← Realfoodology
Realfoodology
How to Win the Fight Against Corruption in Health and Agriculture | Senator Ron Johnson
01:34:54
Loading summary
Transcript259 lines
- [00:00]
A
On today's episode of the Real Foodology.
- [00:02]
B
Podcast, it was all a big lie. And they're still lying about it. They're still covering up.
- [00:09]
A
Hello, friends. Welcome back to another episode of the Real Foodology Podcast. I am coming to you live from dc. Actually, I'm recording this intro in my house in Denver, but this particular episode, I flew out to Washington, D.C. to interview Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. You may recognize his name because he is the senator that hosted the roundtable that I spoke at recently at the U.S. senate. And he is such an amazing guy. I love what he's doing right now. Working so hard for the people as senators should. I decided to bring him on the podcast. He is the soon to be chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Now, if you don't know what that means, don't worry, because we dive into that in the episode. We talk about what his plans are to expose and hold accountable to corruption within our health agencies and how he's going to move forward working with RFK Jr under Trump. We talk about how likely it is that RFK will get voted in by the Senate. We talk about what actually needs to be addressed to make real change with our food industry. Is it possible? We go over so many things. I really loved this episode and it was such an honor to be able to sit down with Ron Johnson. I just. I'm truly so grateful to know him. This is a man who really cares about the people. You can tell based on how he talks and what he says in the interview. And I just think it's so refreshing to know that people in the government have our back because all we hear is about the corruption and how everybody's in it for themselves or they're in it for the companies that they're getting paid from. And we talk a little bit about that with him as well. The lobbying and invested interest and if people are getting paid by other companies. And so we talk about that a little bit as well. And I think you'll be very happy to hear what Ron Johnson has to say. So with that, I hope that you love the episode. If you could take a moment to rate and review the podcast. It means so much. It also helps to get this podcast out to more people. So I am truly grateful for you listening and I hope you enjoy the episode. I am a huge fan of Manuka Honey. In fact, I've taken it for years because of its antibacterial and antiviral properties. It's great for, if you have a sore throat, you feel like maybe you're getting run down, especially as we go into the winter months. In fact, I was just traveling and I took this Manu Kora honey with me because they come in these amazing little travel packs. I love Manu Kora honey. It's rich, creamy and honestly the most delicious honey I've ever tasted. I what makes it so special? It's ethically produced by master beekeepers in the remote forests of New Zealand and it's packed with powerful nutrients that support both immunity and gut health. The bees collect nectar from the Manuka tea tree and the honey they produce contains three times more antioxidants and prebiotics than regular honey. Not only that, but Manukora honey also contains a special antibacterial compound called mgo. Every single harvest is third party tested for MGO and you can even scan a QR code to see the results for yourself. I love to take a spoonful of Manukur honey straight from the jar in the morning. The creamy texture just melts in your mouth and it's a perfect way to start the day. I also love to add it to my coffee. Plus it's great to add to tea or drizzle and toast. Now it's easier than ever to try Manukora honey head to manukora.com real foodology to get $25 off the starter kit which comes with an MGO 850 plus Manuka honey jar, five honey travel sticks, a wooden spoon and a guidebook. That's ma n u k o r a dot com real foodology for $25 off your starter kit. Are you looking to boost your energy and support healthier aging? I've been using Mito Pure by Timeline and the results have been pretty incredible. It was developed by Swiss based Timeline after a decade of research. Mito Pure is a powerful urolithin, a postbiotic that's tough to get from diet alone. I've noticed significant improvements in muscle strength, recovery times and overall energy levels. I highly recommend you going back and listen one of the podcast episodes I did with the founder of Timeline. We talk a lot about the research that they have done and I really, I seriously like, I believe so much in this product. This is one of my favorite supplements that I have found in a really long time because I really truly notice a difference. Our mitochondria, we all learned this in like 10th grade probably. Mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell. It's literally the batteries of your cell. If your mitochondria are not working properly, you're you're going to feel the effects of it in every area of your life. So might appear is essentially like food for your mitochondria. For me, taking Metapure is more about than just feeling good. Today it's about maintaining my vitality. As I age, I want to be 90 and still enjoy hiking, running, playing with my grandkids. Mind up here helps me stay active and healthy, ensuring I can live life to the fullest. Timeline also offers a delicious berry powder that mixes easily into your yogurt or smoothies. It tastes really good actually. And then they also have super convenient soft gels if that's more your vibe. If you to experience the benefits for yourself, get 10% off your first order of Miter Pure by visiting timeline.com Real Foodology that's T-I M E L-I N E.com Real Foodology so I have really been struggling with this, with. With everything going on with RFK Jr right now, because you and I were speaking a little bit before we started recording that I had initially been on the track to be a registered dietitian. I decided to pull myself out of that track even though my dad was really upset with me. And now he's happy, but I decided to go.
- [05:48]
B
By the way, always listen to your dad.
- [05:51]
A
He's happy now, but at the time he was like, what are you doing? Because RD is a traditional track if you want to be an expert in nutrition and you want to work in any sort of field, at least federally. And so I pulled myself out because I realized that there was so much funding happening from these big food Corp. Corporations like Pepsi, Coca Cola, General Mills. And now what I'm seeing is with RFK Jr. There's a lot of these registered dietitians that are being very outspoken against him right now. And there's this thing happening in my world where we're both split, even though we're both. We're all supposed to be on the same side right now with the nutrition. And you were saying you wanted to talk about this, so this is one of the main reasons I brought you on this podcast today is because you are planning to expose and hold a lot of these corporations accountable. And that's what's happening right now in the registered dietitian world, in the nutrition world, also in science, in the medical system. So can we talk about that?
- [06:48]
B
Sure. No, I'd love to. Because. And by the way, thank you for attending our public event there end of September.
- [06:55]
A
Yeah.
- [06:55]
B
And I didn't really expect you to listen to what I said in my opening statement. But I want to repeat or paraphrase my final paragraph, which I think is probably the most important one, because I've said this a number of times in my events. I marvel at how much knowledge mankind has accumulated over the millennia and how our knowledge base is increasing exponentially. Okay, it's amazing what we know. But having stated that, what we don't know vastly exceeds what we do. You're a smart man, so. No, I'm an ignorant man. Okay, I know, I know. There's so much we don't know, the complexity of all these things. So as we move forward on this, that was the point, because I had no idea what any of you guys are going to say. I have no idea how hard everybody is in terms of their opinions. You have to take that level of humility and modesty into the search for the truth. And part of the big problem we have is science has been so corrupted. Eisenhower warned us about this in his farewell address, military industrial complex. But the next warning was literally government financing of science, funding of it. Whoever funds the science is going to get the result they want. It's always going to be a problem. If you had independent reviewers and supposedly that's what peer reviewing is, but that is completely corrupted as well. Yeah, I mean, the peers are not uncorrupted individuals or non interested individuals. And they have all kinds of reasons for peer reviewing articles that Nestle do not. Well, first of all, very few of them actually look at the data. A lot of this research, the data is not even made available. So you sort of start there. We have a fundamental problem in this country that research, scientific research, has been corrupted. It is corrupt. It's very hard to say what is true and what isn't true. I've got a couple quotes from, for example, Marcia angel, who used to be an editor of the New England Journal of medicine, quit in 2000, started writing about it later on. And again, I could paraphrase her, actually, maybe later on we'll quote her. But she slowly and reluctantly came to the conclusion that she couldn't trust the authorities and the scientific studies they were publishing in the New England Journal of Medicine. She resigned in 2000 because of that, 24 years later, it hasn't gotten better. I would say it's gotten worse. So, I mean, that's our real dilemma as we move forward now. How to make America healthier. What should we be eating? What should we be putting on our body? What supplements? I mean, as somebody who's. I'm an accountant, I'm not a nutritionist. I have no idea where to start. I keep sending my wife articles. She's the arbiter of this stuff. I mean, sometimes I say, jane, you don't need to eat, because eating so many supplements, you know, we are all baffled. And it's true. It would be nice if we had a government agency that was uncorrupted, not captured by the corporate interests that literally could be the arbiters with integrity to try and sort this out. But they're the ones that developed the food pyramid because of corporate capture. So, again, this is, you know, we're starting to learn this, you know, because of the good work of people like you. The public is becoming aware of this because of the technology that now exists with podcasts, and people's eyes are being opened. But again, I'll go back to that. I want everybody to have open minds because we don't know the truth yet. There's so much we need to learn yet.
- [10:43]
A
Yeah. And I said, you're a smart man for admitting that. Because I always tell my audience, I'm like, if you're ever listening to an expert that just says that, they definitively know that this is the truth and you need to follow this. And then they don't understand how science works. They also don't understand that we don't know so much about, especially the human body, when it comes to the human body. Just since I've been studying nutrition in the last, like, 20 years, so much research has come out about, like, for example, the microbiome, things that we never knew when I first went into school, and now I'm having to learn it outside of school because they didn't know in my curriculum at the time. And so there's so many things we don't know about the human body. And this is. I do want to talk about COVID in a little bit, but this is what was driving me so not so Covid.
- [11:24]
B
Do you know Dr. Sabine Hazen?
- [11:27]
A
I don't know.
- [11:27]
B
Okay, I have to connect you to her. I mean, she is the expert in the microbiome, bifidobacteria, the connection of that to our immune system, how the vaccine was destroying bifidobacteria in the gut. Again, it's all complex.
- [11:42]
A
It is. It's so complex. And then we have experts that are in charge that are saying that we know everything and that you need to follow this one science, but we know the science is corrupted. So I'm curious, when you first got into the Senate, into your job, did you know that this was happening, that there was corporate capture happening and no, actually.
- [12:01]
B
So I'm a business guy. Right. I'm an accountant. I ran a plastics manufacturing company for 30 years for food and medical device packaging. Quite honestly. So when I first ran in 2010 as part of the tea party movement, primarily because we're mortgage our kids future, I did not come to the Senate to do this, to investigate, to get involved in health issues. This has been kind of thrust on me. But when I first was campaigned 2010 I defended big pharma and big oil. Really the first speech I ever gave, I defended those entities, said am I the only guy that likes a gas station on every corner because I almost drive down to empty or that wants a new life saving drug? So you know, I'm a defender of big pharma. And it was literally Covid that opened my eyes to the corporate capture, the harm done by advertising. I mean it only takes a second to really think about it. Why would these drug companies advertise? I mean the advertisements are awful. I have no idea what any of those drugs is for. You got people being happy, you know.
