Kristi Noem (5:20)

But first, I would be remiss if I did not address the disturbing actions that we saw last week. There were members of this very committee that took part in an action at Delaney hall on May 9 that need to be addressed. I served as a member of Congress in this body for eight years, and I understand the importance of congressional oversight. What happened on May 9 was not oversight. It was a political stunt that put the safety of our law enforcement officers, our agents, our staff, and our detainees at risk. Here are the facts.

Vince (5:52)

Yeah.

Kristi Noem (5:52)

As a vehicle approached the security gate at Delaney hall detention center, a mob of protesters, including three members of Congress, stormed the gate, and they trespassed into the detention facility. We have footage of those members of Congress slamming their bodies into our law enforcement officers, shoving them, screaming profanities in their faces, striking them with their fists, and otherwise assaulting law enforcement. The behavior was lawlessness, and it was beneath this body. Members of Congress should not break into detention centers or federal facilities. Had these members requested a tool.

Vince (6:27)

Okay, that's enough.

Kristi Noem (6:28)

He certainly would have facilitated a.

Vince (6:29)

That's enough. So you're hearing her saying, look, yeah, yeah, you want to do this the right way, do it the right way. You want to do it the wrong way? That's exactly how you did it. And you heard her. She ticked off a number of things. Shoving these cops, hitting these cops, otherwise assaulting these cops, striking them. Yeah. In my world, that gets me arrested. Try walking out on the street and punching a cop right now and see how that goes for you. Not gonna go well. But a member of Congress gets some sort of extraordinary privilege here. They just get to roam free after hitting cops. They're on camera doing it. There's a congresswoman from New Jersey called Lamonica McIver who's on camera, red jacket, striking police officers over and over. And it doesn't matter that she's weak. It doesn't matter that she probably can't even throw a baseball. The fact is, she's striking the cop. What message does it send if you let her do it and then don't hold her accountable for it? And so one of the things that's driving me absolutely bonkers this week is that they're not getting arrested and now I've been talking about this. I mentioned this on the radio show yesterday, too. Maybe there's some sort of legal, some sort of political consideration going on at the very top of the Trump administration. Oh, don't arrest these guys. Maybe if we do, then the left is gonna turn them into martyrs, and then they will use that against us, and there's gonna be maneuvering. Let me just tell anybody in the Trump administration who's having that impulse right now, stop it. It doesn't matter what you do. They're gonna attack you. You don't arrest them, they attack you. You arrest them, they attack you. Here's what I want. I just want equal application of the law for people who actually break the law. And it's on camera. I don't know how much more clear you can get. Just arrest these people. They don't have to spend the rest of their lives in jail, but send a message. Give them the old perp walk, that there are consequences for your actions. That is what we voted for, by the way. A restoration of order, not an uneven distribution of justice, not the abuse of our justice system tyrannically to go after people who didn't actually break the law or to go after them in a way that's not commensurate with the laws that they violated. Oh, trespassing locked them up for a million years. Now, no, we're not doing that anymore. But if you strike a cop, you should be held accountable. Arrest these people. I don't know how much more clear I could be on this subject. Law and order. Now, Congresswoman McIver is still walking free. Monica McIver again, who was caught on camera striking cops, body checking them. Here is Julio Rosas, great reporter. Chasing her down in the halls of Congress yesterday. Cut to asking her, how do you account for yourself? Well, watch as she doesn't. Congresswoman, I just wanted to ask you what your response is to being on camera assaulting ICE agents. Do you have a response, Congresswoman? Congresswoman. He's pretending he's invisible, that the migrants held or the illegal immigrants hiding in Delaney hall are hardened criminals. Yeah, they're hardened criminals. This is. Look at this. She just keeps walking. She's got her aides next to her. Yeah, why would she say anything? You had a lot that's good for him. By the way, Julio Rosas is a marine, and he's seen some stuff. He's been here in the United States. He's been at all these. These crazy riots and Kenosha. He's seen it all and so here he is walking down the hallway, and what she's doing, by the way, is just straight up rude. You got a human being is speaking to you. He's not being rude to you. He's just asking you questions. Answer his questions or tell him, hey, I don't really have time to answer your questions. Or, hey, talk to my aide. We can do something else. She's pretending he doesn't even exist. She's a child. She's an emotionally incontinent child. You're invisible. I can't see you. I'm covering my ears. Ridiculous. I can't see you. It's insanity. Anyway, so she's walking through the halls of Congress pretending he doesn't exist because she has no good answer to that question. She assaulted a cop. And you get a great Julio Rosas asking her about it, and she refuses to answer. And so now where are we going with these things? So obviously we see these guys violating the law. Now we have AOC and the dial up Democrat, Hakeem Jeffries, the guy who speaks slowly because he thinks slowly. They're all saying that. I dare you. They're daring the Trump administration to arrest these Democrats. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah, do it. Find out is what they're saying. Find out what happens if you do that? Okay, what happens? Is that a threat? Are you gonna assault more cops now? Is that the plan? Let's start with aoc. Here's aoc. Cut three hilariously threatening Tom Noman. Tom Noman. Tom Homan and Kristi Noem. Take a look. If anyone's breaking the law in this situation, it's not members of Congress. It's the Department of Homeland Security. It's people like Tom Homan and Secretary Kristi Noem. You lay a finger wrong on someone. On representative. I wish you could do Coleman. On representative. Or any of the representatives that were there.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (11:33)

