Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Hey, everybody, Welcome to Everything'sPolitical. I'm your host, Taya Shoemake.
You can also find us online atEverything's Political dot substack dot com.
Shout out too, Magicman Joe Strecker, the John Wooden of podcast producers,
who on this day, Joe intwoenty ten, passed away at the age
(00:22):
of ninety nine. May you havehealth and wellness and live that long,
my friend, John Wooden, obviouslythe legendary basketball coach at UCLA, also
known as the Wizard of Westwood.He won ten championships in twelve years,
(00:44):
and he invested in his players,by extension, invested in the game,
made college basketball the awesome sport thatit is. He is an OG in
the top tier. I'd throw himin there with Adolph Rupp, Jim Calhoun,
Bobby Knight. I'd throw in RickPatino there as well. And it's
(01:10):
a perfect shout out today Joe,this legendary basketball coach, because I have
no doubt that our next guest isgoing to be a slam dunk, same
(01:30):
as the Okay. Speaking of OG'sin the top elite tier of their professions,
you will recognize the name of ourguest today. Most of you Will
(01:53):
who has helped keep most of ussaying over the last four years. If
I weren't so to speak to himtoday, I might be a little intimidated.
He holds a PhD in physics.He is a nuclear cardiologist and holds
a JD as well, so adoctor of laws. He is doctor Richard
Fleming. Doctor Fleming, welcome andthank you for being here today. It's
(02:15):
my pleasure to be here. Thankyou for the invitation. Absolutely. Okay,
It's hard to know where to start, because if I say start from
the beginning, doctor Fleming, wehave to go back to you were one
of the first people who made thelink between inflammation and chronic disease and metabolic
(02:35):
health, and then in a wholetesting and measuring system that came with that.
So and so feel free to interjectwith that. I just wanted to
say that upfront because we are abouthealth and wellness here on the show,
and our audience is very interested inthat and has been how to keep down
(02:57):
inflammation, how to increase metabolic healthat the cellular level. So let's start
with for our listeners, your forayinto the COVID melee. A lot of
us were skeptical when Anthony Fauci wentfrom there's nothing to see here too,
You're all going to die gasping forair waiting on a hospital bed within the
span of two weeks, and alot of us were like, that just
(03:21):
doesn't seem right. We didn't knowwhy. Now you helped us go down
some of those rabbit holes, thankgoodness. But what was your foray into
this debacle? Well, I guessI'd have to start when I was a
medical student, because that's when HIVcame out, and that's also when doctor
Anthony Fauci took over NIID, Sothat work with HIV was critical. Understanding
(03:45):
the inflammathrombotic disease. I mean,everybody calls it inflammation and heart disease,
and I understand that because that wasthe terminology. I even wrote a book
titled Stop Information Now that was ontwenty twenty. And you can't have inflammation
without blood clotting, and you can'thave blood clotting without inflammation. So what
(04:08):
I've been trying to get people todo is to embrace just that little bit
longer term of in flammel throm body. Because all of these chronic diseases are
disease. You know cbas or strokes, diabetes, cancer, blood pressure.
All of these are in flammo frombody diseases. They are the consequence of
(04:31):
something happening in the body, differentfactors that cause the body to respond or
react. The importance of understanding howthese factors fit together is more than just
me putting a jigsaw as all togetherand saying say that came up with the
theory. It's understanding how these worktogether so that you can sort out what's
(04:55):
important in each person and address that. When when you were twenty twenty happened,
it was very clear to me frommy prior experience with HIV that nobody
was acting in a way that saidwe need to figure this out, you
know. So I sat on andI began looking at what we did know
(05:16):
about different drugs, particularly as theyapplied versus sorted out a research study did
multiple drugs and at multiple combinations tosee what did and didn't work. But
that process can't just be a singlething that you're focusing in my world and
(05:36):
my brain, it's but I haveto understand what I'm dealing it. So
I have to develop the study,I have to develop the protocol, and
I have to carry out the study. But I also need to make sure
I'm not missings, and that meanswhat am I dealing with? Where did
this come from? And that ofcourse opened that Pandora's box that when I
(06:00):
I hear something from one side that'swrong, I can't just deal with one
side. If the other side alsosays things that are wrong, I have
to address that because I have youknow, I'm sixty eight. I've been
to enough conferences, I've been toenough picnics that people have said, well,
I Fleeinn didn't disagree with it,so I must agree. He hurt
(06:23):
it and needed disagree. It's like, well darn and all they would really
have to do is reach out,you know, why not discuss it so
that you know what you're presenting andyou know from whom, from whence it
came. I think it's valuable tospeak to the person who comes up with
something. I have been blessed inmy life many things. I'm not blessed
(06:46):
with bad outcomes, but a lotof other blessings in my life to be
trained by the people. I gottrained by the men who were at the
top of the field in both plasmaand positrons. I got an opportunity to
sit down with Van Allen as asixteen seventeen year old working on my thesis
(07:11):
and talked to him about what Iwas working on with electromagnetic fields. I
mean, that's priceless. I gotthe opportunity to be trained by both Denton
Coolie and Michael Baking, you know, the gurus of party of oscar surgery
in con general hertesy surgery. Iwas there when intravascular ultrasound was developed.
(07:33):
I was there doing research on someof the chemotherapy drugs, and every one
of those opportunities added into my levelof understanding and the ability to converse with
the people. I don't know ifthey will ever consider anything I do,
having paid in any small fraction.I believe it was you were the first
(07:58):
one to talk about the potential orlikelihood I don't know which one for a
prion disease from spike protein, andyou had a beautiful graphic explaining your reasoning
behind it. And I can't rememberif it was the SARS Kobe two or
if it was the mRNA recipe spikethat could cause those folds in the protein.
(08:28):
I guess it was in the tauelprotein. So when I think of
you in the OG and roll intwenty twenty. How are these things coming
to you because you were out infront and you were able to educate us
so that we knew what to lookfor. I mean, how do you
(08:48):
know, hey, this is what'slikely to happen with this understanding of virus
is a two step approach. Youcan't do it like bacteria where you just
do one step and grow it ona petrio plat or growing in an animal.
You have to really do two things. You have to You have to
find it, but it's smaller thana bacteria, so it's the electron micross
(09:09):
bey to find it. But whenyou use electron microsky, it pills everything
that you're studying. It's part ofthe consequence of using electron microssy. It's
a small but that the technique procederkills everything that's there. And then the
other part is figuring out the geneticcode sequence so you can identify it.
(09:33):
So purpose with Luke Montani and Iwere talking about that and the changes that
are going on and how HIV andand also stars Kobe two was losing this
glycoprotein one twenty off it when theproteo pco pretty as inhibitors were being used
(09:54):
like pac slogan right, and sowe were seeing the same phenomenon then occurring
where initially it looked like people aregetting better and then they were eating worse.
Well, the click approaching when twentyis a prime component. And it's
interesting because to get to one twenty, typically there's a cleavach from something on
is gl like approaching one sixty,and it gets cleaved by the furine cleavach
(10:20):
protease. And so GP one sixtygets cleaved by the furine cleavach that we
talked about with this Tariskooby two virusinto glycoprotein when twenty mils and no furine
is very much involved with cancers,and so whether it's one of the consequences
and it's shedding is part of what'sbeing saying. That's to be determined because
(10:43):
there really aren't any good studies.Nobody's being sampled, nobody knows what to
look for. This is very costlyand laborious task at this point in time.
So all of that was altering thestructure of the spy protein. And
you know, the very simple analogythat I was trying to lay out for
people is imagine you have a boxand you alter the box, right,
(11:05):
you put something more in it.If you're in cleavage side of the GP
Win twenty or any of the seventeenhundred and seventy whatever is it, seventy
six nucleus sides that were inserted inthere, they like stepping on the box.
It deforms the shape of the box. That alderation then causes the box
to have an effect upon things aroundit. I mean, the box you
(11:28):
have change the shape of the thing. So almost always there's a sudden recognition.
Yeah. I wouldn't say that wasreally an aha moment because there were
multiple things there, But when youwhen it finally makes sense, you suddenly
realize, yeah, okay, thisis where we're going. All right,
well, let's follow the science.And in contrast to doctor Fauci, who
(11:50):
didn't seem to be really interested infounding the science, he was more interested
in trying to guide this science.I like to follow the science because then
I don't have to figure out whetherI've interfered with it. It will tell
me, which is kind of thecompanying part about being a scientist. The
uncomfortable part is you're not to theanswer until you get to the answer and
(12:13):
you don't win. The answer isgoing to come where if you're making the
answer that you can kind of fudget. I suppose that's what he looked like
he was doing so much of thetime. But you follow it until you
get to the end. And whenyou get to the end of the rope,
so to speak, you know you'vefound that kind of allusion. Then
the question is are you missing otherpieces? That's where the scientific integrity really
(12:37):
kicks in, because you know,as we were talking about before, you
know, the integrity of the foundingfathers and people from a couple hundred years
ago, they seem to have muchmore intellectual curiosity about something or determination that
they just weren't going to loose andwere not acceptable. And if they were
there, it's because they couldn't addressthem all. But they weren't gonna,
you know, take the week offor the month off and say, well,
(13:00):
I'm too busy, I really wantto go to the beach. You
know. You know, it's kindof one of the expressions that had for
people is that hospitals are great placesif it wasn't for the patients. You
know, the patient keeps showing upand you know, it changes what you're
going to do in the day.Otherwise it'd just be a nice place to
go vacation, but never works outthat way. Would it be accurate to
(13:20):
say that all of those things thatwell, the IQ people. So I'm
an EQ person. I knew Founciwas lying the second his mouth opened,
But I couldn't have told you exactlywhy, Okay, because I'm not trained.