- [13:03]
A
Frolicking in the grass.
- [13:05]
B
Yeah. You know, throwing footballs. You know, it's like just wonder. And then the last 30 seconds are just a portion of the horrible side effects that they've got a list. So obviously no business would literally pay money to tell you that their drug could kill you. Okay, so why do they do it? There's only one reason. They want to capture the narrative. And they did capture the narrative. So they've captured the agencies, they've captured the media, the social media, to the detriment of, you know, American public's health.
- [13:37]
A
And you are soon to be the chairman of the senate permanent subcommittee on investigations. Correct. So I have so many questions about this. First of all, what does that mean and what are your plans moving forward with that?
- [13:50]
B
So this is. This committee actually existed before the full committee that I was chair for six years. But in our conference you time out after six years. So I was chairman for six years. I timeout. Which puts me in line to then be the chair of the permanent subcommittee investigations. As chair of that, I will actually have stronger subpoena power than I had as chairman of the full committee, which I will use. So I have written, for example, well over 60 oversight letters to the federal health agencies, Department of Defense, you know, anybody associated with our miserably failed response to Covid, you know, I've basically been given the middle finger. They haven't responded to me. You Know, my guess right now is you've got the shredding machines, the furnaces, the, you know, whatever they do to wipe disk drives, you know, the bleach bit going, you know, fast and furious inside these health agencies, which is scary. But again, in the modern age, it's hard to wipe out electronic records. I mean, there's copies all over who you send them to, that type of thing. So, you know, I will. I've laid the foundation for oversight work just from a standpoint. Standpoint of our response to Covid. The way we turned our back on the safety surveillance systems, ignored vaers, the safety warnings. Right now I'm reading Brianne Dressen's book, Worth a Shot. I'd recommend it to your listeners. I mean, it's just, it's hard to read just in terms of what she went through as somebody who was totally pro vax. So pro vax that she signed up for the AstraZeneca trial and then was immediately abandoned. I mean, she had an adverse. A horrible, serious adverse event that day. And it just got worse and worse and worse. AstraZeneca did nothing for her. They eventually sent her like a $1,300 check and said, well, this ought to take care of it. Even though her medical bills were hundreds of thousands and that was duplicated time and time and time and time again, federal health agencies still don't acknowledge it. She was working with somebody within the nih, thought they were. You know, so they were really quiet about it, didn't want to upset the app cart there. They were just stringing her along, stringing all these vaccine injured along. And then Facebook shuts down their support groups, which led to suicides because so many of them were suicidal. I mean, their lives were completely shattered. And you've got the media, you've got our federal health agencies, you've got the medical establishment. You know, all these people that pushed the vaccine said they were safe and effective. They didn't want to admit that they were wrong, so they completely ignored them. I mean, think of how lonely that would be. It's like, I have no hope. How am I ever going to get treated by these people that are denying. I mean, they're saying, it's all in my head. No, this is so again, I would really worth a shot brand dress and read it and just put yourself in her shoes and then get angry and demand action.
- [16:42]
A
I'm very angry about what happened during COVID and I was very outspoken during then too, actually. In fact, I. My Instagram was shadow banned for years. Because I was very outspoken about all of this. I remember years ago, too, I didn't talk too much about vaccines on my podcast, but I would talk about them on my Instagram. And then people would go to my podcast and give me one star reviews calling me Anti Vaccine. And I came out time and time again. I was like, I'm not anti. But look at the studies that are coming out right now, and we can't deny that people are being injured. I had a very, very close friend, still to this day is in and out of hospitals because she has pericarditis, which is inflammation around the sac around the heart. And I just. But then people would call me Anti Vaxx. They would call her Anti Vaxx. If she came out and just said, like, look, I took it and I was injured and people are still calling them Anti Vaxx even if you already took it. It was insanity. I'm so grateful that you were outspoken about this. I was actually talking to Grace right before we came in here, and she said that that's how she met you was through her school. They were trying to mandate the vaccine. And so she. Her mom, I guess, met with you during that time. I'm so grateful that you were outspoken during this time. What was the. I'm assuming you got a lot of pushback from that in this world.
- [17:51]
B
Oh, yeah. So it's interesting reading, and I almost feel bad recommending the book because I come out looking like a saint, which I'm not. Okay. But what was interesting about that is nobody else would listen to him. Ken Rutgers, who was a Green Bay Packer, not my constituent. He lives out in Oregon. But he heard what I was saying about Vaers and I was acknowledging these things, so he reached out to me. I was the last elected official they wanted to be associated with. I was so poisoned to them because of the media, the way they were painting me, the way they were vilifying me and ridiculing me.
- [18:27]
A
Because you were outspoken.
- [18:28]
B
Because I was just pointing out the Vayer system. I mean, I was fortunate enough to have talked to somebody called Dr. Michael Yeaden, who worked for Pfizer for 30 years, ended up being vice president of research. His specialty is in toxicology. He was beside himself when he heard what his former colleagues were doing. Again, they all were educated. They all know the same things. And Ron, there's a long list of ingredients we don't put into injectables because they're toxic to the body. When I heard my colleagues were going to invent an injection that Was going to turn the body into its own manufacture of something that is toxic to it, encapsulated in something that is designed to permeate, difficult to permeate barriers. Okay, so all these lies, and he published, you know, the 13 lies of COVID but it starts with, oh, it's gonna stain your arm. No, they knew it wouldn't. They had studies in ras that, that lipid nanoparticle travels all over the place, concentrates in the ovaries, the adrenal glands. They knew it was gonna happen. And then of course, you know, the mRNA, which is not real mRNA, which is, you know, does degrade very rapidly, which is why they encapsulate that this is modified it so it wouldn't degrade. So when those lipid nanoparticles delivered that MRNA to enter a cell, turn the cell into a little manufacturing site of something toxic to it. So those cells express that spike protein. What does the body do? It attacks it. It's not me. It's not part of me. I attack it. I destroy what's not me. So if a lot of that settles on the heart, inflames the heart. I mean, when the body attacks itself, that's called inflammation, attacks the nervous system. You know, that's what caused all the neurological. And yet all these doctors are just completely. Because during COVID you know, the people that testified before my committees, like Peter McCulloch, Pierre Cory, they got fired, they got sued, they had their careers destroyed. It doesn't take many individuals to be completely destroyed by the medical establishment, by the media, before other people say, I think I, you know, I've invested about $500,000 in my medical license here. I want to be able to practice medicine. Maybe I just shut up and that's, that's what happened.
- [20:47]
A
Are you trying to stay hydrated but still feeling tired? No matter how much water you drink, it's time to rethink hydration. Introducing Element, the electrolyte drink mix designed to replenish what you lose when you sweat. Unlike plain water, Element provides essential sodium, potassium and magnesium to prevent muscle cramps, headaches and energy crashes. Developed by renowned biochemist R.O. bob Wolf and Keto Gains founder Louis Villainsignor, Element contains zero sugar or artificial additives with refreshing flavors like citrus salt and raspberry salt. There's something for everyone. And for my sparkling water lovers, Element has created a sparkling water called Element sparkling. I'm so excited about this product. With the same trusted electrolyte formulation you love now in a refreshing 16 ounce can of sparkling water. Element Sparkling provides health conscious consumers with a guilt free option to support their wellness journey. With every sip, you're making a conscious choice against sugary and stimulant filled bever beverages, empowering yourself towards a healthier lifestyle. Try Element Sparkling today and experience hydration with a sparkling twist. To get your free sample pack with any drink mix purchase, go to DrinkElement.com Real Foodology that's drink L-M-N-T.com Real Foodology and if you're an LMNT insider, you have first access to Element Sparkling, a bold 16 ounce can of sparkling electrolyte water did you know that most cookware and appliances are made with Forever chemicals? Yes, that means your non stick pans, your air fryers, your waffle makers, your blender could possibly have PFAs and yes, even our beloved crock pots and pressure cookers. I have actually been talking about this for so long. Back in 2006 my mom came to my dorm room and made me get rid of all my nonstick pans because she was concerned about me being exposed to something called Teflon. Teflon is a coating that is used on nonstick pans and a lot of these appliances that I just named. So I've avoided Teflon nonstick PFA coated appliances, pots and pans. You name it for a very long time and the only option for the for a very long time was just stainless steel pots and pans. So I was really excited when a company like Our Place came out because they started creating really beautiful cookware and appliances that are like pieces of art. Every appliance that I have from Our Place I legit want to store it on the counter and I'm the type of person that does not want anything on my counter because I like it to look really just clean and minimal. But I'm so obsessed with all the Our Place products that I have so many of them displayed on my counter because they are legit pieces of art. Our Place is a mission driven and female founded brand that makes beautiful kitchen products that are healthy and sustainable. All their products are made without PFAS which are the Forever chemicals and also made without PTFE which is Teflon. If a company is not outwardly stating that they don't use these chemicals then if they are using non stick coating on their appliances they are absolutely using Forever chemicals. And there's been increasing global scrutiny for their impact on the environment and our health. And recognizing this impact, the EU plans to prohibit PFAS by 2025 our place has always been PFAS free and they offer durable toxin free ceramic coatings ensuring a healthy, safe cooking experience. And let me tell you, you guys, they are changing the game with non toxic appliances. They have a blender, they have an air fryer, they have a crock pot. Not to mention they're amazing. Always pan. They have a perfect pot which is just the perfect size for soups. And they also just came out with a cast iron that I'm loving as well. And I more recently replaced all of the bowls and plates in my kitchen because I really needed an upgrade. My other ones were so old so I got some from our place and they are so beautiful. The ceramics are beautiful, the colors are amazing. Like I said, everything is like a piece of art. If you want to try any of the products from our place place go to fromourplace.com and enter my code real foodology checkout to receive 10 off site wide. That's fromourplace.com code real foodology. Our place offers a 100 day trial with free shipping and returns. How did they not shut you up? And how did you keep your job?
- [24:52]
B
They can't shut. They can't shut me up.