You lay a finger.

Vince (11:34)

She doesn't know their names. You're going to have a problem. She doesn't know the names of the other representatives at all. Robert Menendez Jr. And Lamonica McIver. She didn't remember their names. You lay a finger on Bonnie Watson, Coleman, or any of the others that are there, she has no idea. She doesn't even know the names of her colleagues. But she says you better not do it. If you do it, oh, you are in for some trouble, baby. What kind of trouble? What kind of trouble could you possibly create, you little agent of chaos? Tom Holman thinks, of course, this is all ridiculous. Jake Tapper asked him about this Yesterday. What do you think of AOC's statement here? Tom Holman watch Homan torture cut four. Here he goes.

Tom Homan (12:14)

First of all, you can't intimidate me. Come on, give me a. You know, I was enforcing him. I was wearing a green uniform, Border patrol agent for five years before she was even born. I had more than three decades enforcing immigration law before she became a member of Congress. I worked for six presidents. I've seen policy. I've seen hundreds of policies. Some work, some didn't. But you can't deny the success of the Trump administration when it comes to border security again, the most secure border in history, this nation. And I said from day one, and she knows this, you can not support ice. Shame on you. You can support sanctuary cities. Shame on you. But you can't cross the line. You can't knowingly impede a lot of ISIL enforcement officers. That is a felony. You can't harbor and conceal. Knowingly harboring, conceal. Illegal alien from ice. That is a felony. And you certainly can't commit criminal trespass. You know, and as far as her district, this administration has done more to protect her district than she has. The number of criminal aliens we took off the streets in New York made her community much safer. She ought to be thanking the members of this, the men and women of ICE who protect this country, make her community safer. So, you know, it's politics over public safety. It's just ridiculous. She ought to love her community more than she hates Trump because we're doing a lot. Protect her community.

Vince (13:31)

That's. That's the money shot. He stuck the landing there, baby. She ought to love her community more than she hates Trump. Yeah. Big time. Big time. Jake Tapper had nothing to say to that. He's just staring at. He's like, guy's right. I don't even know what to say to this. Yeah. And again, you assault cops. Arrest these people, just put cuffs on them, put a camera out there, let them know that that happened. I mean, they did it to Roger Stone, right? The left, they abused their power. They send the feds down to Roger Stone's house, they surround it, right? They put a police boat in the canal behind his house. They show up with guns to arrest an old man, scaring the hell out of his wife. They put a CNN camera outside. CNN suddenly knew about it, and there they are in an early morning raid. And that kept happening over and over in that Biden administration. They did it to Peter Navarro. They showed up at the airport, and they put him in leg irons. Okay, you want to do that to people without cause? How about we arrest people with cause? How about we do that? Driving me absolutely crazy that it hasn't happened yet. Also, Hakeem Jeffries, very slow. I apologize for that, but nothing we can do about it. It's biological. He just can't get it out quickly. But he. He, too, threatens the Trump administration if these Democrats do have some accountability. Take a look.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (14:54)

Here he is.

Vince (14:55)

The other day, after there was this incident in Newark, you said they better not touch our members. Correct. What happens if they were to go and arrest these members or if they would try to sanction them here in the House of Representatives?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (15:06)

They'll find out.

Vince (15:07)

What would you do, though? I mean, they'll find out, of course. I mean, doesn't that broach a.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (15:10)

They'll find out.

Vince (15:11)

Doesn't that go across.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (15:12)

That's a red line.

Vince (15:13)

They'll find out. What's the red line, though? I mean, I know we have this.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (15:16)

It's a red line.