But the IQ people who saw allof the things you mentioned, the
cleavage sites, the one twenty,glico one twenty, all of that,
(13:43):
would that in combination? Is itaccurate to say that signaled to you that
this was gain a function or justthat it was man mad. There was
something wrong, okay, something thatshould not be there again. You know
what we see, most mutations thatoccur end up in the death of whatever
(14:07):
they occur in. So when mutationsoccur, and they typically occur one part
at a time, when nucleus sidebase at a time, not in twelve,
not in seventeen hundred and seventy sixof them, one will do it.
One will kill you. So youknow, if your sickle cell patient
one changes your red blood cells fromwhat there's a mind probably look like to
(14:31):
a sickled cell and it's critical andit survived because it had to survival.
About it that malaria couldn't kill offthe people with sickled cells when you start
doing the research, and this iswhat the initial research grants show. So
the question is, Okay, here'shere's these grants going out right, where
(14:52):
are the grants going They're going tothese people for this research and these papers
are being published. Well, whatdo we find out from that? And
if you've been to my website,you know I've got that gain of function
t have there and I walk youdown. So if you want to pretend
that your genet says, you cando it. And when you look at
(15:13):
the PCR data, what you discoveris that RS thirty three, sixty seven,
Kobe rsc M A fifteen and Mfifteen and Kobe M fourteen match SARS
W two and all three of thoseviruses. We're gain of function viruses that
(15:37):
these people made with these grant monies, including you know, going way back
to two thousand and four when Daisacand Barritt were first rescuing er Bunny Stars
Kobe or Bannie. That's what startsto make it obvious. I mean,
here are these things matched stars Kobetoo genetically. These things we have vapors
(16:03):
that show that they were man made, and here's somebody that did it.
That that pretty much will tells youyou've got you've got a bioweapon. As
doctor Fauci wanted to emphasize last weekduring his testimony be for the sub committee,
he said, well, it's notgain a function because this other group
(16:26):
change gain of function. Okay,so you know, shake your head a
line. A rose by any ofthe name is still a rose. So
but a bioweapon by any of thename is still a bio weapon. So
let's use doctor Fauci's approach. Let'suse what the experts have defined as a
bioweapon. Well, if you lookat the Biological Weapon Convention Treaty of nineteen
(16:52):
seventy five, they're pretty clear.If you look at the nineteen eighty nine
Anti Terrorism Act, the bioweapon definitionis very clear. If you look at
the twenty twelve Law eighteen USC.Section and seventy five, the definition of
bio weapon is pretty clear. Thanksto doctor Fauci's insistence that we use the
(17:15):
expert's definitions, these are bioweapons.In fact, eighteen US Section five goes
so forth as to say, it'snot a biological agent if you find it
in nature. It is if youtake it out of nature, right,
And so I don't care if youwant to play this thing about Wuhan bats
(17:38):
and all the rest of that,which is, you know, a great
research source. When it's brought outof nature and put into a lab,
by definition, it's now a biologicalagent. And when it's a weapon.
Do you need a PhD in physicsto do this one? It's a biological
(17:59):
weapon? A yes. My father, who had an eighth grade education,
who was a carpenter, he wasraised during the depression. My mother,
who added twelfth grade education, andboth people were extremely brilliant, would not
have needed a PhD in business todo this matter. I know two things
can be true at the same timewith regard to gain of function. And
(18:21):
you're creating this bioweapon, is itthe sole intent just to make it more
infectious and or to make it morelikely that the virus SARS CoV two will
evolve into the disease of COVID nineteenRight, So some people with robust immune
systems will prevent that disease from happening. Is that part of the gain of
(18:47):
function or do you know if it'sjust part to make it more transmissible.
So gina function by definition is eitherchanging something to make more infective or more
pathogenic. So Corona virus disease firstidentified in the year twenty nineteen, is
where the term COVID nineteen comes from. It's a disease. Covid is an
(19:14):
inflammable throat in flammo thrombotic response tosource COBE two virus. This is the
response of the body to something perturbingit. Most of what we saw up
front, where people with the coolmorbidities, right the people who already had
in flamml throbtic diseases, we justwe haven't been talking about them in this
(19:37):
term. I mean, I guessthree decades ago when everybody started using the
term inflammation because it was nineteen ninetyfour. It presented this American art in
Dallas. That was three decades ago. And I see literature material in cardiology
where they're talking about like a protein, little A and other substances and they're
saying, well, this is important, you know. My response is,
(20:00):
yeah, it was thirty years agowhen I put it in the thirty.
So it's important to realize that thepeople who already had enflamneled thrombotic diseases,
this was kind of the last thingthat they needed to tip them over the
edge. And it's one of myimportant points because when people say, oh,
they didn't die from COVID, theydied from as late, public would
(20:22):
say a heart attack. No,they died from COVID, because that's what
happens you have any flamnel thrombodic disease. If I could interject, is it
sure would it be fair or accurateto say that spike from SARS Kobe two
or the mRNA recipe spike. Ithink they're different, but do the same
(20:48):
thing. They get into your body, find and exploit weaknesses. Is that
fair well? And I wouldn't evensay it's weaknesses. I mean it's the
body's response to them to something that'snot supposed we did right. The difference
is is that typically when you haveso yes, spikebroken from either source is
going to precipitate that. And Iwarned people up front. I said that
(21:10):
we should not be before we havethe genetic vaccines that I refer to as
eugenic genetic vaccines, because once youread the book or with it's endangered species
to understand why that's so critical tounderstand, and it's the evidence is there.
I caution that it would be abad idea to vaccinate healthy people,
(21:37):
because they're healthy, they will havea massive immune response to these genetic vaccines.
So when person a person transmits avirus, it's you know, a
thousand and ten thousand virus particles.It's something like ten billion gene sequences in
the genetic vaccines to replicate. Soif you take a healthy person and their
(22:03):
cells are healthy and they replicate billions, their immune system is going to respond
to that like they just got gasolinepoured on them and a match lit.
And that's what we saw. Andit's important to note that I calculate in
this new book that the risk analysisit is zero point eight percent, and
(22:26):
from the people doing this type ofwork from a military perspective, this is
an acceptable loss because there's huge amountof data that's been generated and at quite
acceptable levels from a military perspective.Part of what we trained as to get
our doctorates at the age that wedid is every week we ran scenarios of
(22:49):
who lives and who dies? Soyou can imagine doing this for six years.
We were doun a lot of scenarios. And the scenarios are, you're
at point A. For humanity tosurvive, you have to get the point
B. Here's everybody you have withyou, here's all the equipment. Tell
us what equipment you're going to usebecause you can't use all of that.
(23:14):
And who you're going to take withyou because this is the limited number of
people you get to take. Wholives and who dies because you're doing this
for humanity? Right. We didthis every week, So mindset was to
make decisions and not regret it,right. And the scenario is what do
(23:36):
you have to do? Two?How will people react? How can you
control that reaction? Do you getpeople to do what you want them to
do? And when you understand thatmore than half of these bioweapons, of
this money for this gain of functionbio research came from the US d O
(23:56):
D. You know again, asI tell people, the Department of Defense
somewhat laughable name, and I believethey used to be called the Department of
War. Well, you know,I mean, there's nothing defensive about what
they're doing, right, I meanmilitary militaries do not make weapons that they
don't want to use. The USDepartment of Defense paid four hundred nineteen five
(24:19):
hundred eleven dollars through Metabiota and Blackand Beach in the beginning of November twenty
nineteen, and that money was togo to the Ukrainian labs to provide a
DoD with a report on COVID Okay, So, seven weeks before anybody heard
about a Wuhan wet market, aDoD spent more than four nineteen thousand dollars
(24:44):
for a COVID report the inflammable roboticresponse disease from Ukrainian labs. The same
labs, by the way, thatwe know Russia was in there before building
bioweapons on in the nineteen nineties,they're building bioweapons or cry alone. By
March, eight days after Russian invadesthe Ukraine, the US admits we have
(25:07):
fifteen biolabs and four mobile ones weredoing and within three months we admit that
there's forty four labs that we havebiolabs in the Ukraine, and at the
cost of two hundred and twenty fourmillion dollars. By the way, the
DODA has gone on and wiped offthe evidence of their grants, of course
to Metabiota, except that, beingthe research scientist that I am, I
(25:29):
have copies of everything, and you'llsee them in the book and you'll see
them in the QR codes. Becauseit's called obstruction of justice. It'd be
one thing if they were smart enoughto just simply delete it and go on.