- [24:54]
A
Oh yeah, okay. I guess because you'd have to. Yeah. Because you were voted in. That's true.
- [24:57]
B
Yeah, I'm us, Sandra. I, you know, that's true. Now what happened is they don't invite me on the main news shows anymore. I used to go and argue with Chuck Todd all the time. I don't get invited back to abc, NBC, cbs.
- [25:12]
A
Well, they're all going under anyways. They're all.
- [25:14]
B
I realize that. But again, they're very. I did not realize how poisonous I was to the vaccine injured. I didn't realize. Now they quickly met me and their concerns were relieved. I mean, but prior to that, I mean they really thought I was just, well, Bobby Kennedy, in our event, he said, you know, you used to be a super villain to me. Yeah, gee, I mean, I don't view myself as a super villain. I view myself as a pretty reasonable guy, you know, relatively, you know, I'm not bombastic. I'm pretty reasonable in my rhetoric. Yeah, I get passionate about things, which.
- [25:55]
A
Is a good thing. And I'm so grateful that you've been so passionate about all of this last couple of years because I mean, so in my world I've been, I feel like I've been fighting this battle for 20 years because like I said, you know, when I went to school, I, I woke up very early I also have a brother who was vaccine injured when I was 21. And so that woke me up to the vaccine stuff.
- [26:13]
B
How badly injured he.
- [26:15]
A
He ultimately passed away. Yeah, like 10 years later, actually. He was 11. He was 11 when he passed away.
- [26:22]
B
So when was he vaccine injured? At what age?
- [26:24]
A
When he, like, pretty much like right after he was born. And then, because he was born super healthy, and then day three, they gave him some routine shots, which I still don't know what those shots were. The nurse just told my mom that she was gonna give him some shots. His fever spiked. He ended up in an incubator for three weeks after that, and then he was neurologically never the same.
- [26:43]
B
Horrible.
- [26:44]
A
Yeah.
- [26:44]
B
You know, that's how Bobby Kennedy got involved in this too.
- [26:47]
A
Yeah.
- [26:47]
B
I mean, he. Hughes environmental speaker. Right?
- [26:50]
A
Yeah.
- [26:50]
B
It was all those moms that came to his events. He just.
- [26:55]
A
I know he's like, go, stop. I don't know anything about this.
- [26:58]
B
I don't want to deal with this. Until the one mom had the tenacity to find out where he lives, showed up with research paper, and to his credit, he read the research. And to his further, even greater credit, once his eyes were open, he couldn't shut his eyes. And that's, I think, true of all of us.
- [27:18]
A
That's how all of us feel.
- [27:19]
B
People say, oh, you're so courageous. No, my eyes are open. I'm sorry, I can't close my eyes to this. I mean, I'm looking at this. We need to prevent further harm.
- [27:28]
A
That's exactly how I feel, too. And I look around and I see with our current food system, how many people are being harmed right now? I mean, 74% of our population is either overweight or obese. 50% of our children are. And you know all this because we spoke about it at the roundtable, but so I want to start asking you a little bit, like what? I think we already know this, but I want to hear you outline this a little bit. What actually needs to be addressed to make real change with our food industry.
- [27:54]
B
So first we have to repair science.
- [27:57]
A
Yeah. How do we do that when everything's so corrupted?
- [28:00]
B
Well, first of all, you have to expose how it is corrupted. Sabine Hazen, we talked about her earlier. She's got a really good tweet thread that just shows how corrupt. And that's maybe the wrong word. How colluding, how biased or how tainted. Maybe tainted. You know, people have their agendas. Peer reviewers have their agendas. And there's no. You know, there are some that have Very high integrity. But there are an awful lot that don't, so that they'll come and peer review a paper that is contrary to their findings and they just rip it, okay? So it doesn't get published again. So that system doesn't work. Okay? The fact that research is funded by people who want a certain result. I mean, climate change, I mean, all this stuff, I mean, it's just. That just makes sense, like, well, I'm paying for the research. That's not the result I want. And let's face it, somebody who's getting that grant, they know exactly the result that the funder wants. And particularly if they want another grant and another grant and another grant. And so that's been happening with Anthony Fauci for 40 years as he's the highest paid federal employee with controlling the purse strings of billions of dollars in grant money. People knew exactly what he wanted and they gave him that result. So that has been corrupted. So in order to fix any problem, the first step is a admitting you have one, then secondly, completely diagnosing it, defining it properly. What is the root cause? I mean, what has corrupted science and what can we do? So you got to go through those steps and then you can start coming up with solutions. But from my standpoint, at the heart of it is going to lie independent boards of people from different disciplines that just really look at this stuff. Somebody published a research paper, the data has to be made available, easily accessible, easily manipulated or analyzed, whatever. Not manipulated, but analyzed. So it kind of starts there, but it starts with the acknowledgement that it's been corrupted. And that's going to be difficult to get the public to accept because the public, by and large, doesn't want to believe things could be this corrupt. That's the silver lining of COVID is it was so obvious that something's wrong.
- [30:24]
A
Yeah.
- [30:24]
B
Okay. I mean, as much as they keep pushing, I mean, the subcommittee, the House subcommittee, just published their results. Most of it's, you know, pretty rock solid. I mean, nothing particularly new. We knew this stuff, but they come out big. Spores are operation warp speed. You know, the COVID vaccine saved millions and millions of lives. There's no.
- [30:42]
A
I still can't believe.
- [30:42]
B
I mean, you know, we've got Dennis Rancour saying, no, it killed about 17 million people globally. I don't know what the figure is. I know that hundreds of thousands in America lost their lives lacking early treatment because they sabotaged the use of whether it's ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, budesonide, I mean, there are a host of things, you know, treat the pneumonia with antibiotics. Instead they slapped them on ventilators where they knew the fatality rate is going to be about 90% remdesivir, which is a corrupt little enterprise there, knocked out people's kidneys. They had, you know, I'm not a doctor, non medical researcher. I think these protocols turned hospitals into killing fields. That's my own personal belief. I know it's a harsh statement, but I think that's just true. And I've heard story after story after story. I'm talking to a lawyer right now that represented hundreds of families who wanted once their family member was in hospital begging, but they went beyond begging. They sued the hospitals to administer ivermectin. And the half that he won, only three people died. Of the suits he lost, they all died. So he's going to be testifying for I become chair. We'll hold a hearing on those hospital protocols and kind of what he's done.
- [32:04]
A
That's amazing. I think one of the biggest mistakes they made too was they were telling everybody, don't do anything. If you get Covid, don't do anything, don't do anything. And then you wait until you're so sick that you can't breathe and then you go to the hospital and then they throw you on that protocol. And at that point, there was no stopping that protocol. Like you just said, people were literally having to sue the hospital just to get their family on ivermectin.
- [32:25]
B
So, so the fun, the what, what has caused that? What has turned medicine into rather than prevention and then worst case, treatment. Now we want to prevent with a drug, a vaccine, okay? Which in theory sounds great, man. If you can inject somebody and you never get that illness, fabulous. Okay? But when you start playing around with God's amazing immune system, what could go wrong? A lot, a lot could go wrong. Particularly when you're injecting like six different vaccines at the same time into a three month old child. Okay, gee, maybe something could go wrong. But don't ask that question, don't ever have it.
- [33:10]
A
It.
- [33:13]
B
Argued in a court of law. Because we've given everybody immunity from liability. And again, that's the fundamental problem. Now again, I'm not a fan of trial lawyers and I'm not a fan of multimillion dollar judgments which bankrupt businesses. I mean, we do need, I do want drug companies, I do want them conducting research and developing new life saving drugs. I want that. Okay? But I don't want them corrupting the process. And there's gotta be some system to hold them accountable, force them to do the studies. I mean, we bypassed so many studies and then ignored the results. I mean, that's the, that's the really result of the Pfizer papers, which, if you want to know how corrupt that was, the fact that. Not Pfizer. I think Pfizer probably would have gone to court. They didn't have to. The FDA went to court to try and keep the trial data from the public. Why would the FDA do that? Could it be because they. Well, so my last oversight letter based on the Pfizer papers, they had very early indications of myocarditis in youth. It was obvious, and they were scrambling. They're going to do a health advisory network warning on this, right? So they're all emails, heavily redacted. You can tell they're going to warn the public about this. In the end, they didn't do that. Instead they came up with a 17 page talking point memo which is 100% redacted. We don't know what it is, but through FOIA requests, they got it all redacted. So I've written an oversight letter. I'm not subject to redactions. I want to see that letter. I want to see what you were doing. Okay, so again, total corruption because it'll show that the people in the fda, the cdc, nih, they knew that these vaccines were causing myocarditis in youth and they hit it. But even worse than that, I mean, what I was looking at, because I'd been tipped off by Michael Eden, so I was very wary of this. We were looking at Vaers. I confronted Francis Collins in a meeting with, I don't know, five or six other Republican senators. They're all patting themselves in the back because they finally got the testing kits out and I was the skunk in the room. So, yeah. Dr. Collins, are you washing Vaders? I think at that time there was something like 3,000 deaths reported in the. I mean, that's unheard of, a new drug associated with the COVID vaccine. At that time, about 46% were occurring day of vaccination within one or two days. So, like thousands of deaths, 46% occurring within two days. And okay, I know, Dr. Collins, that VAERS doesn't prove causation. He said, well, you know, Senator, we've attributed six deaths with the JJ vaccine, you know, the clotting, but, you know, standard people die, really, 3,000 within a couple months, 46% within a couple days.
- [36:04]
A
Especially with a new drug so they.