Tom Homan (15:16)

It's very clear.

Vince (15:20)

It's a red line. What does that even mean? It means literally nothing. I mean, unless it does mean something. What, are you gonna activate the stormtroopers again? Get the ground troops going? You gonna have them running all over the country just causing havoc? Any more police precincts to burn down? Any more laser pointers to point in the eyes of law enforcement? Anything like that? Any more riots, More death and destruction? Is that what's coming? Attacks on federal courthouses? Is that what you're promising? What exactly are you saying, Hakeem Jeffries? And speak slowly. Oh, don't worry. You will. Amazing. Oh, you'll find out. Okay, let's find out. I'd love to test that. Just like Tom Homan said, I'm not intimidated. Not intimidated by that. Let's see what happens. And regardless of the tack the Trump administration takes here, this is my message. For my friends in the Trump administration. Regardless of the tact you take, they will attack you. So just follow the law. Just do the right thing. That's all you have to do. It's very straightforward. So a lot of, you know, the updates we've been getting this week, you know, including from. I Talked to Tricia McLaughlin, the DHS spokeswoman, earlier this week. She said, look, it's in the hands of the Justice Department right now. They're looking at everything. They're considering everything. Okay? No more looking, no more considering. We've looked, we've considered. We saw people break the law. Hold them accountable. Hold them accountable. We did have Some other remainders from the Kristi Noem testimony yesterday. Dan Goldman, the ridiculous New York Democrat, the Levi Strauss heir, he was spazzing out yesterday, and Kristi Noem was completely composed and sober and doing a great job. But Dan Goldman was freaking out, and that's because Kristi Noem caught him. What did the kids say? Stanning. Yeah, Stanning for terrorists. For Ms. 13. Take a look. Cut six here. Dan Goldman acting like a spaz yesterday.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (17:12)

Garcia, pursuant to this court order.

Kristi Noem (17:15)

Got to be extremely dis. Discouraging to be one of your constituents. To see you fight for a terrorist like this and not fight for them is extremely alarming to me.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (17:25)

I'm fighting for due process, and that's under the Constitution. Gentleman's time has due process.

Vince (17:30)

The gentleman's time has expired. He's panicking. Whoa. I'm fighting for due process. There's like n. You're fighting for terrorists, actually. Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Just want to repeat the core element of the Abrego Garcia story. A judge asked him in a court years ago, how did you get into the country, legally or illegally? He said, illegally. I'm sorry, I think the case is open and shut. The due process has occurred. He said under sworn testimony that he arrived in the country illegally. Get him out. And of course, President Trump did. Coming up, Dr. J. Bhattacharya will have his commentary in just a moment. Big interview ahead. I want to talk to him about everything going on in health, what he found as he arrived at nih, and some big concerns about bio labs, including right here in the United States of America. We'll get to that in just a moment. I have to thank our great sponsors. Millions of adults over 65 start to lose their hearing each year, and, you know, my dad actually is one of them. He's been losing his hearing a bit, and let me tell you, Maryland hearing has been a game changer for him. In fact, the last time we went out to dinner together, he was able to engage and hear the whole conversation and respond. Didn't miss a beat. And that's because MDHearing really brought our conversation to life. Now, this podcast is sponsored by MDHearing. MDHearing makes high quality, easy to use, rechargeable hearing aids with exceptional sound quality that are personalized to your hearing profile, and they cost a fraction of what typical hearing aids cost. They're FDA registered, rechargeable, and you're not even going to know that they're there. They fit right inside your ear. Plus MDHearing just launched their smallest model yet, the Neo Xs. Get the high quality, affordable hearing aids that you deserve with MDHearing. Go to shopmdhearing.com, use the promo code, Vince, and you'll get a pair of hearing AIDS for just 297 bucks. Plus they're adding a free extra charging case which is a $100 value. That's just for listeners and viewers of that's shopmdhearing.com use their promo code. Use our promo code, Vince, and get a pair of hearing AIDS for just $297. That's shopmdhearing.com promo code, Vince. Yes, indeed. And more and more Americans are prioritizing their wellness and getting back into shape. Studies actually prove that strength training does a lot more to help burn fat than cardio alone. In fact, the bigger muscles you have, the more calories you burn just by sitting around. That's what they call your basal metabolic rate. It's great. And this is why I'm so pleased to be working with Don and the team at Jacked Up Fitness. Their all in one home gyms are best in class. And their all new X series elevates home fitness to a whole new level. The Power Rack Pro X functional trainer lets you do hundreds of exercises, basically everything that you could do at the gym, all from the comfort of your own spare room or garage. This absolutely stunning machine features a completely upgraded cable crossover system with articulating pulley arms, giving you unlimited width combinations to hit every muscle group. Now, if you're new to strength training, they offer a free Get Jacked up program that has full body video workouts. You just press play and then you follow along. No excuses. I love my Jacked up fitness machine. You will too. I'm getting fit, so let's do this together. Go to getjackedup.com, sign up for their free training program and get. And when you're ready to purchase your own Power Rack Pro X, just use my promo code, Vince, and you'll save 10%. That's getjackedup.com promo code, Vince, I'm pleased to say. Joining Me now is Dr. Bhattacharya. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya is the director of the National Institutes for Health, the nih, and he joins us here on. Vince. Sir, good to have you with us.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (21:15)