I don't know how that got deleted. I mean, we didn't do
it. Did you do it?Frank? You know? I mean they
play that stupid responsible. I don'tknow where you could do that. I
mean somebody, maybe somebody hit adelete button. I mean, everybody's done
(25:52):
that, right, But then togo on and change it and say that
those same grants stopped on January thirty, verse twenty thirteen. And those grants,
by the way, are now connectedwith research on kids, you know,
I mean, come on, guys, yeah, so you know,
And now we're getting into the tothe nitty gritty of why. You know,
(26:14):
there's an old adage never attribute tocriminality what you can to incompetence.
I think we're dealing with both atall levels of government, and we are
a big proposer of the idea thatour government does everything and more that we
only accuse other governments of doing.And I think your naive if you don't
at least consider that. And that'sreally predicated upon a cursory knowledge of history.
(26:38):
So our eugenics program in bioweapons programbegan in the eighteen fifties eighteen sixties,
and it provided the impetus for AdolfHitler to have his eugenics programs during
Nazi Germany. People have talked abouthaving a second Nuremberg, and I can
only hope that that never happens,because Nuremberg won in nineteen forties him with
(27:00):
a blithering disaster. We prosecuted.I go through this in the book.
A couple dozen Nazis, high rankingofficials, intelligence officers, scientist doctors between
the United States, the Soviet Unionnow Russia, England, France, and
Canada. We brought more than threethousand of them out and put them in
(27:22):
our government and our research facilities,including doctor Bloom that I talked about in
the book Who you can go Wikipedia? This guy, he was one of
the doctors that was acquitted thanks tothe US. We got him off.
What did this guy do? Hedid genetics research on twins, He did
Aeroslia's vaccine research, and he droppedAnthras on US military and Russian troops.
(27:47):
And the cost of him doing thistype of activity was the US win and
got him off, got him acquitted, and then stuck him into our programs.
So between Projects six three and Projectpaper Clip and m k Uldra and
Operation as Urasium and variety aboutyers,these Nazis were pived into every government agency
(28:14):
that that had any power. Infact, of the five U n Council,
you know the I forgot the nameof it right now, but the
Council of the Five Nations, whichis Russia kinda, the United States Security
Council, England and Fance, theone the big five that make the decisions.
(28:36):
Four of them had Nazis went intothem, and the ones that didn't
are the Chinese. Somewhat laughingly,I think here with everything, so you
know, Nurnberg was a blithering disaster. I lay out in the book,
I'd only how to prosecute these people, and to do it through ten letters
dot org and to provide the evidencefor attorney generals and district attorneys to prosecute
(28:59):
these frominals. And we're coming closeto it. I just gave testimony I
won't release to whom, but toanother nation for its government to address the
origins, to deal with the problemsin its country, and to call upon
the United States Attorney generals and districtattorneys to prosecute within the US by US
(29:19):
laws. Fauci, Collins, Gates, Welenski, and the others that are
associated with it. We have eventson I lay out in the book how
to address the genetic vaccines, theeugenic genetic vaccines, and it is not
the way that people have been goingabout it. But I explained in the
book what people haven't noticed and whatneeds to be talked about to win this.
(29:45):
And I also lay out in thebook the American Healthcare Act of twenty
twenty five. You notice we're notthere yet, which is legislation that needs
to be passed now. And abig believer, even as an attorney,
that we need laws, but sometimesyou need laws. And when Obama and
(30:06):
Biden knew that they were going tobe inaugurated, Podesta reached out to me
and I'm sure a number of otherphysicians. I'd have no idea how many
to hold town hall meetings on theAffordable Healthcare Act and to find out the
consensus of the American public. SoI did that and I generated report and
(30:26):
that means that I've been asked aquestion, which means I have the right
to answer the question. It's likehaving somebody on a witness stand. If
you don't ask them the question,they don't have the right to answer something
they want to answer. But ifthe attorney and attorney, any attorney,
or the judge asked them a question, now you have the right to answer
(30:47):
it. They've opened the box.So I have the right to move this
forward because Obama, Biden Podesta askedme to. And within this legislation,
it takes and moves the government outof science and medicine, and it also
(31:08):
revokes a number of laws that arealready in place. But I don't just
tell people that. I explain topeople why something needs to be done.
I need it's important to me thatI'm not just say something and somebody says,
well, okay, let's go dothat. I want if you're going
(31:30):
to act, and you need toact, people need to act. I
want people to understand why it's critical. First Off, you know what you're
doing is right. Secondly, you'renot easily diswayed by somebody who says,
oh, that's mean you don't wantto do that. There's a reason it
(31:51):
needs to be done. The UnitedStates Congress is never more any Congress than
any politician anywhere, is never goingto convince me that them saying we shouldn't
have done that, we won't dothat again. I lay out in the
book what the powers of the federalgovernment actually are, so you know they
were violated, so you know this, I'm sorry, we will never do
(32:14):
that again. Just doesn't cut itfor me, because they shouldn't have done
it again with so apparently we needa law. But these people themselves put
on the book and say, Congresswill not do this well, and unless
they're punished or unless there are consequences, they're absolutely going to do it again.
It's like they're like teenagers. That'sone of the expressions I used to
(32:36):
use to explain cancer to my residentsand fellows. Cancers are like insurance residents
and fellows or teenagers. They eata lot, they consume a lot,
but they don't do anything else.So they don't provide anything constructed, but
boy do they consume. And ourland officials certainly know how to consume.
(32:58):
I mean that power of the purseus consume them, and they are in
the process of consuming everything we have. And then some they do not have
the authority to do what they havebeen doing. You know, elected officials,
as far as I'm concerned, areinterested in two things, getting elected
and getting re elected. By andlarge, it's pretty challenging. But you
(33:20):
know that's on us. That ison us because Franklin warned us right up
front would form a government. Didyou give us, doctor Franklin? And
he said, a republic, madam, if you can keep it. So
when I talked about the book andeverything beginning of the eighteen fifties, if
you think about that, it meansthat the United States of America literally was
(33:44):
a country for seventy five years.I would argue it was because our founding
fathers and the men and women theyinfluenced lived that long. And when those
people were no longer there, yousaw what happened. People changed, right.
It didn't take long, did it. If you want to watch a
dynasty of some sort fall apart,give it three generations, and it's usually
(34:05):
the third generation. The first generationbuilds something, the second generation kind of
has a perspective, and they kindof work at it because they were They
kind of saw part of it.But that third generation, they didn't work
for it. They never saw thehard work. They just feel that somehow
it's due to them, which isnot what the first generation thought. The
(34:27):
first generation thought, right, Ineed to work at this right, right.
And I always go back to ThomasPaine's quote, if you expect to
reap the blessings of liberty, thenyou better, like men, undergo the
pinnings of maintaining it. We've outsourcedeverything you know, to government or to
a system that a bureaucracy that's basicallystacked against us. The Declaration of Independence
(34:51):
was a declaration of war. ThomasJefferson two documents and merge them together to
make the Declaration of Independence. Oneof those documents accounted for a third of
the Declaration of independance. It wasthe British people from the sixteen hundredths declaration
about King Charles the first and second. Do you have any idea what the
other document was? Is it theMagna Carta? Nope, that would have
(35:15):
been the one that I just referredto. Fifteen eighty one Flemish Declaration of
Independence taken and translated from Flemish toEnglish. Those documents put together the Declaration
of Independants. On the twenty fourthof December seventeen seventy six, when many
people were at home, Washington tookthe fight on the offensive to the German
(35:37):
mercenaries, and along with George GeneralGeorge Washington was Captain Fleming, who later
became Colonel What are you going todo tonight? On Christmas Eve? Crossing
across my family made me learn thesethings, not as had ourselves on the
(35:57):
back. Look at who we are. It was your ancestors did this.
What are you going to do forthe next generations? How are you going
to repay them? And how areyou going to pay it forward? That's
our responsibility, right I mean,we talked earlier about the definition of liberty,
(36:19):
and our founder's estimation had a healthycomponent of responsibility. So in whatever
role you're placed in this world,you have a responsibility. And uh,
you know, whether or not werecognize it or or implement or execute it
to the degree that that we canpreserve the liberty for the next generation right
(36:39):
now, I think in question.But that's why I'm excited to read the
book. It's are we endangered species? Take us through a history, and
I love this too because when Italk about that paradigm of our government does
everything we only accuse other governments aredoing. There are so many examples of
that. And then there are examplesthroughout history. And you say, dating
(37:02):
back to the eighteen fifties of theeugenics program, I mean doctor Fleming.
If the Five Nations are recruiting andhiring Nazis, I mean, I've been
accused of not giving the judgment ofcharity very often. And that might be
true when it comes to government,but that's not even applicable here. That's
that's not good when you are employingNazi And so I have to wonder,
(37:28):
why why are you creating these thingsthat are going to kill the most vulnerable
among us? Right because if youhave comorbidities, you're at risk for everything
a common cold, the flu,cancer, So why is our government doing
this? Well, you've got twoparallel pathways. You've got one that's a
bioweapons program that is designed to you'regoing to use it if you need you
(37:51):
right, and you're understanding and learningfrom that wor dtrich tray to recruit me
in twenty twenty one as a physicistto work on in effect diseases, funded
by NIAID. Two months later,the FIRS book came out and all communications
stopped. So you can't tell methey weren't following what I was doing.