- [36:06]
B
Were completely unconcerned about it. Right now, the stats, these are worldwide stats, about over 37,000 deaths, 24% occurring on day 01 or 2. Now, they had a higher death rate early on because the early injections were elderly. You know, people just, they couldn't handle the adverse systems. They just blew it off. They are continuing to blow it off. And again, the House select subcommittee on the coronavirus, again chaired by a Dr. Card King Member of the medical establishment. I mean, everybody, almost every member here probably cut videos, did radio interviews, get vaccinated. We got to end this pandemic. So they all push the vaccine. Doctors push the vaccine. The social media and the media companies push the vaccine. So nobody wants to admit they're wrong. Nobody wants to do a me and company. I guess maybe we should have been a little more cautious. Maybe we should have listened to people like Michael Yeaden, who knew what he was talking about, could explain it in layman's terms because trust me, once Michael Yeaden very quickly explained to me what these injections were, there was no way I was going to put these in my body. So I think my first moment of controversy was a local reporter asked me, sandra, have you gotten the vaccine? This is like in February. And I said, again, I'm not a doctor. I don't know. I'm not gonna impose my, you know, I'm not gonna spout off. I said, well, no, we don't have enough vaccines right now. There are other people more vulnerable. Besides, I already had Covid asymptomatic, by the way, and we should talk about that. Yes, already had that. So, you know, I've already got the natural immunity, which is probably better than vaccine. And I just got slaughtered for that. As a matter of fact, I went on to say probably once I'm getting slaughtered for this. Listen, why are we so arrogant to think that mankind can produce a better immunity than what our creator has? And oh, by the way, everybody is fauci's denying the ability of natural immunity. What do you think the vacuum is going to rely on exactly? It was meant to trigger our natural immune system to if we encountered this coronavirus to kick in. And supposedly a vaccine that only is the spike protein, as opposed to your natural immune system is recognizing your entire face. The vaccine's only going to have your body recognize your nose. You can change your nose. And plus natural immunity. Why do you think half the world population apparently got infected with coronavirus? Again, That's PCR test. You can go down that Path too, but didn't have symptoms. Well, their natural immune system must have taken. You know, they probably had another cold of some different version of a coronavirus. You know, coronavirus isn't new. Most colds are rhinoviruses, but there are coronaviruses and maybe they're close enough. And maybe those of us who had a coronavirus in the past, maybe you already had natural immunity to it modified at all. But all the stuff was denied. Yeah, it was. It was all a big lie. And they're still lying about it. They're still covering up.
- [39:08]
A
I mean, it's so sick. I just wonder what it's going to take for those people that still believe all the lies to actually realize what really happened during that time. Because I remember, like I said, I was paying attention during all of this because of my brother, and I was like, oh, I'm not going to take this new vaccine. I don't understand this at all. This is a new medication. Despite them saying, oh, this, this is safe and effective. And we actually have 20 years of research. Well, the research showed in the animals that it was killing people or killing the animals. And so I already knew that. And then also, if you actually took the time to read the studies that were coming out, Pfizer came out with a study and they showed that they. One, they didn't even test for it, but they didn't even know if it was gonna keep us from transmitting Covid or not. And then I'm watching the news and Rachel Maddow and everybody's going, if you get vaccinated, Biden said this too, that you will not catch it and you will not be able to transmit it. And I was going, yeah, and I was going, wait, but that's not, that's literally not what the science says. Like, what is going on here? And then the thing you brought up, the myocarditis, and I think this is important for people to hear this. There was a study that just came out kind of recently, and it's the largest scale study they've done on children, Covid and vaccines. And they found that not a single child that had just gotten Covid got myocarditis. The myocarditis was only coming from the vaccine only period.
- [40:22]
B
And myocarditis is not mild.
- [40:25]
A
Yes. And we don't know what the long term effects of that is.
- [40:28]
B
How do you explain all the sudden deaths? All these young, they go to sleep, they don't wake up. I mean, the athletes dropping dead or unconscious on the field and it's like. And it's happening all over the world. And every time that would be reported, you say, well, did they get a vaccine? They would never ask the question.
- [40:47]
A
I know.
- [40:48]
B
All these vaccine injured go to their doctors and they just refused to acknowledge they had anything to do with the vaccine.
- [40:56]
A
I know.
- [40:57]
B
So, no, nobody ever wants to admit they're wrong. Right. All the people who got the vaccine, they literally just want to move on. They want to forget about it. They want to put this in the past. They don't want to look at the studies that might show that some of these things, the DNA contamination, the, the SV40 sequence that are in these, contaminating these vaccines that, that could produce cancer sometime in the future. Nobody wants to recognize that. And I understand that. I don't even like talking about it. I know, but it's just. It's the truth. I mean, you're getting these turbo cancers. You're having cancers that have been in remission come roaring back into stage four. I mean, this is happening. It's not being reported on, and yet they're still pushing these things. That's the, the most outrageous thing.
- [41:45]
A
Yeah.
- [41:46]
B
Is this was experimental. They knew it was going to. I mean, they should have known all these things. That's what Mike Eden says. You know, I know what these guys know. I know they're lying to us. I know they know they're lying to us. And yet they're doing it, and they're still doing it brazenly.
- [42:02]
A
Was it. I know we don't know definitively, but in your opinion, was this a control thing or was this a money thing? It. To me, it seems like a money thing. And I'll say this really fast. I'm going to outline this. So part of the reason or the way that they were able to emergency authorize this vaccine in the first place is because in order to enact that, there can be no other viable medication to treat that. Now, I was sitting over here going, wait, whoa, whoa, whoa. There was hydroxychloroquine. There's all this other stuff that we knew, but they intentionally suppressed all that so that they could push this vaccine forward. Now, do you believe that that was for money?
- [42:40]
B
So when you consider the global cost of the pandemic, I mean, just the economic cost, I mean, let's set the human suffering, the death, just. It's trillions of dollars. The profit made in the vaccine. Tens, hundreds of billions. I mean, it's not even close. So I have a hard time thinking it could be the profit motive. It could be people being so unbelievably greedy that they just waiting to spring, you know, anything they could call a pandemic. Of course there are people say there was no pandemic. I mean, this didn't spread. You know, again, I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna wade into that because I just don't have any expertise, you know, I do know. And my first hearing in. Well, my first hearings in actually February, but the one where I really started questioning things was in May. And the main reason I held 2021 or 2020 during this very early on, okay, I mean, I'm hopping on board hydroxychloroquine, talking to Novartis who produces it. And they were gonna have like 12 studies and they're all gonna be coming out in May. They went dark by the end of April because I think that's when somebody, they made the decision, this is gonna be vaccine pain. Don't worry about anything else. But my first hearing was with Johnny and Edis and others trying to calm everybody down because they had the Princess Cruise. So we had that crucible of a study. It's just a perfect little 700 person whatever study. And from that we could understand the lethality of this thing and the vulnerability. So if you're old and elderly, had certain comorbidities. Comorbidities, That's a hard one to say. Well, especially when you talk fast. Yeah, this would be a threatening disease. But if you're young and healthy, it's gonna be like a flu. Maybe bad flu, but whatever. You know, the center for Evidence Based Medicine on Oxford, I mean, they were very early on predicting a case infection fatality rate of about double a bad flu season. So this isn't Ebola, it's not sars, it's not mers. This is gonna be like maybe double a bad flu season, which is serious. Take it serious. Load up in vitamin D, of course, like the Grinch, you know, Fauci, you know, solved world hunger, told no one he was taking vitamin D. Of course he was. Why didn't he tell anybody else to do that?
- [45:02]
A
Because he wouldn't make any money for.
- [45:03]
B
All of his constituents. I think it's more about control. If you look at him and Rick Bright, who was the guy who really torpedoed hydroxychloroquine, but they're at a conference with the Milken Institute, I think in October 2019, and they're just bemoaning the fact they don't have a universal vaccination program. And you know, flu's never Going to do it. People aren't convinced. You don't have a high enough percentage. It's probably going to take a pandemic. Well, isn't it interesting? The coronavirus is already probably circulating because of Anthony Fauci's gain of function research. That Ralph Barrack took the next level and then transferred to the Bat lady in Wuhan. This was all pretty obvious to me, okay? And they got their pandemic. They were ready for it. They had the Trusted News initiative From the event 201 that occurred a few weeks after that Milken Institute thing. I mean, of course, Bobby Kennedy lays us all out in the real Anthony Fauci.
- [46:04]
A
Everybody should read that book.
- [46:05]
B
Absolutely.
- [46:06]
A
Yeah.
- [46:06]
B
They'll find out this guy is a. This. He's an evil man.
- [46:09]
A
Very evil. I know I was. And I caught onto this early too. I just felt like during 2020, in this whole, the last, like three and a half years, I was going, oh, my God, what is happening to everybody? Everybody was under a trance. Oh, King Fauci, you know, our Lord and savior and the vaccines and all this stuff. I just was blown away that people could not see the corruption. But I, I say this often. Once you open your eyes to one part of it, you basically copy and paste it to every other institution. And this is what I did with food because, you know, I've been studying this for a long time, the corruption. And this is what I spoke about at the Senate roundtable was my eyes were opened with glyphosate, how it's being sprayed on all of our food. Monsanto has a full. Well now Bayer has a full monopoly over our food system. Essentially, it's a big agrochemical company that is producing the majority of the. The seeds for our food. And once my eyes were open to that, I was like, oh, copy and paste. This is happening in all of our other institutions. So this actually brings me to. I want to talk a little bit about. I asked on my Instagram because I wanted to see kind of what my audience was wanting answers from. And I got a bunch of things back. First of all, is it possible to reallocate farm subsidies from corn and wheat and soy to healthier food items like, like fruits and vegetables, livestock, you know, dairy, meat, things like that.
- [47:34]
B
First, real quick on glycos fate. So do you know Stephanie Senhoff?
- [47:37]
A
No.
- [47:37]
B
Okay, so I gotta introduce you to her as well. So, you know, she's an interesting person mit. She's really been digging into this. And it is interesting, you know, glycosphate as A pre emergent, you know, requires obviously GMO seed. Yeah, okay, that, that might make sense. I mean, you know, I think you always had to be concerned about what are we doing to our soil microbiome, but at the same time you can test that and see what's happening. But it's when they realized that it was also a really good desiccant and they started spraying it on our food.
- [48:09]
A
Yep.
- [48:10]
B
It's like. Okay, now, okay, now I've got to point and I'll get to your question. But it is interesting after our event. Okay. About a couple weeks later, this letter was written to the chair and ranking members of the Senate and House Agricultural Committee. Gets signed by over 250 Ag cultural interests.
- [48:30]
A
Whoa.
- [48:31]
B
Okay, let me just read you a couple.
- [48:32]
A
Okay.
