to other states and some

climates are better for growing it, but

um that has been a hindrance to the

marijuana industry.

>> Well, it's also you're enabling the

[laughter] cartel to make money off of

it. That's the real problem. Uh I had a

gentleman on my podcast named John

Norris. He was a game warden in

California and um you know just checking

fishing licenses and making sure that

people are following the laws and u

wound up uh chasing down a dry creek and

uh f trying to find out like had a

farmer diverted the creek like what had

happened here. Well, it turned out there

was an illegal grow operation by the

cartel because when California made

marijuana legal in the state for adult

use, what they did was make it a

misdemeanor to grow it illegally. So,

it's just a misdemeanor. So, the cartel

just started growing it in state parks,

forests.

>> And so, they would find these heavily

armed cartel operations in the middle of

national parks, national forests. And

you know the his group became like he's

got a great book called Hidden War and

his his organization became essentially

a tactical group. You know they had

Belgian Malamis and bulletproof vests

and they were having shootouts with the

cartel in the forest

>> because these guys were growing this

stuff and 90% of all the marijuana

that's sold in these states where it's

illegal was being grown in a state where

it's only a misdemeanor to grow it. And

>> so they were growing it in California

and they [clears throat] were using all

sorts of horrific pesticides and

herbicides that are illegal

>> uh everywhere else, but they would use

them. And so you'd get pesticide

poisoning, herbicide poisoning.

>> You know, it's crazy. It's like we're

it's just responsible adult use. We're

curtailing. And the way we're doing this

is by propping up these illegal drug

cartels the same way that during the

alcohol prohibition, they propped up the

mob and the

>> moonshiners. And this is what people

don't understand about prohibition. When

you have prohibition, you get products

that are more dangerous because they're

not openly regulated. You also have more

uh young people using it because if it's

already illegal, what do I care if I'm

selling out of the back of my car? I'm

not going to check your ID. So we to get

adult use and to get rules on those

things, it's better to actually have it

legal. So with the hemp thing,

McConnell, I'm in the same state. So he

goes home and he tells everybody, "Yeah,

Ren Paul wants your kids to use hemp."

That's not true because Kentucky passed

a state law that says you have to be 21,

regulates the amount. His law is going

to overturn that and there is no federal

law on the age of hemp. So, he's

actually the one that's going to

overturn the law by prohibiting it all.

But most of the states have reasonably

looked at this. Now, Texas looked at it

and then Texas was going to ban it and

then Governor Abbott stepped up and and

vetoed it. But Texas, the legislature

was terrible. uh they were gonna they

were gonna they passed a ban on hemp

here and then Abbottz vetoed it. It's

sort of in limbo now.

>> Um so when this this national one when

does this go into effect?

>> It's one year from when we passed it and

I think we passed it in uh probably

November. So this coming November u the

entire heist will go bust. This is a$2

billion industry. This is not a small

industry and there's a lot of jobs.

There's a lot of people using it. Like

you say, these aren't reefer madness

people out there committing crimes. It's

your grandmother, your mother. It's

people have difficulty sleeping. It's um

you know, there's still hope and I'm

trying to reverse it. I have several

bills that we're working on going to

introduce in the near future to either

try to extend the deadline andor change

it. I'd like to change it where if your

state has regulated it, the federal

government would um aced to your state

regulation or um allow your state to

regulate it.

>> Well, it's got to be very bizarre being

a rational person working for the

government. Yeah. Um and it I don't the

people up there are of a different sort.

Many of them have never worked really

outside of government. So they really

>> Yeah. They they know they know nothing

about writing checks. Yeah. Exactly.

>> Telling you how to live your life.

>> And it's kind of when people come up to

me and they say, you know, they're

young, smart kids, kids that have been

interns in my office. I want to run. I

want to be part of government. And I

say, go out and have a career first.

Work somewhere. You know, I worked as a

physician for about 20 years before I

ended up running. And really you have to

have a real career because politics one

isn't that great a career and two there

is no guarantee you can be the smartest

person in the world not win. It doesn't

always you have to be in the right right

person right time right place and a

little bit of luck. Yeah. And you know

it's like how can someone

effectively govern if you haven't

experienced life outside of the

government? It just doesn't seem even

rational. Yeah. that you could be a

person that would be a good

representation of all these hardworking

people if you've never actually had a

job. Just seems weird.

>> Yeah. That's why people thought one of

the bushes was out of touch. I think it

was the elder bush when he went to the

grocery store and he didn't know what a

scanner was. He had never seen grocery

scanned because he never been in a

grocery store. That's that's funny. But

what is it like like being I mean how

it's got to be incredibly frustrating,

but it's also got to be bizarre.

>> Yeah. And um I'll give you an example

what I think is bizarre. So we've been

uh blowing up these people in boats off

the coast of Venezuela. They're accused

of running drugs, but nobody knows their

names and nobody's putting up any

evidence. When we um had them September

2nd, two of them were still clinging to

the wreckage. They're shipwrecked. Um

they blew them up. And so what I think

is bizarre is I hear mostly my

Republican colleagues say, "Well, um, we

shouldn't have to. How do we know

they're not armed?" And it's like, but

there's this thing called presumption of

innocence. They say, "It doesn't apply."

Well, it actually always has applied on

the oceans. We have always we've had

drug interdiction, but we have always

stopped boats and asked to search them.

If they flee or shoot at the Coast

Guard, they will get shot and blown up,

but it's usually an escalatory sort of

steps.

We know that when the Coast Guard boards

vessels off of Miami and off of

California, one in four of the boats

they board don't have any drugs on them.

So I I look at my colleagues who say

they're pro-life and they they value

God's inspiration in life, but they

don't give a [ __ ] about these people in

the boats. And are they terrible people

votes? I don't know. They're probably

poor people in Venezuela and Colombia.

And really, they say, "Well, we're at

war with them. They're committing war by

bringing drugs into America." They're

not even coming here. They're going to

these islands in the south part of the

Caribbean. The cocaine and it's not

fentinel at all. The cocaine's going to

Europe. Those little boats can't get

here. No one's even asked this common

question. Those boats have these four

engines on them. They're outboard boats.

You can probably go about a 100 miles

before you have to refuel. They're 2,000

miles from us. They have to refuel 20

times to get here. They really It was

all a pretense and a false argument. But

I guess what I don't feel connected to

my Republican colleagues is that those

lives don't matter at all and we just

blow them up. And against all justice

and against all laws of war, all laws of

just war, we never have blown up people

who were shipwrecked. It's against the

military code of justice to do that and

we're doing it and everybody just says,

"Oh, well, they're drug dealers." Why do

you think they were attacking those

people? because I've heard a bunch of