Over all decades, they knew exactlywhere I was. The other one is
(38:14):
the eugenics program, which is selectingwhat is going to survive and what isn't
going to survive, And that programwas failing until they until Kirico and Weismann
was they were able to modify RNAusing urdine and making it into false urdine
sou urdine, and then they reportedin their paper in two thousand and eight
(38:37):
that that change to pseudo urinine madethe molecule stable so it could be used.
Then tested it to see if itwould work as a vaccine and showed
that it couldn't. And then theytested to see if it would work as
a gene therapy or transduction and showedit could. That launched the next stage
(38:58):
of eugenics researcher doing actively today.But there's this host of questions about how
well will people tolerate this eugenic geneticvaccine approach, How do you get people
to accept this approach, you needthat data and either you need thousands of
(39:19):
years to do it, which doesn'tdo you a lot of good of your
life right now, or you needa massive amount of data right now.
So all the leak out of thisbiological weapon did on a parallel pathway was
to open the opportunity for somebody tosay, let's see if we can get
these people over here to make usa quick vaccine like we've never done before.
(39:43):
The data said it wouldn't work asa vaccine, but if you want
us to make one, sure you'regoing to pay us to do it,
and we're going to get lots ofresearch data. Instead of thousands of years,
we're going to get millions of researchsubjects. Was extremely successful from that
point of view, and it's modifiedthe behavior, hasn't it across the board?
(40:07):
Something that five years ago, tenyears ago was an unacceptable approach to
doing with people now is you know, you would think has received whatever deification
is necessary to get people to saythis is a great thing. Right,
So, we have in a shortperiod of time demonstrated the consequences how well
(40:30):
it's accepted in an injections sequences,we now have all sorts of studies that
are planned out with a crisper combinationwith the eugenics genetic vaccine approach, and
we're off and writing. These werenot connected programs, but this provided an
opportunity for both the benefit. Itprovides the benefit for the eugenics program to
(40:52):
prosper, and it provides a mechanismto say, well, we can continue
to these biological agents, these weapons, and nobody hit nobody's questions because think
about it, they've gone after PeterDays, aud Eco Health, They've gone
after Mourns, who was Fauci's underlink, and they went kind of after Fauci.
(41:16):
These are the drug dealers on thestreet. They're not the mob boss.
Do you think any one of thosethree men came up with the money
printed? No, the federal governmentof the United States provided this money.
We've already briefly discussed where the peoplein control at the top were being trained
(41:37):
at in the nineteen forties, theirpredecessors. They've simply moved it up to
the next step. So here weare in twenty twenty four, and without
people looking at this, you cansee that these sub committees want of both
sides. Republicans and Democrats want theviewer to take away the message of what
(42:01):
a wonderful job they're doing. Andeven though they look like they're arguing,
the Republicans are happy with the Republicans, and the Democrats are happy with the
Democrats. And I don't see anybodysaying, wait a minute, every one
of you people on this sub committee, you and and the people before you
voted this money in to allow theseagencies to have this money, and then
(42:23):
you did nothing to monitor they're doingit, and you want to slap DAISAC
on the on the hand for sloppywork. Hmm, yeah, yeah,
let's think about that show with noconstitutional authority other than the purse. But
this segues right into the what westarted with, which was people like to
(42:44):
say this was just all incompetence andit everybody just flubbed up and blah blah
blah. Well, I think itcan be incompetence, and I think it
can be criminals at the same time, and competent in the criminal right.
There's no other reason from WUT youto go from zero to you're all going
to die unless he was chosen,unless he was both. Well, I
(43:07):
think he's been incompetant. But unlesshe's complicit, let me give you military
education one oh one. Okay.Always allow your enemy to defeat themselves.
Always allow them if they want todistract and manufacture misinformation and confuse people,
(43:30):
which has been going on on bothsides, Let your enemy do that.
It's like all the talk about birdflu H five and one, bird flu
is nothing more than a form ofinfluenza A. Right now, we have
a few people that are selectively warningpeople. Most of the time they have
(43:52):
a nice product for you to buyit. So if I'm on the other
side playing this scenario, my responseis, let them keep talking. You
don't have to do anything for themto undermine themselves. They are driving the
fear. And now what do youdo now you watch the fear that's produced
(44:14):
in the American population and around theworld by these people talking. They now
become useful tools for you because theyare so enamored with getting tension and people
want to hear from them that theycontinue to fall over themselves in this effort
to get attention and money, andthey lose people because they're inconsistent. Because
(44:39):
they were the ones criticizing the fearfor so long and now they're using it
to sell the process. Yeah,people haven't caught onto this yet, I
don't think, because if you wantto understand what your enemy is doing,
you have to be able to focuson your enemy. But if your enemy
can let your friends mislead you,they will. I mean, your enemy
(45:00):
doesn't have to expend any energy,resources, any losses if your friends are
misleading you. Let me ask youthis, doctor Fleming, what can we
the people do? I know youhave ten letters dot org, your website
is full of resources. What canwe do so that our enemy defeats itself?
(45:22):
First thing, and I hate tosay it this way because it sounds
like I'm being self serving, isto get educated with books. Sure,
absolutely, because that information is criticalto exposing them and to understanding because I
think one of the things that theymiscalculated on, in my opinion, is
(45:44):
that Americans are not as stupid asthey think we are, and people around
the world are not as stupid aswe think. This knowledge takes away the
power from the people manipulating. Itexposes you, it exposes them. Ten
letters calls for criminalments on these people. But also as these folks are running
(46:05):
for election right now, this needsto be a campaign issue. This is
the campaign issue of this country.This is what's running the country, the
control of these people, how theirmoneyes go through, how everybody's health has
been deteriorated and controlled by the militaryindustrial complex and big pharma. You know,
(46:25):
I would go so far as tosay all the garbage is going on
in the food and everything else.People need to wake up and realize that
what you're putting in your body,it doesn't matter to me whether it's food
you're putting in, or a pullyou're putting in, or an injection you
put in. You can put somethingin your body and then think, oh,
let me put something else in mybody. To treat what I first
(46:46):
put into my body, you treatit by not putting the first thing into
your body. So from the intelligenceperspective, you've got to be able to
have the knowledge base. Then you'vegot to be able to insist that the
people that are running for office rightnow, they're running for office, they
want or vote, they will payattention to you. You need to put
pressure on them to say these areour topics. These people need to be
(47:09):
indicted for these biological weapons, andwe need to return control of science and
medicine from the federal government back toscience and medicine. Are there a lot
of people within science and medicine they'refairly botched up right now? Yeah,
there are, Okay, but let'sbe honest. We've worked on it.
(47:29):
We've worked really hard, and we'veand we've and we now are reaping the
rewards of what we have done,and we're going to have to address that.
And that's part of what has tobe done in the future as well.
You need to be holding people accountable. You also need to hold your
doctors accountable. By the way,it's harder to hold the scientists accountable.
But all the doctors that I don'tcare if they're even saying, now,
(47:51):
don't do this, don't do thatone up front they were they were proposing
I don't want to just say thevaccines because that sounds like it's back to
the vaccines, but proposing whatever itwas without thinking it through. Right,
there's going to be an accountability foreverybody. There has to be an accountability
for everybody, or the shiny cityon the hill just became Gotham. We
(48:14):
can't survive without justice. The Republicis at the precipice of failure, and
I would say it's headed down andthat's why we're here. That's why,
and there's never been such an opportunity, not just individually but as a country
start make a comeback in the lead, if you will. And it's definitely
(48:36):
a hefty task. I've had multiplepeople tell me that everything in my life
led to me being in this position. I have mixed responses to that,
But that being said, the responsibilityof looking this task for all of us
is ours. And a lot ofpeople say, you know, they hope
to live in interesting times that makeit different. We live in times that
(49:01):
will make a difference, and wedetermine what that difference will be. We
also determine whether we're going to bethe next endangered species or not. Well,
I can't end better than that,other than to say I could speak
to you for at least another threedays and probably not get it all in.
Doctor Richard Fleming, Are We theNext Endangered Species? Is his book.
(49:25):
You can find it on Amazon.You can go to doctor tell us
the name of your website. SoFleming method dot com has a lot of
material. Ten letters dot Org allowspeople to go on send in documents to
governors and attorney generals of their stateand to your friends to do the same
thing. Doctor Fleming, thank youso much. We will put all the
(49:47):
information on the website. We hopeyou'll come back and give us an update
at some point, and until thenwe wish you godspeed and take care.
He's one of the those guys,Joe, that you're just glad to know
is out there and on the sideof truth. Good Lord. Okay,
(50:08):
look, I highly recommend people goingto his website, namely Fleming method dot
com. Fleming that's F E,M, I n G. Just one
M flemingma dot com. The resourceson that website are absolutely incredible. It's
a heyday, it's a geek kday, and his knowledge is vast. So
(50:35):
I want to thank everyone for listeningtoday. I want to thank as always
to Magicman Joe Strecker. Until nexttime, everyone who will stand at either
hand and keep the bridge with me, have a great day.