- [48:33]
B
Genetic improvement technologies are likewise essential for continued US Agriculture productivity, sustainability and competitiveness. Pesticides are essential for protecting public health and infrastructure from deadly or destructive pests such as mosquitoes, termites, rodents, bed bugs and others. The United States has risk and science based statutory authorities in place that support the safety and proper use of these important tools. Products of biotechnology, for example, are thoroughly regulated by usda, FDA and EPA to ensure they do not pose environmental, food or food safety risks to go on. Should these misunderstandings persist? I mean. Yeah, should we persist. We are concerned with the impact it would have on US Consumers ability to safe. To access safe nutritious food supply. Farmers need tools to protect their crops and livestock, which is essential for food, national security, providing affordable goods to consumers and U.S. competitiveness in global economy. I agree with that last. Okay, yeah. And I'm not saying that they're not making legitimate points here. Yeah, okay. I think so. I want to be a very honest broker in this. I'm kind of like not taking sides. I've got a completely open mind. I mean obviously wonderful things have happened with pharmaceuticals. Wonderful things have happened with advances in chemistry, things like pesticides. But as I think probably the most as great as your testimony was and everybody else, I think the most important thing said in that event, the end of September, was by Dr. Chris Palmer, psychiatrist, looking at nutrition as it relates to mental health, when he said they, they don't want to discover the root cause.
- [50:15]
A
That's the whole issue.
- [50:15]
B
And that has to sink in. They really, I mean, autism, how can the fda, how can they not be just doing study after study after study? How could they completely ignore. Of course you've seen the things with Bill Thompson in the movie Vaxxed about how they destroyed evidence that they did prove The MMR was attributed to, I think, autism in black children. Black young boys. I think it was. I could be wrong. Don't fact check me on that. Research it yourself. But this, if we do find the root cause of these things, it can completely disrupt these industries. So I understand profitable industry is kind of going, whoa, be careful here. And we should be careful. Whatever we do has got to be completely science based. Which is why, again, my. The first thing we have to do is we need to restore integrity to science. And what the government funds is done. Not with an evil dictator like Fauci, totally compromised, thoroughly captured and completely independent board of a bunch of people from coming. These people ought to be at the table. I mean, they say, oh, hang on, that doesn't make sense to us. And you ought to be at the table. And everybody with vested interests in here, including patients and consumers, they need to be. We need honest brokers providing oversight in terms of how we proceed with this science.
- [51:51]
A
That is the issue, though, is because we do not have honest brokers. Which brings me to. We can get back to their question.
- [51:57]
B
Yeah. I haven't answered your questions yet.
- [51:59]
A
No, it's okay. Because this goes into other questions that I had for you. I'm concerned, and I know a lot of people are concerned about this. How likely is it that RFK Jr. Is actually going to get voted in? Because he has to be actually voted in by the Senate. Correct.
- [52:12]
B
Well, so nothing happens around here without public pressure.
- [52:18]
A
Yeah.
- [52:19]
B
Okay. What gives me the greatest hope? First of all, I'm kind of doing the unofficial whip count. So I've talked to 41 of the 49 Republican senators. I've got almost all the conversations go the same way they go. Boy, there's a lot of stuff. I just love what Bobby's talking about here. Right. But I'm really concerned about. There's about three or four issues. Okay. Which I think, having listened to Bobby, I think he'll be able to alleviate those concerns pretty easily if they have an open mind. But I think the greatest thing he has going for his favor is all these people here who understand that they, you know, they are representing their constituents, and their constituents are speaking loud and clearly in a nonpartisan way. We want to solve the chronic health care crisis. We want to get to the bottom of this. We want to understand what the root cause is.
- [53:11]
A
Yeah.
- [53:12]
B
And so the fact that. And again, I just give Bobby so much credit for, you know, first having the courage to run for president, even though he knew he was risking his life, he wasn't getting Secret Service protection, working his tail off. Okay. For so many months, recognizing in the end, listen, it's two party, third party candidates. Just, I mean, the probability of success was so low. Recognizing that early enough to reach out to both campaigns and say, listen, I'm on a mission for this. Will you work with me? And to Trump's credit, we said, yeah, because that's something they agree on. There's all kinds of things they disagree on. But yeah, let's focus on that. I think Trump knows some people that he also believes were vaccine injured from the childhood schedule. Okay. So he had an open mind to that, which is why initially he was going to appoint Bobby in his first administration to, you know, outside committee. And somebody inside probably Fauci tanked that for him. Okay. So I think Trump probably realized that was a mistake and the two men set aside their differences to focus this. And I'm hoping Bobby really appreciates how welcomed he was within our party.
- [54:33]
A
Yeah, I think I would assume that he probably does because he got so ostracized by his other party. And, and it's so interesting to me that so many people still don't see that. They just see like, oh, I don't even know what their argument is other than like, they say that like Harris rejected him and so then he, you know, went to Trump to try to get in some party or another. But people don't recognize that he's been a lifelong Democrat and they essentially pushed him out. He was essentially running. He was running for a Democrat.
- [55:03]
B
They wouldn't let him in.
- [55:04]
A
They wouldn't let him in the primary.
- [55:05]
B
They wouldn't allow him in. The. The party that claims they're going to defend democracy was the most. This has been the most undemocratic primary in an election on the Democrat side in our history.
- [55:17]
A
Oh, it's unremarkable.
- [55:17]
B
They wouldn't allow for primary challenges. They completely blocked him with the help of the mainstream media who would never give him an airing. Wouldn't. You know, I remember when Bobby said earlier in the campaign, this will be the first presidential campaign decided by podcasts. Now for him to win. And that would had to be true. So I said, well, I wish it were true because these podcasts are great. This isn't a three minute interview. We can get into depth in these things.
- [55:40]
A
I still believe that's true, though. I think.
- [55:42]
B
Well, I think in the end it was. So it didn't elect him, but I think it went along. Bobby's joining the team with Tulsi Gabbard showing that coalition, a nonpartisan coalition, plus then Trump going on Theo Vaughn and Joe Rogan, obviously. So then America could. Could see the. The person I know when I talk to him in person.
- [56:04]
A
Yeah.
- [56:04]
B
Which, you know, I've always said, if you spend time with Trump, you cannot not like him.
- [56:09]
A
Yeah, I've heard that.
- [56:11]
B
Obviously, he's charismatic, he's funny, he's engaging. He, you know, but that's, again, that's kind of like the media has turned me into super villain. I'm really not a super villain, but that's what we've done to him.
- [56:23]
A
And you're going against their narrative. They have a specific narrative, they have a specific prerogative, and anyone that steps out of that line, they're going to immediately bastard size.
- [56:31]
B
You know, so what I'm. Because I'm generally not an optimist, I'm pretty pessimistic. We're going down destructive path here. But what gives me hope is that we at least had a majority of Americans that had their eyes opened and realized that. Yeah, I don't think very many people who voted for Trump thinks he's a perfect human being. Okay. They have misgivings, I'm sure, but they were so outraged by how he'd been treated starting 2016 and all the way through the torment. And then, particularly in this last round, the law fair, all that kind of stuff. I mean, people said, no, this is grotesquely unfair. This has to stop. And I think that was a. There are many factors that decided election, but I think that was a big one where people just said, this can't. This is just wrong. This is what's going to destroy our democracy right here.
- [57:25]
A
Well, I know myself, and I think many people listening voted for Trump because of rfk. Like, RFK was my guy. And when he sided with Trump, I was like, all right, I'm in. Let's do this.
- [57:36]
B
Were you initially disappointed, though, that he did that?
- [57:39]
A
No, I actually wasn't. Because the way that I saw it was I felt like this was actually the perfect pairing, and I felt like this was the way to get Bobby into a position where he shines the most. Because I really thought about it at first. I was like, oh, man. And then I really thought about it, and I was like, you know what? I actually, really believe that Trump is more equipped to actually be president. And I believe Bobby is better and more well equipped to be in a position like the hhs, where he can actually really focus on the things that he is. He's an expert at. So I really ultimately was very happy with it and I'm very happy. And that's what I was going to ask you about him is so if he gets voted in, do you believe that he will really be able to help institute some change in some of these corruptions institutions like will he?
- [58:25]
B
I don't know anybody better suited. Which is why the Wall Street Journal ed board came out with a pretty negative column here today, which I was disappointed to see. Yeah, Scott Gottlieb, who is hard to other than Fauci, think of somebody more compromised than Scott Gottlieb. You know, FDA commissioner going over to Pfizer board. Oh yeah, pushing, you know, remdesivir as well because I think he's associated with Gilead as well. So Bobby, because of his work in environmentalism, saw the corporate capture of other agencies, understands the process, acknowledges the problem. First step, gotta admit you have a problem, has already done a fair amount of root cause analysis. Now again it's gonna be difficult because as I said, I think the shredders and the erasers of disk drives are in full force. So he'll want exposed. I'm going to help him. I'll be subpoenaing these records. So it's not going to be easy. I mean my concern about Trump is over promising, under delivering my concern about Doge great ideas. But you guys, I mean you're dealing with this leviathan here. It's slow moving. So my approach in business has always been to under promise, over deliver, under budget, beat the budget. So America has to understand this is going to take some time. So you got to do it step by step. What I hope Bobby does is lay it out, let me handle the vaccines. Okay, that's too controversial. Okay. You focus on what America wants. I mean we want to get to the bottom of chronic illness. In doing that, you will expose the capture of those agencies, you'll expose the corruption. But do the fundamental things. Figure out a way to fix scientific research to restore integrity to it. I hope Bill Clinton with his signature of a pen allowed big Pharma to advertise. Signature of pen. We have to roll that back. It's just again, I'm free market guy, free speech. Let people advertise. No, now, now that I saw why pharma does it and the impact of it, let's, let's let only one company, one country in the world, you know, allow big Pharma.
- [60:48]
A
I was gonna say there we're only one of two. Like what are we doing here with that? And so this Brings me my. To my next question, because I'm seeing a lot of concern about this on both ends of the spectrum. So I see people criticize Bobby because they're concerned about him deregulating everything. And, and I live kind of in the middle where I believe, like some of these things have to be regulated. I mean, if we are knowingly poisoning our population, we have to do something about that. But I see a lot of concern of a nanny state, you know, and I know this is a big Republican thing where people want to be left to their own accord to make their own decisions. So where, where do you feel like is the middle ground? And, and can we maybe speak a little bit to that where people are concerned about both ends of the spectrum.