Thanks for having me. Vince. So good to talk to you again. It's been a few years.

Vince (21:21)

It's been a while, but man, I'm so grateful that you're talking to me today and I'm more grateful, actually, that you're in the government. I love this. And I'm actually, every so often, if you start getting pessimistic about anything, one area of a lot of optimism is all of the health officials that President Trump has picked. It's you, it's Dr. Marty Makary over at FDA. It's Casey Means coming in as Surgeon General. It's RFK Jr. As the HHS Secretary. I mean, it's hard for me to imagine how this cast could get better, sir. Do you feel that way?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (21:53)

It's absolutely incredible. The team is incredible. I mean, I don't know what it's like. It's been like in the past, but I don't think I've ever heard of a more cohesive team of people leading Health and Human Services. We work together on almost everything. We managed to get things done that would take years of bureaucratic infighting to accomplish. We do them overnight, and we're all aligned in the same direction. The focus is how do we improve the health of the American people. It's just amazing, Vince.

Vince (22:25)

It is amazing. And also, each of you, to your own extent, was especially you were defined by your opposition to senseless government destruction of our country. That wasn't predicated on science. So people were gonna. If they're hearing the name Dr. J. Bhattacharya and thinking, why do I know that name? Well, the reason for that is because Dr. Bhattacharya was at Stanford and you became famous for signing onto something called the Great Barrington Declaration. And if I remember it correctly, it was that simply focused protection. In other words, the only people who should be subjected to any kind of specialized situation are the vulnerable. But everybody else, young, healthy people, we don't need to lock down society. And yet you were excoriated for that, doctor, weren't you?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (23:11)

I was. It was interesting. This is October 2020. We wrote this, Vince, and it was the most common sense thing in the history of common sense things. Right? Protect the vulnerable and don't disrupt the lives of kids. Don't, like, harm them by keeping them out of school. We had now years of this opioid epidemic going on, hundreds of thousands of people dead as a result of it. And it was the lockdowns that accelerated it. Kids that have been behind in school for two years of learning, I mean, we're still picking up the pieces. I don't think people understood how powerful the agencies, the health and human service agencies actually were until the pandemic. And, I mean, I was really concerned through the whole pandemic, I tried my very best to try to sound the alarm bell. It's amazing to me now that I have the chance to be inside and help reform these institutions so that this kind of thing never happens again.

Vince (24:09)

What is it like being on the inside? So you arrive in an institution that is full of people who clearly had animosity towards you and what you were saying in public. And in fact, the NIH is a massive budget. It's near $50 billion that you have at your disposal, that the agency has had at its disposal. And much of it was being dedicated to supposed research that was used to try and debilitate people like you who were saying, hey, this isn't real science. This is. This is nonsense in the service of captured interests. So, you know, what is it like working in that agency now?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (24:44)