Hey, everybody, Welcome to Everything'sPolitical. I'm your host, Taya Shoemake.
You can also find us online atEverything's Political dot substack dot com.
Shout out too, Magicman Joe Strecker, the John Wooden of podcast producers,
who on this day, Joe intwoenty ten, passed away at the age
(00:22):
of ninety nine. May you havehealth and wellness and live that long,
my friend, John Wooden, obviouslythe legendary basketball coach at UCLA, also
known as the Wizard of Westwood.He won ten championships in twelve years,
(00:44):
and he invested in his players,by extension, invested in the game,
made college basketball the awesome sport thatit is. He is an OG in
the top tier. I'd throw himin there with Adolph Rupp, Jim Calhoun,
Bobby Knight. I'd throw in RickPatino there as well. And it's
(01:10):
a perfect shout out today Joe,this legendary basketball coach, because I have
no doubt that our next guest isgoing to be a slam dunk, same
(01:30):
as the Okay. Speaking of OG'sin the top elite tier of their professions,
you will recognize the name of ourguest today. Most of you Will
(01:53):
who has helped keep most of ussaying over the last four years. If
I weren't so to speak to himtoday, I might be a little intimidated.
He holds a PhD in physics.He is a nuclear cardiologist and holds
a JD as well, so adoctor of laws. He is doctor Richard
Fleming. Doctor Fleming, welcome andthank you for being here today. It's
(02:15):
my pleasure to be here. Thankyou for the invitation. Absolutely. Okay,
It's hard to know where to start, because if I say start from
the beginning, doctor Fleming, wehave to go back to you were one
of the first people who made thelink between inflammation and chronic disease and metabolic
(02:35):
health, and then in a wholetesting and measuring system that came with that.
So and so feel free to interjectwith that. I just wanted to
say that upfront because we are abouthealth and wellness here on the show,
and our audience is very interested inthat and has been how to keep down
(02:57):
inflammation, how to increase metabolic healthat the cellular level. So let's start
with for our listeners, your forayinto the COVID melee. A lot of
us were skeptical when Anthony Fauci wentfrom there's nothing to see here too,
You're all going to die gasping forair waiting on a hospital bed within the
span of two weeks, and alot of us were like, that just
(03:21):
doesn't seem right. We didn't knowwhy. Now you helped us go down
some of those rabbit holes, thankgoodness. But what was your foray into
this debacle? Well, I guessI'd have to start when I was a
medical student, because that's when HIVcame out, and that's also when doctor
Anthony Fauci took over NIID, Sothat work with HIV was critical. Understanding
(03:45):
the inflammathrombotic disease. I mean,everybody calls it inflammation and heart disease,
and I understand that because that wasthe terminology. I even wrote a book
titled Stop Information Now that was ontwenty twenty. And you can't have inflammation
without blood clotting, and you can'thave blood clotting without inflammation. So what
(04:08):
I've been trying to get people todo is to embrace just that little bit
longer term of in flammel throm body. Because all of these chronic diseases are
disease. You know cbas or strokes, diabetes, cancer, blood pressure.
All of these are in flammo frombody diseases. They are the consequence of
(04:31):
something happening in the body, differentfactors that cause the body to respond or
react. The importance of understanding howthese factors fit together is more than just
me putting a jigsaw as all togetherand saying say that came up with the
theory. It's understanding how these worktogether so that you can sort out what's
(04:55):
important in each person and address that. When when you were twenty twenty happened,
it was very clear to me frommy prior experience with HIV that nobody
was acting in a way that saidwe need to figure this out, you
know. So I sat on andI began looking at what we did know
(05:16):
about different drugs, particularly as theyapplied versus sorted out a research study did
multiple drugs and at multiple combinations tosee what did and didn't work. But
that process can't just be a singlething that you're focusing in my world and
(05:36):
my brain, it's but I haveto understand what I'm dealing it. So
I have to develop the study,I have to develop the protocol, and
I have to carry out the study. But I also need to make sure
I'm not missings, and that meanswhat am I dealing with? Where did
this come from? And that ofcourse opened that Pandora's box that when I
(06:00):
I hear something from one side that'swrong, I can't just deal with one
side. If the other side alsosays things that are wrong, I have
to address that because I have youknow, I'm sixty eight. I've been
to enough conferences, I've been toenough picnics that people have said, well,
I Fleeinn didn't disagree with it,so I must agree. He hurt
(06:23):
it and needed disagree. It's like, well darn and all they would really
have to do is reach out,you know, why not discuss it so
that you know what you're presenting andyou know from whom, from whence it
came. I think it's valuable tospeak to the person who comes up with
something. I have been blessed inmy life many things. I'm not blessed
(06:46):
with bad outcomes, but a lotof other blessings in my life to be
trained by the people. I gottrained by the men who were at the
top of the field in both plasmaand positrons. I got an opportunity to
sit down with Van Allen as asixteen seventeen year old working on my thesis
(07:11):
and talked to him about what Iwas working on with electromagnetic fields. I
mean, that's priceless. I gotthe opportunity to be trained by both Denton
Coolie and Michael Baking, you know, the gurus of party of oscar surgery
in con general hertesy surgery. Iwas there when intravascular ultrasound was developed.
(07:33):
I was there doing research on someof the chemotherapy drugs, and every one
of those opportunities added into my levelof understanding and the ability to converse with
the people. I don't know ifthey will ever consider anything I do,
having paid in any small fraction.I believe it was you were the first
(07:58):
one to talk about the potential orlikelihood I don't know which one for a
prion disease from spike protein, andyou had a beautiful graphic explaining your reasoning
behind it. And I can't rememberif it was the SARS Kobe two or
if it was the mRNA recipe spikethat could cause those folds in the protein.
(08:28):
I guess it was in the tauelprotein. So when I think of
you in the OG and roll intwenty twenty. How are these things coming
to you because you were out infront and you were able to educate us
so that we knew what to lookfor. I mean, how do you
(08:48):
know, hey, this is what'slikely to happen with this understanding of virus
is a two step approach. Youcan't do it like bacteria where you just
do one step and grow it ona petrio plat or growing in an animal.
You have to really do two things. You have to You have to
find it, but it's smaller thana bacteria, so it's the electron micross
(09:09):
bey to find it. But whenyou use electron microsky, it pills everything
that you're studying. It's part ofthe consequence of using electron microssy. It's
a small but that the technique procederkills everything that's there. And then the
other part is figuring out the geneticcode sequence so you can identify it.
(09:33):
So purpose with Luke Montani and Iwere talking about that and the changes that
are going on and how HIV andand also stars Kobe two was losing this
glycoprotein one twenty off it when theproteo pco pretty as inhibitors were being used
(09:54):
like pac slogan right, and sowe were seeing the same phenomenon then occurring
where initially it looked like people aregetting better and then they were eating worse.
Well, the click approaching when twentyis a prime component. And it's
interesting because to get to one twenty, typically there's a cleavach from something on
is gl like approaching one sixty,and it gets cleaved by the furine cleavach
(10:20):
protease. And so GP one sixtygets cleaved by the furine cleavach that we
talked about with this Tariskooby two virusinto glycoprotein when twenty mils and no furine
is very much involved with cancers,and so whether it's one of the consequences
and it's shedding is part of what'sbeing saying. That's to be determined because
(10:43):
there really aren't any good studies.Nobody's being sampled, nobody knows what to
look for. This is very costlyand laborious task at this point in time.
So all of that was altering thestructure of the spy protein. And
you know, the very simple analogythat I was trying to lay out for
people is imagine you have a boxand you alter the box, right,
(11:05):
you put something more in it.If you're in cleavage side of the GP
Win twenty or any of the seventeenhundred and seventy whatever is it, seventy
six nucleus sides that were inserted inthere, they like stepping on the box.
It deforms the shape of the box. That alderation then causes the box
to have an effect upon things aroundit. I mean, the box you
(11:28):
have change the shape of the thing. So almost always there's a sudden recognition.
Yeah. I wouldn't say that wasreally an aha moment because there were
multiple things there, But when youwhen it finally makes sense, you suddenly
realize, yeah, okay, thisis where we're going. All right,
well, let's follow the science.And in contrast to doctor Fauci, who
(11:50):
didn't seem to be really interested infounding the science, he was more interested
in trying to guide this science.I like to follow the science because then
I don't have to figure out whetherI've interfered with it. It will tell
me, which is kind of thecompanying part about being a scientist. The
uncomfortable part is you're not to theanswer until you get to the answer and
(12:13):
you don't win. The answer isgoing to come where if you're making the
answer that you can kind of fudget. I suppose that's what he looked like
he was doing so much of thetime. But you follow it until you
get to the end. And whenyou get to the end of the rope,
so to speak, you know you'vefound that kind of allusion. Then
the question is are you missing otherpieces? That's where the scientific integrity really
(12:37):
kicks in, because you know,as we were talking about before, you
know, the integrity of the foundingfathers and people from a couple hundred years
ago, they seem to have muchmore intellectual curiosity about something or determination that
they just weren't going to loose andwere not acceptable. And if they were
there, it's because they couldn't addressthem all. But they weren't gonna,
you know, take the week offor the month off and say, well,
(13:00):
I'm too busy, I really wantto go to the beach. You
know. You know, it's kindof one of the expressions that had for
people is that hospitals are great placesif it wasn't for the patients. You
know, the patient keeps showing upand you know, it changes what you're
going to do in the day.Otherwise it'd just be a nice place to
go vacation, but never works outthat way. Would it be accurate to
(13:20):
say that all of those things thatwell, the IQ people. So I'm
an EQ person. I knew Founciwas lying the second his mouth opened,
But I couldn't have told you exactlywhy, Okay, because I'm not trained.