- [61:30]
B
So what I'm hoping is through education podcasts like this, events like we held, the public becomes aware and starts demanding it. Okay, so it's public pressure, it's market demand that is going to drive people toward non GMO or healthier food, that type of thing. But you need regulation. I just had Wisconsin Dairy Association, I think the National Dairy association come in. So I asked them about raw milk, which I'm intrigued by. My parents grew up on dairy farms. I done.
- [62:02]
A
So they probably.
- [62:04]
B
Yeah, but, but one, one of the people in the meeting was in distribution and I said, I mean, is it, is it possible to make this widely available? And she's just going, yeah. And it's, it is.
- [62:14]
A
I mean, it needs to be with local farms if you want.
- [62:17]
B
So it's, it's kind of a specialty niche thing. And. But it's, it's not, it's. It's literally too dangerous to provide. Okay, so. Okay, so for the, the cost benefit, the benefit doesn't exceed the cost of the potential outbreaks of whatever they'll steer you, whatever that is knocked out with pasteurization. So you reduce the nutritional value, but it's a whole lot safer product with still a lot of nutritional value. So that's probably pretty good balance there. But again, those are the questions. Those are the offsets that you have to consider here. But you have to have information, you have to have science. And that's why you have to have everybody at the table talking like decent human beings with the public's interest at heart, you know, not your own economic interest. But I mean, let's think of the public, let's think of your customers. Because as a private sector guy, first of all, customer is king. You take care of your customers and you do it well, you'll be successful in Business. So businesses ought. Again, I, I actually do have a great deal of faith in people who run businesses because they're not trying to harm their customers, they're not trying to harm their employees. They're trying to produce good products and stay solvent and make a profit so they can continue to do it. So again, it's a different attitude here because coming from the private sector, I do have faith in most businesses. But I also realize there is corruption and there are some greedy people. And that's why you need kind of government intervention to make sure they don't form monopolies, that they don't capture the agencies, that they don't, you know, corrupt the agencies for the benefit of them at the expense of their customers and consumers. And that's. The pendulum swung too far that way.
- [63:58]
A
Yeah.
- [63:58]
B
So we got, we got to rein that back in. But I would, I would, you know, so absolutely need regulation. I would love the government to be the honest arbiter of, you know, regulating science. Okay. I mean, organic, I mean, that's been corrupted.
- [64:17]
A
Oh yeah.
- [64:18]
B
I kind of set my Hostess donuts aside as much as that. You know, my, I'm still doing Smarties every now and again. Sorry. And more organic. But I have to admit, I don't really have faith that all this stuff is like. Yeah, okay, they're calling it. Yeah, I'm sure this is, yeah, sure. Grass fed.
- [64:35]
A
I know.
- [64:35]
B
But I would, you know, I come from manufacturing where you have, have, you know, ISO certification. Those are private sector companies. They're a bunch of certification companies. And the private sector itself completes itself. So, you know, if I'm a, if I'm one of the competitors. So I'm one of the businesses that I'm being certified by this company and my competitor is being certified by that and they're cheating. Okay, well, you can start calling the whistling. You can probably sue them in the private sector and that will, won't be perfect, but it'll police itself as opposed to having government regulators to get corrupted, to get bought off so that organic food in, you know, in this state where they're importing all this feed from China that is not organic.
- [65:18]
A
But, but then they're labeling it organically.
- [65:21]
B
But they're allowing it in that state because they want their agribusiness to succeed over that state's agribusiness. So again, you just, you have to understand kind of how business works, how it all works and try and make this as honest as possible so the consumer is informed. So then consumer drives demand. And by the Way. There's a great book I read. The guy was actually a comms director for my 2016 campaign, Brian Risinger. And he was raised on a small little farm in Sauk county in Wisconsin. Dairy farm. It was started by his great grandfather. And it's just. The book is called Land Rich, Cash Poor, and just goes through the kind of the heartbreaking struggle of small farms trying to survive. Okay. And we're losing. I think. I think it says 35,000 small farms a year. So what I'm hoping is that this whole organic, better nutrition will create real opportunities for smaller farmers, smaller distribution systems to augment the big food processes, which we still need. We do need to deliver mass quantities of food at affordable prices. But the consumer demand, all of a sudden, well, let's do Froot Loops, but let's do the Canadian version where it's natural food coloring versus all the other crap. McDonald's fries. Let's do French fries, sea salt and beef tallow. Yeah.
- [66:50]
A
Yes.
- [66:51]
B
I saw you love that. I do research.
- [66:55]
A
I love that. Yeah. And that's all Bobby is saying, too, and I think this is where it gets lost on a lot of people, is he's not saying he's going to come in and. And take your Twinkies and take your McDonald's and all this stuff. He just wants to make sure the ingredients in there are actually really food.
- [67:09]
B
And that, you know. Well, that, you know what they are. I mean, first and foremost, this is what it is.
- [67:13]
A
Yeah.
- [67:13]
B
And again, I. I think the event that you participated in, that opened a lot of people's eyes.
- [67:18]
A
I hope so.
- [67:19]
B
I mean, you guys do great jobs with podcasts, but there's something about a U.S. senate forum to highlight it. And I mean, I've been really. It's fun to watch all your snippets out there. You know, 2 million views here. It's like that educated the public and that gets shared.
- [67:34]
A
Yeah.
- [67:34]
B
This is how, you know, this is the beauty of what we have now with technology that as long as it's not censored, and God bless Elon Musk for buying X, he's going to lose his you know what on that purchase. But offering that free speech forum now for this information to flourish.
- [67:51]
A
Yeah.
- [67:51]
B
And again, I would advise everybody watching take it with a grain of salt. I'm sure Courtney's right on just about everything, but there may be some things. Who knows?
- [68:04]
A
Well, exactly. And it goes back to earlier. What we were saying, what we know now, we may find out later, was not entirely true. It wasn't the whole picture. And I'm always so open to that. And also, the whole process of science is that we learn what we learn at the time, and then new things come out, new hypotheses, new theories, and then we have to go and study those and then we find out new. And that's the whole process of science.
- [68:27]
B
There's nothing more unscientific than the term scientific consensus.
- [68:30]
A
Yes, exactly.
- [68:32]
B
I mean, that's just fingernails on a chalkboard. I mean, all during COVID the consensus is. Is. No, that is not scientific.
- [68:39]
A
Yes.
- [68:39]
B
You know, not even close.
- [68:41]
A
Exactly. So, okay, to go back to a little because I have a couple questions about, regarding, like, policies and all of that. So you had mentioned something about smaller distribution for small farms. Now, this is something I'm super passionate about. Is there ever a world in which that could actually happen On. It's. This is kind of an oxymoron of, like, on a large scale, but not if that makes sense where we have. I don't know if there's, like, policies in place that could happen where we could almost encourage the American public to shop more locally.
- [69:09]
B
So I think the best way of making that happen is returning these policies back to the states. Okay. I mean, our problem, you know, we passed something we call a farm bill. It's a food stamp bill.
- [69:23]
A
Yeah.
- [69:24]
B
Okay. And we have made so many people dependent on food stamps, and we allow them to buy crap. Okay.
- [69:30]
A
10% of it is spent on the first thing.
- [69:33]
B
We shouldn't. We should rein that in. Okay. So at least what we're supplying in terms of food subsidies to families, it's. We got to buy healthy stuff. Sorry.
- [69:41]
A
Yeah.
- [69:41]
B
You can't buy the crap in a package. Okay. You know, buy whole potatoes and, you.
- [69:45]
A
Know, because otherwise you're going to end up on our health care bill.
- [69:49]
B
Yeah. So if we do that, you know, again, I've said this for a long time. I'd much rather have Wisconsin lawmakers determining how do you support dairy pricing and not have to worry about, well, how are we subsidizing Kansas wheat and, you know, Florida oranges and sugar. Okay. Because otherwise it gets all wrapped up in the farm bill. All these different subsidy programs. You probably throw way more money than you need to at it, and it's not good. I mean, in the end, the result is watered down in some way shape. So start returning those farm policies back to the states and let them figure it out for their own best interests, because then they're going to be far more responsive to the type of Agriculture in their states. So that would literally be my. Again, I'm not a fan of the federal government. If I have a mission when I came here, and it's still my mission, is to wean as many Americans off relying on the federal government as I can. It doesn't solve problems, it exacerbates problems as it's mortgaging our future with $36 trillion in debt. This isn't working. Sorry. We're just not smart enough. Members of Congress sure aren't. Our staffs aren't, the bureaucrats aren't. I mean, try and deal with complexity of agriculture markets, which, by the way, they need support. I mean, agriculture is completely different than virtually any other business. I mean, you can dial up, supply the businesses in ag culture, just like you commit to the seeds and the fertilizer to grow the crop. And if you get wiped out by weather or you have a bumper crop and prices collapse, again, it needs support. If we're going to feed ourselves, you have to support farmers in some way, shape or form. But again, I'd much rather do it at a statewide level as opposed to national.
- [71:36]
A
I agree. I'm fully in. What's the word I'm looking for? But yes, I agree with you and full agreeance. So, okay, you've brought up the farm bill and I had a couple questions and I hope you're good. I'm good to go until 11:30 if you're okay. Okay.
- [71:50]
B
I think we get booted.
- [71:51]
A
Okay, perfect. Well, that's perfect because I have, I'm.
- [71:53]
B
A US Senator, I like to talk.
- [71:55]
A
Oh, I love it. And I have so many questions about like policies and stuff. And one of them was you brought up the farm bill and I want to talk about the subsidies, but also, I know. So I, I don't know what the correct term is, but I, I read that the farm bill was, it was supposed to be up in September of this year. And there was something really concerning in the farm bill that I had very briefly touched on in my Senate hearing, but I didn't have enough time elaborate on it. But essentially they, the pharmaceutical agrochemical company, sorry, Bayer, slid in something in the farm bill which gives them immunity to litigation. If somebody feels as though they got cancer from their products like glyphosate, they slid in there that they could have immunity from being sued. And that's because they have been getting sued like crazy. I think they've paid out. Don't quote me on this, but I believe it's 2.2 billion so far. To people that have gone non Hodgkin's lymphoma and other places.
- [72:46]
B
I think Bob Candy got the biggest award. Right.