I mean, of two minds in a sense, Vince, because I love the nih. I mean, it's supported my research for much of my career, and it has a really illustrious track record of advances in basic scientific knowledge that have resulted in better treatments for people. Its mission is absolutely noble and I completely support it. But the idea is that, that we support research that advances the health and longevity of the American people. Like, who can be against that? Right? That's exactly the mission. And in that sense, I absolutely love the nih, but it has fallen on hard times. The American people don't really trust us anymore, and for good reason. What we did during the pandemic, now I'm saying we. As if I. During the pandemic, I didn't. But what the NIH did during the pandemic, it was. I mean, it didn't. It didn't do the research that would have resolved the. Some of the. Like, for instance, like the research on whether the COVID vaccine stops you from getting and spreading. Covid, Right. That instead the NIH kind of leaned in ways to things that led to mandates. It's led to, like, all kinds of things that were not particularly helpful. And worse, the NIH actually supported research that very likely caused the pandemic. Pandemic started in China, I believe, as a consequence of research that the Chinese government was supporting. But I'm sad to say that the NIH also supported that same research, this gain of function research that very likely led to the pandemic. So the place needs fundamental reform. The plus side is I found lots of great allies. There's a lot of great Americans here who want the best for the country and want to advance scientific knowledge. There's a lot of people that are really, you know, they're sitting there concerned because they might lose their jobs and all this. And I have sympathy for them too. But the place needs change and I think it's been interesting. I've been here six weeks and we've accomplished a lot. I've uncovered some things which I wish I had never happened, but did and we managed to make a lot. I'll tell you about specifically about a incident at a high security lab that I found as we move on the conversation. But it's been eye opening and it's been really useful to learn so many things. It's still a great institution, but it definitely needs some changes and I'm working on that.

Vince (27:21)

I do want to ask you about your concerns about what's going on at these really important biolabs, including in the United States. But first on the mission and kind of the, as you mentioned, Covid, NIH funding going to that Wuhan Institute of Virology where of course it is believed by most thinking people that the virus emerged from. And I Wonder, I've heard RFK Jr talking a lot about this lately. The HHS secretary and the way he seems to describe a lot of this so called gain of function research that the president, he just put an executive order out banning so much of it around the planet, funding for so much of it. The way I'm hearing people like RFK describe it, it sounds like these are Manhattan Projects that they're not actually designed to improve health, but instead they're being sold to the public as health operations when in fact they're the development of bioweapons. So do you have as a part of your focus right now preventing NIH funding which is for health being used for things like bioweapons programs?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (28:27)

I think the NIH should be entirely civilian organization, right? It should not be involved in any military kind of research at all. I think that there are other parts of the government that do that and do that better than us. The mixing of missions actually poisons the NIH's primary objective, which is to do research that improves the health and well being of the American people, longevity of the American people. On the question of this gain of function research. It's funny Vince, because the same research was pitched as biodefense can also be used as bio offense. It's the same research, the same exact research. And in fact the civilian justification given to the research agenda that I think led to the pandemic was to prevent pandemics, to go out into the wild places, find all of the viruses and pathogens that live in places where humans generally don't go, bring them into labs and catalog them and ask how close are they in evolutionary space so they'll make the leap into human populations. And to do that, you have to essentially weaponize them, make them more infectious in humans and ask how many mutations are needed before they become infectious in humans. You know, it's one of those things where it's a utopian agenda was sold as well. We can prepare for all possible pandemics. And so any possible pandemic in the future we'll know about before it happens, have countermeasures in place like vaccines and antivirals. That utopian agenda, I think, actually caused the pandemic because it's not possible to handle those agents so carefully that they never leak. It just, it doesn't have to be malicious. It's just human error. And I don't know exactly what happened in Wuhan because the Chinese won't share their lab notebooks with us. But what I will say is that we should not be engaged in any of these kinds of utopian exercises that pose a risk to human health at the scale that we saw during the pandemic. It's just a catastrophic mistake that we ever engaged in this. And whether it's a civilian justification or some bio defense justification, it makes no sense to me for us, to the US Government or any other government to be engaged in it.

Vince (30:45)

So, Dr. Bhattacharya, when you, you know, I know you were standing alongside the President, he just put out this executive order banning gain of function research funding, especially in these risky and adversarial countries, places like China, which of course makes the most common sense in the world that we would start there. But I understand reportedly that there was a more expansive gain of function ban considered by the President, that there was a. They were contemplating going even further on and stopping it. I think, I presume, domestically as well. Do we need to go further with banning this research in your personal view?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (31:20)

Vince? Actually, the gain of function ban the President signed is expansive. It's actually everything I wanted. It essentially directs the US Government as well to not support this kind of dangerous research internally and externally. It mentioned specifically some adversary nations. I mean, it's amazing to me that we cooperate with the Chinese on this kind of research in the past, because that's especially dangerous. But part of the reasoning, why was that the biosafety standards were more lax in Wuhan than they were here. And so some researchers, I keep saying, we, when it wasn't me. Some researchers engaged in offshoring this kind of dangerous work because they knew it would be more difficult to do here. But it is also still done here, Vince. And I think it's dangerous no matter where it happens. And the President's order essentially says no more of it. It's a little tricky because gain of function as a tool is actually useful biologically for human health. So, for instance, human insulin is produced at scale using a kind of gain of function work, and take E. Coli and trick them into making human insulin. The problem is gain of function work that has the possibility of causing a pandemic. That's the work we should not be doing, no matter what it is, no matter where it is. And I saw Secretary Kennedy say this, and I completely agree. We should be promoting an international treaty to get rid of this work. It helps nobody. It won't help us win battles with our adversaries. It just endangers human populations.