But the IQ people who saw allof the things you mentioned, the
cleavage sites, the one twenty,glico one twenty, all of that,
(13:43):
would that in combination? Is itaccurate to say that signaled to you that
this was gain a function or justthat it was man mad. There was
something wrong, okay, something thatshould not be there again. You know
what we see, most mutations thatoccur end up in the death of whatever
(14:07):
they occur in. So when mutationsoccur, and they typically occur one part
at a time, when nucleus sidebase at a time, not in twelve,
not in seventeen hundred and seventy sixof them, one will do it.
One will kill you. So youknow, if your sickle cell patient
one changes your red blood cells fromwhat there's a mind probably look like to
(14:31):
a sickled cell and it's critical andit survived because it had to survival.
About it that malaria couldn't kill offthe people with sickled cells when you start
doing the research, and this iswhat the initial research grants show. So
the question is, Okay, here'shere's these grants going out right, where
(14:52):
are the grants going They're going tothese people for this research and these papers
are being published. Well, whatdo we find out from that? And
if you've been to my website,you know I've got that gain of function
t have there and I walk youdown. So if you want to pretend
that your genet says, you cando it. And when you look at
(15:13):
the PCR data, what you discoveris that RS thirty three, sixty seven,
Kobe rsc M A fifteen and Mfifteen and Kobe M fourteen match SARS
W two and all three of thoseviruses. We're gain of function viruses that
(15:37):
these people made with these grant monies, including you know, going way back
to two thousand and four when Daisacand Barritt were first rescuing er Bunny Stars
Kobe or Bannie. That's what startsto make it obvious. I mean,
here are these things matched stars Kobetoo genetically. These things we have vapors
(16:03):
that show that they were man made, and here's somebody that did it.
That that pretty much will tells youyou've got you've got a bioweapon. As
doctor Fauci wanted to emphasize last weekduring his testimony be for the sub committee,
he said, well, it's notgain a function because this other group
(16:26):
change gain of function. Okay,so you know, shake your head a
line. A rose by any ofthe name is still a rose. So
but a bioweapon by any of thename is still a bio weapon. So
let's use doctor Fauci's approach. Let'suse what the experts have defined as a
bioweapon. Well, if you lookat the Biological Weapon Convention Treaty of nineteen
(16:52):
seventy five, they're pretty clear.If you look at the nineteen eighty nine
Anti Terrorism Act, the bioweapon definitionis very clear. If you look at
the twenty twelve Law eighteen USC.Section and seventy five, the definition of
bio weapon is pretty clear. Thanksto doctor Fauci's insistence that we use the
(17:15):
expert's definitions, these are bioweapons.In fact, eighteen US Section five goes
so forth as to say, it'snot a biological agent if you find it
in nature. It is if youtake it out of nature, right,
And so I don't care if youwant to play this thing about Wuhan bats
(17:38):
and all the rest of that,which is, you know, a great
research source. When it's brought outof nature and put into a lab,
by definition, it's now a biologicalagent. And when it's a weapon.
Do you need a PhD in physicsto do this one? It's a biological
(17:59):
weapon? A yes. My father, who had an eighth grade education,
who was a carpenter, he wasraised during the depression. My mother,
who added twelfth grade education, andboth people were extremely brilliant, would not
have needed a PhD in business todo this matter. I know two things
can be true at the same timewith regard to gain of function. And
(18:21):
you're creating this bioweapon, is itthe sole intent just to make it more
infectious and or to make it morelikely that the virus SARS CoV two will
evolve into the disease of COVID nineteenRight, So some people with robust immune
systems will prevent that disease from happening. Is that part of the gain of
(18:47):
function or do you know if it'sjust part to make it more transmissible.
So gina function by definition is eitherchanging something to make more infective or more
pathogenic. So Corona virus disease firstidentified in the year twenty nineteen, is
where the term COVID nineteen comes from. It's a disease. Covid is an
(19:14):
inflammable throat in flammo thrombotic response tosource COBE two virus. This is the
response of the body to something perturbingit. Most of what we saw up
front, where people with the coolmorbidities, right the people who already had
in flamml throbtic diseases, we justwe haven't been talking about them in this
(19:37):
term. I mean, I guessthree decades ago when everybody started using the
term inflammation because it was nineteen ninetyfour. It presented this American art in
Dallas. That was three decades ago. And I see literature material in cardiology
where they're talking about like a protein, little A and other substances and they're
saying, well, this is important, you know. My response is,
(20:00):
yeah, it was thirty years agowhen I put it in the thirty.
So it's important to realize that thepeople who already had enflamneled thrombotic diseases,
this was kind of the last thingthat they needed to tip them over the
edge. And it's one of myimportant points because when people say, oh,
they didn't die from COVID, theydied from as late, public would
(20:22):
say a heart attack. No,they died from COVID, because that's what
happens you have any flamnel thrombodic disease. If I could interject, is it
sure would it be fair or accurateto say that spike from SARS Kobe two
or the mRNA recipe spike. Ithink they're different, but do the same
(20:48):
thing. They get into your body, find and exploit weaknesses. Is that
fair well? And I wouldn't evensay it's weaknesses. I mean it's the
body's response to them to something that'snot supposed we did right. The difference
is is that typically when you haveso yes, spikebroken from either source is
going to precipitate that. And Iwarned people up front. I said that
(21:10):
we should not be before we havethe genetic vaccines that I refer to as
eugenic genetic vaccines, because once youread the book or with it's endangered species
to understand why that's so critical tounderstand, and it's the evidence is there.
I caution that it would be abad idea to vaccinate healthy people,
(21:37):
because they're healthy, they will havea massive immune response to these genetic vaccines.
So when person a person transmits avirus, it's you know, a
thousand and ten thousand virus particles.It's something like ten billion gene sequences in
the genetic vaccines to replicate. Soif you take a healthy person and their
(22:03):
cells are healthy and they replicate billions, their immune system is going to respond
to that like they just got gasolinepoured on them and a match lit.
And that's what we saw. Andit's important to note that I calculate in
this new book that the risk analysisit is zero point eight percent, and
(22:26):
from the people doing this type ofwork from a military perspective, this is
an acceptable loss because there's huge amountof data that's been generated and at quite
acceptable levels from a military perspective.Part of what we trained as to get
our doctorates at the age that wedid is every week we ran scenarios of
(22:49):
who lives and who dies? Soyou can imagine doing this for six years.
We were doun a lot of scenarios. And the scenarios are, you're
at point A. For humanity tosurvive, you have to get the point
B. Here's everybody you have withyou, here's all the equipment. Tell
us what equipment you're going to usebecause you can't use all of that.
(23:14):
And who you're going to take withyou because this is the limited number of
people you get to take. Wholives and who dies because you're doing this
for humanity? Right. We didthis every week, So mindset was to
make decisions and not regret it,right. And the scenario is what do
(23:36):
you have to do? Two?How will people react? How can you
control that reaction? Do you getpeople to do what you want them to
do? And when you understand thatmore than half of these bioweapons, of
this money for this gain of functionbio research came from the US d O
(23:56):
D. You know again, asI tell people, the Department of Defense
somewhat laughable name, and I believethey used to be called the Department of
War. Well, you know,I mean, there's nothing defensive about what
they're doing, right, I meanmilitary militaries do not make weapons that they
don't want to use. The USDepartment of Defense paid four hundred nineteen five
(24:19):
hundred eleven dollars through Metabiota and Blackand Beach in the beginning of November twenty
nineteen, and that money was togo to the Ukrainian labs to provide a
DoD with a report on COVID Okay, So, seven weeks before anybody heard
about a Wuhan wet market, aDoD spent more than four nineteen thousand dollars
(24:44):
for a COVID report the inflammable roboticresponse disease from Ukrainian labs. The same
labs, by the way, thatwe know Russia was in there before building
bioweapons on in the nineteen nineties,they're building bioweapons or cry alone. By
March, eight days after Russian invadesthe Ukraine, the US admits we have
(25:07):
fifteen biolabs and four mobile ones weredoing and within three months we admit that
there's forty four labs that we havebiolabs in the Ukraine, and at the
cost of two hundred and twenty fourmillion dollars. By the way, the
DODA has gone on and wiped offthe evidence of their grants, of course
to Metabiota, except that, beingthe research scientist that I am, I
(25:29):
have copies of everything, and you'llsee them in the book and you'll see
them in the QR codes. Becauseit's called obstruction of justice. It'd be
one thing if they were smart enoughto just simply delete it and go on.