- [72:49]
A
Yeah. For that.
- [72:50]
B
Which is why they hate him.
- [72:52]
A
Well, exactly, exactly. And it's why they go so hard after him. I mean, one of the main reasons why they go so hard after him in the media. But is it too late to fix this? Because I know once that goes in, it's four years before it gets reimbursed.
- [73:05]
B
Well, first of all. So we're just operating an extension.
- [73:07]
A
Okay.
- [73:08]
B
So we still have to pass the next iteration of a farm bill. You know, I am sympathetic. As we talked about is, you know, the adversarial system. Listen, I'm an account business guy. I avoided lawyers in the judicial process like a plague in business. Okay. So I conducted myself well so I didn't have to deal with that. You know, trial lawyers are not my favorite class of people. Okay. But they have a. They serve a very valuable purpose, but they need to be somewhat restrained. We can't let trial lawyers run the roost where we just destroy industry after industry after industry. You know, particularly industries that are by and large operating under the rules that we've laid. Okay. Call it good faith. You know, again, if you find out like the back industries that these guys knew about it and say, okay, that's. That's something different. There's got. So there has open up these companies make sure or don't eliminate liability. You can certainly limit it. You know, I think it makes sense. I mean, you know, medical malpractice. I mean, you don't want to. We need doctors, we need nurses.
- [74:15]
A
We can't sue them to a.
- [74:16]
B
Okay. So yeah, you know, people screw up, sued, but cap it at some point in time, Okay. I think we'll have to do the same thing with vaccine injuries. I mean, I want to help the vaccine injured. It can't just be. They sue them and get billions of dollars because you got juries that aren't thinking about the whole economic consequences on this.
- [74:35]
A
So then my question is, at what point do we start going, huh? So 2.2 billion has been paid out to people that have gotten cancer and we're still spraying our crops with this. At what point? So I understand what you're saying, but it's like, at what point do we intervene and go, maybe we need to investigate this?
- [74:51]
B
I think the point when we've fixed science and the research done has integrity and we can believe it.
- [74:57]
A
Yeah, okay.
- [74:58]
B
So that we're not. We're not Going from one extreme to the other go, oh, this is fine. I mean, the thing says here that we have rigorous controls versus people that go, this is going to cause it, but it's not. I mean, it's low enough level and it is safe. I mean, again, our bodies are amazing in terms of how we can detoxify ourselves. And I mean, we're subject to tax and throughout our lives and somehow we survive somehow. Life expectancy until the drug addictions, drug overdose and stuff is limited, but we're doing a lot better for some reason. That's why the event we had was not exactly how I outlined it. End up being wonderful and all that kind of stuff. But my outline for that event literally was history of sanitation, starting with dissolving illusions that just recognize that the reason most of these infectious diseases are controlled at a much lower level is because we don't live in squalor anymore. We have sewer systems, okay? So that's the main reason it's not vaccines that if you eradicate these, it's basically good sanitation, which in some of our bigger cities, because we're not fiscally responsible, we're losing good sanitation. So anyways, so it starts there. Then the next outline point I wanted was the history of and changes in agriculture. Now let's look at that. How has it changed from what you say? No, was it renewable farming?
- [76:24]
A
Regenerative farming?
- [76:25]
B
Regenerative, yeah, regenerative farming. That's how it always was for millennia. And all of a sudden we figured out fertilizers. Rockefeller figure out how to turn oil into pharmaceuticals, could be great. The wonders of chemistry. Okay. And again, again, during this whole history, if you go back 100 years, our life expectancy has gone from something in the 40s to now we're approaching 80. So we're not doing everything bad. And one of the reasons, I think one of the reasons you have more cancers is, well, we're getting older and our cells don't have the ability to repair. I mean, that's just. I hate it. I mean, I don't see anything good about getting old. My body's wasting away, but that's just life, okay? And until we figure out how to stop that aging process, and we may never be able to, that's going to happen too. So again, as you can see, I've got a very open mind in terms of, you know, what, what's causing this. I mean, in general, we ought to really be focusing on is the chronic illness in youth. I mean, that that's what's gone haywire you know, obesity, that's where we see the big issue again. That's. And that's what's going to be so popular. And that, that's what I really want Bobby to focus on, is hhs. It's not controversial. Now, again, once we determine the right root cause, it might be very controversial for those individuals that are going to change their business model to minimize or alleviate that root cause.
- [77:47]
A
Yeah, yeah. And that's a, that's a big concern. And in my opinion, I think, I mean, it's so multifaceted the way that we attack this. But I think one of them is going back to what I said earlier was the subsidies. Because we know right now that we're paying farmers subsidies to grow corn, wheat and soy. A lot of that goes to our livestock and that a lot of it ends up in our ultra processed foods that are on the shelves. It's why when you read the back of the ingredient label, it says contains corn, wheat and soy in almost every single one of those products. So I got a ton of questions about this. Is it possible? And what has stopped us so far from changing those subsidies now that we know? Because I think back in the day, I think it was, it was written in good conscious because they saw, oh, this is the most nutrient dense. We're going to be able to, you know, send it all across the nation. We're gonna be able to feed everybody. I think it all started in good conscious, but now in 2024, we know and we're seeing all these chronic diseases, that many are linked back to these hyper processed foods. So is it possible for us to rewrite those subsidies and would we do that?
- [78:45]
B
So I think it's, again, it's, you know, I'm the dairy state. Right. My parents grew up on dairy farms. I've done everything except artificially inseminate a cow. My uncle tried to talk me into it. I didn't do it. Okay. So, but I have no idea how they determine dairy pricing. I mean, it's incomprehensible. Okay. I mean, the fact that you have dairy farmer, they don't know what they're going to get for the milk till like three or four weeks later when they get their dairy check. So this is complex stuff. Okay.
- [79:14]
A
Yeah.
- [79:15]
B
In general, what I would try and do is design the subsidies to mitigate or alleviate the risk of farming. Farming. Okay. Don't design the subsidies to drive markets, to drive production. Yeah, Try, try and let the market determine. And what you don't, we sure don't want to do is produce subsidies that produces overproduction. That's what's happened with cheese. I mean, all kinds of things. You know, it's like. So I, I don't have the answers on that. But again, if you define the problem properly, if you try and design the solutions based on principles. And again, principles are agriculture is difficult and we got to protect farmers from, you know, with crop insurance, from price fluctuation, that type of thing, and do it in a way that doesn't drive over production. Again, not an easy thing to do.
- [80:11]
A
Okay, yeah, that makes sense. That's really hard.
- [80:15]
B
And particularly when you've got a dysfunctional place like this where everybody pays to play and they got a seat at the table and all they care about is we want X number of dollars for media head. Yesterday somebody said, we have $4 million for this. First of all, let's not talk money, okay? Let's focus on, you know, if there's a screwed up pricing program or something like that. Let's not talk about grant money for your advertising, whatever. It's like we don't have it. We just ran an 8 $1.8 trillion deficit. We're $36 trillion in debt. I mean, quit looking at the federal government to fund things, okay? Look to the federal government to quit screwing crap up, you know, and where we need a little bit of help, little direction for the federal government. Help us design the proper direction.
- [81:02]
A
Yeah, no, I completely agree. So I'm curious what it's like with you and your colleagues right now, because I spoke about this briefly in the very beginning. I find it really interesting that I'm now fighting my own colleagues in the nutrition world over RFK and all of this stuff because so many of them were Democratic and they believed that everything that they want to see changed was going to happen through the Democrats. And now they're kind of going like, I don't like this. I don't want it to be with the Republican side, with Trump. Are you kind of seeing similar things like in your world too, with your colleagues? Is it still pretty political in the sense that like people don't want to get on board with the mission simply because it's under Trump and rfk, or is there more of just like a bipartisan thing happening?
- [81:49]
B
So I talked to a lot more Republican senators than Democrats. I think Democrats were pretty open. I didn't. I think in a couple of the Democrat colleagues, you could see that they harbored ill will toward what Bobby did politically and stuff. But again, almost Democrats and Republicans alike the first words out of the mouth. Boy, there's a lot that I love that Bobby's doing.
- [82:07]
A
I love that.
- [82:07]
B
Okay, Focus on that.
- [82:08]
A
Yeah.
- [82:09]
B
I mean, again, I'm a business guy. Right. I mean, the bizarre thing about this is people push division because it works politically in the private sector, you have to focus on areas of agreement. I mean, you don't get very far in the business world arguing all the time.
- [82:23]
A
Exactly.
- [82:24]
B
So it's like, okay, I got a product, you want to buy it. We agree on that. Let's focus on that. Okay. Now we can haggle over the price. Price. So it is about focusing on areas of agreement. And again, that's why I give Trump and Bobby credit for, is they talked. Yeah. Something we can agree on. Benefits, both of us. You know, it helps Trump get elected. It helps Bobby finally get a position where he can do what he's been crusading to do for a long time.
- [82:49]
A
Exactly. Well, I'm so happy to hear that because like I said, there's a lot of fighting in my world with all of this. And it's so frustrating to me because I, I see it as a zoomed out. Like, I don't see it as like left versus right. I see this as a bipartisan, bipartisan issue. And how can we all get on board? Because essentially we all want very similar things, you know, and so just so.
- [83:12]
B
For your Democrat listeners.
- [83:13]
A
Yes.
- [83:13]
B
Okay. Now, Bobby called me a super villain. You know, the vaccine injured. I was the last person in the world they ever wanted to be associated with. I mean, do I sound really bad?
- [83:24]
A
No.
- [83:24]
B
Okay. So very smart, reasonable. So join our movement. I mean, I, I would like, I don't like using the word bipartisan. I like nonpartisan. There's nothing partisan about this. So let's not let it devolve into partisanship. You know, let's focus on the truth. Let's focus on. Okay, what again, how do we actually, you know, what's a step by step process? What do we do first? Got to fix science. And that's a big. That'll take some time. So don't be jumping to your, your solution right away. Don't you. Here's my bill. You got to get this passed. We're not ready for that bill yet.
- [83:58]
A
Yeah.
- [83:59]
B
You know, we've got to get this right first. Okay. Now, again, some things may be obvious there, you know, there may be a consensus. You know. Okay. You know, thinking may change. You know, new information. We have to be open to new information. But right now, the basic state, this is Kind of what we think.
- [84:19]
A
Okay, so for the listeners, how can they personally get involved? Because I have so many people in my DMs just like chomping at the bit. Like, just let me in, coach. Because they all want, first of all.
- [84:29]
B
Buy healthy food, demand it. Talk to your grocers. Literally talk to them. Can I talk to the manager here? I appreciate. We've got six feet of organic. Can we get more? If you do, I'll pay the premium. I was talking to, for example, organic milk. Sky high pricing. I was trying to say there's really no reason for that, right? Not really. It's just that right now the demand far exceeds the supply. So the more the demand, they'll be there. They'll get more supply. And those prices, I mean, the marketplace actually works. So use the marketplace. Go look at one thing I notice as I'm starting putting my Hostess donuts. Not totally. They are really good. Okay, so we go to the organic section. We're trying to find the right oils, none of the seed oils. So you get. That's different. We got some avocado oil potato chips. Right? But like all these other. So everything's labeled as organic, but most of it's with seed oil. Oil.
- [85:37]
A
I know.
- [85:38]
B
I mean, so I did get like Boulder chips or whatever is the one that, you know, with avocado tastes fine. They're a little bit greasier when you get to the tail end of the bag, but yeah, it tastes just fine. But that's. I thought that was very interesting. So, okay, organic. But has. It has the wrong kind of oil. So how do we, you know, how do you get. So again, what it'll require is more people like me reading the label or my wife. And then, well, I'm going to pick this one. And all of a sudden they're always out of the boulder. Go, well, why is that? Well, tell them supermarket managers I'm looking for. I want organic at some point in time. I want certified organic. I'm not going by that label. I want a good label that's organic. This is really. But I also want the right oils in these things, too. So start demanding it. Start, start. Because until consumer. And that's going to be the best way to solve this problem is through consumer demand. And that can change very rapidly.
- [86:38]
A
Yeah, that's true. That's very true. And Jason Karp mentioned that in our Senate hearing was that if a company feels like a 5% hit on their overall. What's the word? Like income coming in, then they will be forced to change or they'll feel the pressure of it and feel like they need to change. So that's on us to stop buying those products, stop buying those foods. I just can't get concerned and we don't have time to get down, go down this road. But I get concerned about the lower income families and the food deserts and the low accessibility.
- [87:06]
B
But again, that's why I say this is these are legitimate concerns that these 250 some people are writing about us. You know, we do need to make food abundant and affordable.
- [87:16]
A
Exactly.
- [87:17]
B
But again, there's really no reason in general that you can make things healthier without costing an arm and a leg. I mean, right now it's just because the demand exceeds the supply and that will eventually work its way out.
- [87:34]
A
And it's the subsidies too. Right. That are taking a cut from the overhead. Or does that not.
- [87:41]
B
Again, the purpose of the subsidies is just recognize that farming is hard and we need to support farmers.
- [87:48]
A
Yeah.
- [87:48]
B
In, in a very imperfect market. Again, that's, you know, my belief, what these subsidies ought to be. I'm not saying they operate that way.
- [87:55]
A
Okay.
- [87:55]
B
I don't, I don't think that again, farming is not a highly profitable business. Now if you're big ag, you know, those big guys are probably making fair amount of money. It's the only way they can afford that.
- [88:05]
A
Yeah.
- [88:05]
B
You know, all their equipment stuff. So again, you don't want to bankrupt them.
- [88:09]
A
No.
- [88:09]
B
I come from Wisconsin. We've got these, got these dairy farms, like literally, literally 15,000 cattle. It's like a manufacturing operation. It's unbelievably clean. I mean the animal husbandry is really quite good there. It's not quite like chicken stuff, but I mean with dairy cows, I mean it's, and they are taking the manure, they're turning into methane. I mean it's pretty good operation. Okay. Plus it supports the smaller guys too. It provides a distribution center. So again, I don't know how it all sorts out, but we have Organic Valley in Wisconsin and there's, there's got to be opportunities here.
- [88:45]
A
Yeah.
- [88:45]
B
Okay.
- [88:46]
A
We need to protect the farmers too, and their livelihood.
- [88:48]
B
And again, coming from a, a farming background, again, read, you know, land rich, cash poor. It's really, it's really a written from the heart. It'll give you a sense of, of how difficult it is. And I would hate to see the, the tradition of the family farm go away.
- [89:04]
A
Me too. I feel like I'm fighting so hard for this right now because I, I believe this is, this is how we get out of a lot of our chronic diseases because we need to be eating more local, in my opinion. And we need to get the chemicals out of everything. We need to move back to nature and farming regeneratively and it can actually be done large scale. I've spoken to a lot of experts about this, but there's so much resistance with that because of the agrochemical companies.
- [89:28]
B
There's an easier way of doing it.
- [89:29]
A
Yeah.
- [89:30]
B
So.
- [89:30]
A
Yeah.
- [89:31]
B
Which is again, that's economic efficiencies, you know, equates with easy.
- [89:35]
A
Yeah.
- [89:35]
B
And something's a little more hard. But again, they will do what's hard. If the public demands it, if there's demand for the product, they'll do the right thing.
- [89:42]
A
Yeah. Okay. I have one more question for you and this one's a little bit out of left field, but I had forgotten to ask you about this earlier and I was getting. I noticed it was one of the most commented thing I got on my. The speech that I did at the Senate hearing. I was just getting comment after comment after comment. Essentially the same thing. Of. Of. Okay, well, this senator and none of his colleagues are going to do anything about this because they have stock in the agrochemical companies and they have stock in big pharma. And can you speak to that for a second?
- [90:12]
B
So what I did when I ran for US Senate again, 30 years of manufacturing accountant. I sold all my marketable securities and turned it into cash. So I've just been sitting on a pile of cash losing my. You know what. Because I don't. I mean, my wife eventually took and she bought index fund. Have no idea what's in. So, no, I think that is grossly overblown. Now, I think there have been some members who came in here pretty poor and left wealthier than others. Okay.
- [90:44]
A
I can think of a few. Yeah.
- [90:45]
B
Yeah. But we won't name to be nonpartisan.
- [90:48]
A
Yeah.
- [90:49]
B
That's not why people come here.
- [90:51]
A
Yeah.
- [90:52]
B
Listen, I'm not a real fan of this place. Okay. But I think most people come here, do it because they're concerned about this country. They're concerned about their constituents. So they want to do right by their constituents. Part of the problem is they're defending their constituents, which is something good for that state, not particularly good for that state. And I want to get as much subsidy for my farmers and I don't care about those cow herders over there. That's the basis of politics. Politics. I think that what should be the genius of our founding fathers is a limited Federal government. That's. I think the really root cause of our problem is government grows, our freedoms recede. Government's not good at what it does. It isn't. It's really good at mortgaging our kids future. And that puts our nation at risk. So you got to take a look at the big picture here. The solution lies with individuals, individual liberty and freedom. And that is the, the secret sauce. Right. The essential ingredient, freedom. That's what allows us to dream and inspire and build and create jealously. Guard your freedom. Growing government, your freedom recedes. So understand that basic dynamic. Demand your freedom back. Demand government devolve back to the states as much as possible. Quit mortgage our kids future and restore science. Let's keep your eyes open. Try and open as many people's eyes as possible and make sure they stay open.
- [92:18]
A
Yes. We don't have time for this, but I wish that we could have talked about lobbying for a second because that is a big concern of people as well.
- [92:25]
B
So just real quick. They are educated. There's nothing wrong with it. It's a First amendment right to petition your government lobbyists, educate the individual donations members get, that's not going to affect their vote. Now the millions they give to the campaign committees, that can certainly impact what leadership does. But for individual members, I think it's way overblown in terms of the influence of these contributions. I really do. It doesn't impact me at all.
- [92:51]
A
I'm really happy to hear that because that is a big concern in my world.
- [92:55]
B
And no, what drives people's motivation here is am I doing right by my constituents? I mean, will it help me get reelected? I mean, that's not a bad indicator. So. No.
- [93:04]
A
Yeah. If you're actually helping people.
- [93:06]
B
If I'm doing things contrary to my constituency, I won't get reelected.
- [93:09]
A
Exactly.
- [93:09]
B
So I'm going to do things that my constituents are demanding now again, they're divided. One of them, you know, so it's a messy. It's political.
- [93:16]
A
Yeah.
- [93:17]
B
There's nothing wrong with that. But just maintain your own individual liberty and listen, let's do this again sometime.
- [93:23]
A
I would love that. I really enjoyed this conversation. I also just wanted to take a moment and say thank you so much for allowing me to speak on that Senate roundtable.
- [93:30]
B
Thanks for doing it.
- [93:31]
A
Yeah. That was a really big deal to me and it felt really special and important to be there. And I'm just so grateful. One, that you put it on and two, that I was, that I was able to be a part of it.
- [93:39]
B
That's a really cool room, isn't it?
- [93:41]
A
That was very cool. My fiance came with me and later he was like, I was freaking out for you. And I walked in because we just walked into this beautiful, gorgeous room with these really high ceilings and he was like, I was nervous for you.
- [93:55]
B
There'll be a lot of historic things have happened in that room.
- [93:57]
A
It was very cool.
- [93:58]
B
So, no, thank you for doing. You did a great job. They all did.
- [94:01]
A
Yeah, it was a really great, like.
- [94:03]
B
Tucker Carlson told Casey and Kelly, means, you're going to change the world. Yeah, I believe that's true.
- [94:07]
A
I do, too. Oh, thank you very much. Thanks for your time. I really enjoyed this episode.
- [94:11]
B
Thank you.
- [94:11]
A
Thank you. Thank you so much for listening to the Real Foodology podcast. This is a Wellness Loud production produced by Drake Peterson and mixed by Mike Fry. Theme song is by Georgie. You can watch the full video version of this podcast inside the Spotify app or on YouTube. As always, you can leave us a voicemail by clicking the link in our bio. And if you like this episode, please rate and review on your podcast app. For more shows by my team, go to wellnessloud.com see you next time. The content of this show is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not a substitute for individual medical and mental health advice and doesn't constitute a provider patient relationship. I am a nutritionist, but I am not your nutritionist. As always, talk to your doctor or your health team first.