I don't know how that got deleted. I mean, we didn't do
it. Did you do it?Frank? You know? I mean they
play that stupid responsible. I don'tknow where you could do that. I
mean somebody, maybe somebody hit adelete button. I mean, everybody's done
(25:52):
that, right, But then togo on and change it and say that
those same grants stopped on January thirty, verse twenty thirteen. And those grants,
by the way, are now connectedwith research on kids, you know,
I mean, come on, guys, yeah, so you know,
And now we're getting into the tothe nitty gritty of why. You know,
(26:14):
there's an old adage never attribute tocriminality what you can to incompetence.
I think we're dealing with both atall levels of government, and we are
a big proposer of the idea thatour government does everything and more that we
only accuse other governments of doing.And I think your naive if you don't
at least consider that. And that'sreally predicated upon a cursory knowledge of history.
(26:38):
So our eugenics program in bioweapons programbegan in the eighteen fifties eighteen sixties,
and it provided the impetus for AdolfHitler to have his eugenics programs during
Nazi Germany. People have talked abouthaving a second Nuremberg, and I can
only hope that that never happens,because Nuremberg won in nineteen forties him with
(27:00):
a blithering disaster. We prosecuted.I go through this in the book.
A couple dozen Nazis, high rankingofficials, intelligence officers, scientist doctors between
the United States, the Soviet Unionnow Russia, England, France, and
Canada. We brought more than threethousand of them out and put them in
(27:22):
our government and our research facilities,including doctor Bloom that I talked about in
the book Who you can go Wikipedia? This guy, he was one of
the doctors that was acquitted thanks tothe US. We got him off.
What did this guy do? Hedid genetics research on twins, He did
Aeroslia's vaccine research, and he droppedAnthras on US military and Russian troops.
(27:47):
And the cost of him doing thistype of activity was the US win and
got him off, got him acquitted, and then stuck him into our programs.
So between Projects six three and Projectpaper Clip and m k Uldra and
Operation as Urasium and variety aboutyers,these Nazis were pived into every government agency
(28:14):
that that had any power. Infact, of the five U n Council,
you know the I forgot the nameof it right now, but the
Council of the Five Nations, whichis Russia kinda, the United States Security
Council, England and Fance, theone the big five that make the decisions.
(28:36):
Four of them had Nazis went intothem, and the ones that didn't
are the Chinese. Somewhat laughingly,I think here with everything, so you
know, Nurnberg was a blithering disaster. I lay out in the book,
I'd only how to prosecute these people, and to do it through ten letters
dot org and to provide the evidencefor attorney generals and district attorneys to prosecute
(28:59):
these frominals. And we're coming closeto it. I just gave testimony I
won't release to whom, but toanother nation for its government to address the
origins, to deal with the problemsin its country, and to call upon
the United States Attorney generals and districtattorneys to prosecute within the US by US
(29:19):
laws. Fauci, Collins, Gates, Welenski, and the others that are
associated with it. We have eventson I lay out in the book how
to address the genetic vaccines, theeugenic genetic vaccines, and it is not
the way that people have been goingabout it. But I explained in the
book what people haven't noticed and whatneeds to be talked about to win this.
(29:45):
And I also lay out in thebook the American Healthcare Act of twenty
twenty five. You notice we're notthere yet, which is legislation that needs
to be passed now. And abig believer, even as an attorney,
that we need laws, but sometimesyou need laws. And when Obama and
(30:06):
Biden knew that they were going tobe inaugurated, Podesta reached out to me
and I'm sure a number of otherphysicians. I'd have no idea how many
to hold town hall meetings on theAffordable Healthcare Act and to find out the
consensus of the American public. SoI did that and I generated report and
(30:26):
that means that I've been asked aquestion, which means I have the right
to answer the question. It's likehaving somebody on a witness stand. If
you don't ask them the question,they don't have the right to answer something
they want to answer. But ifthe attorney and attorney, any attorney,
or the judge asked them a question, now you have the right to answer
(30:47):
it. They've opened the box.So I have the right to move this
forward because Obama, Biden Podesta askedme to. And within this legislation,
it takes and moves the government outof science and medicine, and it also
(31:08):
revokes a number of laws that arealready in place. But I don't just
tell people that. I explain topeople why something needs to be done.
I need it's important to me thatI'm not just say something and somebody says,
well, okay, let's go dothat. I want if you're going
(31:30):
to act, and you need toact, people need to act. I
want people to understand why it's critical. First Off, you know what you're
doing is right. Secondly, you'renot easily diswayed by somebody who says,
oh, that's mean you don't wantto do that. There's a reason it
(31:51):
needs to be done. The UnitedStates Congress is never more any Congress than
any politician anywhere, is never goingto convince me that them saying we shouldn't
have done that, we won't dothat again. I lay out in the
book what the powers of the federalgovernment actually are, so you know they
were violated, so you know this, I'm sorry, we will never do
(32:14):
that again. Just doesn't cut itfor me, because they shouldn't have done
it again with so apparently we needa law. But these people themselves put
on the book and say, Congresswill not do this well, and unless
they're punished or unless there are consequences, they're absolutely going to do it again.
It's like they're like teenagers. That'sone of the expressions I used to
(32:36):
use to explain cancer to my residentsand fellows. Cancers are like insurance residents
and fellows or teenagers. They eata lot, they consume a lot,
but they don't do anything else.So they don't provide anything constructed, but
boy do they consume. And ourland officials certainly know how to consume.
(32:58):
I mean that power of the purseus consume them, and they are in
the process of consuming everything we have. And then some they do not have
the authority to do what they havebeen doing. You know, elected officials,
as far as I'm concerned, areinterested in two things, getting elected
and getting re elected. By andlarge, it's pretty challenging. But you
(33:20):
know that's on us. That ison us because Franklin warned us right up
front would form a government. Didyou give us, doctor Franklin? And
he said, a republic, madam, if you can keep it. So
when I talked about the book andeverything beginning of the eighteen fifties, if
you think about that, it meansthat the United States of America literally was
(33:44):
a country for seventy five years.I would argue it was because our founding
fathers and the men and women theyinfluenced lived that long. And when those
people were no longer there, yousaw what happened. People changed, right.
It didn't take long, did it. If you want to watch a
dynasty of some sort fall apart,give it three generations, and it's usually
(34:05):
the third generation. The first generationbuilds something, the second generation kind of
has a perspective, and they kindof work at it because they were They
kind of saw part of it.But that third generation, they didn't work
for it. They never saw thehard work. They just feel that somehow
it's due to them, which isnot what the first generation thought. The
(34:27):
first generation thought, right, Ineed to work at this right, right.
And I always go back to ThomasPaine's quote, if you expect to
reap the blessings of liberty, thenyou better, like men, undergo the
pinnings of maintaining it. We've outsourcedeverything you know, to government or to
a system that a bureaucracy that's basicallystacked against us. The Declaration of Independence
(34:51):
was a declaration of war. ThomasJefferson two documents and merge them together to
make the Declaration of Independence. Oneof those documents accounted for a third of
the Declaration of independance. It wasthe British people from the sixteen hundredths declaration
about King Charles the first and second. Do you have any idea what the
other document was? Is it theMagna Carta? Nope, that would have
(35:15):
been the one that I just referredto. Fifteen eighty one Flemish Declaration of
Independence taken and translated from Flemish toEnglish. Those documents put together the Declaration
of Independants. On the twenty fourthof December seventeen seventy six, when many
people were at home, Washington tookthe fight on the offensive to the German
(35:37):
mercenaries, and along with George GeneralGeorge Washington was Captain Fleming, who later
became Colonel What are you going todo tonight? On Christmas Eve? Crossing
across my family made me learn thesethings, not as had ourselves on the
(35:57):
back. Look at who we are. It was your ancestors did this.
What are you going to do forthe next generations? How are you going
to repay them? And how areyou going to pay it forward? That's
our responsibility, right I mean,we talked earlier about the definition of liberty,
(36:19):
and our founder's estimation had a healthycomponent of responsibility. So in whatever
role you're placed in this world,you have a responsibility. And uh,
you know, whether or not werecognize it or or implement or execute it
to the degree that that we canpreserve the liberty for the next generation right
(36:39):
now, I think in question.But that's why I'm excited to read the
book. It's are we endangered species? Take us through a history, and
I love this too because when Italk about that paradigm of our government does
everything we only accuse other governments aredoing. There are so many examples of
that. And then there are examplesthroughout history. And you say, dating
(37:02):
back to the eighteen fifties of theeugenics program, I mean doctor Fleming.
If the Five Nations are recruiting andhiring Nazis, I mean, I've been
accused of not giving the judgment ofcharity very often. And that might be
true when it comes to government,but that's not even applicable here. That's
that's not good when you are employingNazi And so I have to wonder,
(37:28):
why why are you creating these thingsthat are going to kill the most vulnerable
among us? Right because if youhave comorbidities, you're at risk for everything
a common cold, the flu,cancer, So why is our government doing
this? Well, you've got twoparallel pathways. You've got one that's a
bioweapons program that is designed to you'regoing to use it if you need you
(37:51):
right, and you're understanding and learningfrom that wor dtrich tray to recruit me
in twenty twenty one as a physicistto work on in effect diseases, funded
by NIAID. Two months later,the FIRS book came out and all communications
stopped. So you can't tell methey weren't following what I was doing.
Over all decades, they knew exactlywhere I was. The other one is
(38:14):
the eugenics program, which is selectingwhat is going to survive and what isn't
going to survive, And that programwas failing until they until Kirico and Weismann
was they were able to modify RNAusing urdine and making it into false urdine
sou urdine, and then they reportedin their paper in two thousand and eight
(38:37):
that that change to pseudo urinine madethe molecule stable so it could be used.
Then tested it to see if itwould work as a vaccine and showed
that it couldn't. And then theytested to see if it would work as
a gene therapy or transduction and showedit could. That launched the next stage
(38:58):
of eugenics researcher doing actively today.But there's this host of questions about how
well will people tolerate this eugenic geneticvaccine approach, How do you get people
to accept this approach, you needthat data and either you need thousands of
(39:19):
years to do it, which doesn'tdo you a lot of good of your
life right now, or you needa massive amount of data right now.
So all the leak out of thisbiological weapon did on a parallel pathway was
to open the opportunity for somebody tosay, let's see if we can get
these people over here to make usa quick vaccine like we've never done before.
(39:43):
The data said it wouldn't work asa vaccine, but if you want
us to make one, sure you'regoing to pay us to do it,
and we're going to get lots ofresearch data. Instead of thousands of years,
we're going to get millions of researchsubjects. Was extremely successful from that
point of view, and it's modifiedthe behavior, hasn't it across the board?
(40:07):
Something that five years ago, tenyears ago was an unacceptable approach to
doing with people now is you know, you would think has received whatever deification
is necessary to get people to saythis is a great thing. Right,
So, we have in a shortperiod of time demonstrated the consequences how well
(40:30):
it's accepted in an injections sequences,we now have all sorts of studies that
are planned out with a crisper combinationwith the eugenics genetic vaccine approach, and
we're off and writing. These werenot connected programs, but this provided an
opportunity for both the benefit. Itprovides the benefit for the eugenics program to
(40:52):
prosper, and it provides a mechanismto say, well, we can continue
to these biological agents, these weapons, and nobody hit nobody's questions because think
about it, they've gone after PeterDays, aud Eco Health, They've gone
after Mourns, who was Fauci's underlink, and they went kind of after Fauci.
(41:16):
These are the drug dealers on thestreet. They're not the mob boss.
Do you think any one of thosethree men came up with the money
printed? No, the federal governmentof the United States provided this money.
We've already briefly discussed where the peoplein control at the top were being trained
(41:37):
at in the nineteen forties, theirpredecessors. They've simply moved it up to
the next step. So here weare in twenty twenty four, and without
people looking at this, you cansee that these sub committees want of both
sides. Republicans and Democrats want theviewer to take away the message of what
(42:01):
a wonderful job they're doing. Andeven though they look like they're arguing,
the Republicans are happy with the Republicans, and the Democrats are happy with the
Democrats. And I don't see anybodysaying, wait a minute, every one
of you people on this sub committee, you and and the people before you
voted this money in to allow theseagencies to have this money, and then
(42:23):
you did nothing to monitor they're doingit, and you want to slap DAISAC
on the on the hand for sloppywork. Hmm, yeah, yeah,
let's think about that show with noconstitutional authority other than the purse. But
this segues right into the what westarted with, which was people like to
(42:44):
say this was just all incompetence andit everybody just flubbed up and blah blah
blah. Well, I think itcan be incompetence, and I think it
can be criminals at the same time, and competent in the criminal right.
There's no other reason from WUT youto go from zero to you're all going
to die unless he was chosen,unless he was both. Well, I
(43:07):
think he's been incompetant. But unlesshe's complicit, let me give you military
education one oh one. Okay.Always allow your enemy to defeat themselves.
Always allow them if they want todistract and manufacture misinformation and confuse people,
(43:30):
which has been going on on bothsides, Let your enemy do that.
It's like all the talk about birdflu H five and one, bird flu
is nothing more than a form ofinfluenza A. Right now, we have
a few people that are selectively warningpeople. Most of the time they have
(43:52):
a nice product for you to buyit. So if I'm on the other
side playing this scenario, my responseis, let them keep talking. You
don't have to do anything for themto undermine themselves. They are driving the
fear. And now what do youdo now you watch the fear that's produced
(44:14):
in the American population and around theworld by these people talking. They now
become useful tools for you because theyare so enamored with getting tension and people
want to hear from them that theycontinue to fall over themselves in this effort
to get attention and money, andthey lose people because they're inconsistent. Because
(44:39):
they were the ones criticizing the fearfor so long and now they're using it
to sell the process. Yeah,people haven't caught onto this yet, I
don't think, because if you wantto understand what your enemy is doing,
you have to be able to focuson your enemy. But if your enemy
can let your friends mislead you,they will. I mean, your enemy
(45:00):
doesn't have to expend any energy,resources, any losses if your friends are
misleading you. Let me ask youthis, doctor Fleming, what can we
the people do? I know youhave ten letters dot org, your website
is full of resources. What canwe do so that our enemy defeats itself?
(45:22):
First thing, and I hate tosay it this way because it sounds
like I'm being self serving, isto get educated with books. Sure,
absolutely, because that information is criticalto exposing them and to understanding because I
think one of the things that theymiscalculated on, in my opinion, is
(45:44):
that Americans are not as stupid asthey think we are, and people around
the world are not as stupid aswe think. This knowledge takes away the
power from the people manipulating. Itexposes you, it exposes them. Ten
letters calls for criminalments on these people. But also as these folks are running
(46:05):
for election right now, this needsto be a campaign issue. This is
the campaign issue of this country.This is what's running the country, the
control of these people, how theirmoneyes go through, how everybody's health has
been deteriorated and controlled by the militaryindustrial complex and big pharma. You know,
(46:25):
I would go so far as tosay all the garbage is going on
in the food and everything else.People need to wake up and realize that
what you're putting in your body,it doesn't matter to me whether it's food
you're putting in, or a pullyou're putting in, or an injection you
put in. You can put somethingin your body and then think, oh,
let me put something else in mybody. To treat what I first
(46:46):
put into my body, you treatit by not putting the first thing into
your body. So from the intelligenceperspective, you've got to be able to
have the knowledge base. Then you'vegot to be able to insist that the
people that are running for office rightnow, they're running for office, they
want or vote, they will payattention to you. You need to put
pressure on them to say these areour topics. These people need to be
(47:09):
indicted for these biological weapons, andwe need to return control of science and
medicine from the federal government back toscience and medicine. Are there a lot
of people within science and medicine they'refairly botched up right now? Yeah,
there are, Okay, but let'sbe honest. We've worked on it.
(47:29):
We've worked really hard, and we'veand we've and we now are reaping the
rewards of what we have done,and we're going to have to address that.
And that's part of what has tobe done in the future as well.
You need to be holding people accountable. You also need to hold your
doctors accountable. By the way,it's harder to hold the scientists accountable.
But all the doctors that I don'tcare if they're even saying, now,
(47:51):
don't do this, don't do thatone up front they were they were proposing
I don't want to just say thevaccines because that sounds like it's back to
the vaccines, but proposing whatever itwas without thinking it through. Right,
there's going to be an accountability foreverybody. There has to be an accountability
for everybody, or the shiny cityon the hill just became Gotham. We
(48:14):
can't survive without justice. The Republicis at the precipice of failure, and
I would say it's headed down andthat's why we're here. That's why,
and there's never been such an opportunity, not just individually but as a country
start make a comeback in the lead, if you will. And it's definitely
(48:36):
a hefty task. I've had multiplepeople tell me that everything in my life
led to me being in this position. I have mixed responses to that,
But that being said, the responsibilityof looking this task for all of us
is ours. And a lot ofpeople say, you know, they hope
to live in interesting times that makeit different. We live in times that
(49:01):
will make a difference, and wedetermine what that difference will be. We
also determine whether we're going to bethe next endangered species or not. Well,
I can't end better than that,other than to say I could speak
to you for at least another threedays and probably not get it all in.
Doctor Richard Fleming, Are We theNext Endangered Species? Is his book.
(49:25):
You can find it on Amazon.You can go to doctor tell us
the name of your website. SoFleming method dot com has a lot of
material. Ten letters dot Org allowspeople to go on send in documents to
governors and attorney generals of their stateand to your friends to do the same
thing. Doctor Fleming, thank youso much. We will put all the
(49:47):
information on the website. We hopeyou'll come back and give us an update
at some point, and until thenwe wish you godspeed and take care.
He's one of the those guys,Joe, that you're just glad to know
is out there and on the sideof truth. Good Lord. Okay,
(50:08):
look, I highly recommend people goingto his website, namely Fleming method dot
com. Fleming that's F E,M, I n G. Just one
M flemingma dot com. The resourceson that website are absolutely incredible. It's
a heyday, it's a geek kday, and his knowledge is vast. So
(50:35):
I want to thank everyone for listeningtoday. I want to thank as always
to Magicman Joe Strecker. Until nexttime, everyone who will stand at either
hand and keep the bridge with me, have a great day.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.