Vince (33:02)

Yes, that's right. And I heard RFK also bring up that that kind of gain of function research where viruses are made more infectious and more deadly has never once produced a health benefit, which I've been saying for years. I know, I'm certain you've been saying, too. So in light of that, if it's all risk and no upside, don't do it. It's never proven to be beneficial in any way.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (33:24)

I mean, Vince, you're the soul of common sense on this. It's amazing that scientists don't that decisions that don't have that kind of common sense. We should be focused on things that improve human health. Like that's our mission. Why are we focused on utopian schemes that have never been proven to advance human health and that have the risk of causing worldwide pandemics?

Vince (33:49)

Okay, I want to talk about bio lab safety with you in just a moment here in the United States. But first, just on that topic, I don't know if this is a part of NIH's mission at all, but are you familiar with any updates on what's going on with those bio labs that are in Ukraine that have had these dangerous pathogens inside of them or around the planet? Is that a part of the mission of NIH at all, to oversee any of that?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (34:12)

I've not been made aware of any NIH connection to those labs. I have read reports about them from the outside, but if I learn of things, I'll let the public know. I mean, I've been uncovering things left and right, and it's been some of US have been shocking. I'm sure we'll talk about one thing. I'm sure. Right. And say you're about to ask me, I hope in a second about, about, about it. But yes, I haven't found anything yet about the Ukraine biolabs.

Vince (34:41)

Okay. All right, so let's talk about Fort Detrick in Maryland. This is a US run biolab here in the United States of America. It's got, it's got an interesting history. The more time you spend looking at Fort Detrick and the kind of things that have emanated from there, the more you start to wonder, wait, what is. Wait a second. How safe is this place? Because in the early 2000s, there was a researcher there who stood accused of actually being responsible for coming up with the anthrax attacks and then disseminating them around the country. Since that time, there have been a number of times that research has been paused at that facility because of concern about wastewater contamination coming out of it and the risk that it could pose to the public. And now this week we get a really dramatic story that I know you're all over that involves some sort of quote, lovers quarrel going on that may actually pose a risk to the public or could have. Tell us what happened.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (35:37)

Oh, goodness. This one I've been scared by very little in the last five years, but this one really scared me. So about three weeks in, three weeks ago, I'd been three weeks in the job, I got a report from, from someone who was in, was, was, was like doing a routine inspection of this lab the NIH runs, one of the labs at Fort Dietrich. They're military labs as well. The lab the NIH runs is a BSL4 lab. BSL4 means like the highest security level you wear basically, you know, spacesuits and I mean they're called whatever, biocontainment suits. If you're going to be working in a BSL4 lab and some of the stuff that are analyzed in those labs are just really nasty things, you know, Ebola, encephalitis viruses. And they're just terrible if they get out in the human populations. And of course, they're not common in human populations that, certainly not in the United States. The investigation uncovered a security incident that happened in March before I actually signed on, that a contractor had deliberately cut a hole in one of the bike containment suits of a fellow worker. And let's go over a lover's bat. As best I can tell, I'm not sure exactly what happened. In any case, it's leaving aside the contractor and this act, which is, I mean, effectively an act of attempted murder, if not worse. The. The contra. The. The. The fact that this had happened essentially been suppressed. And what I learned is that the safety culture of the lab was really bad. There were incidents going back into the Biden administration where essentially it was just like, you know, sort of waved aside as if it were just normal. This is not normal. You have people working with some of the most dangerous pathogens on the planet doing experiments with them that could really, if it leaked, could spread out to the entire population, damage the whole population. We saw what happened in Wuhan, and when I heard this, I mean, my blood was chilled. I thought, okay, you can't have a lax safety culture in a lab like this. You absolutely have to have 100% commitment to safety when you are engaged in experiments with these kinds of select agents, you know, like pathogens. And so I ordered the a. That the lab essentially shut down until further notice. We secured those to select agents so that they're. They're not going to pose any risk, the select agents being the viruses and stuff, and, you know, shut down all those experiments. I'm not going to reopen the lab until I'm satisfied that whoever is actually running it is. Has safety as job 1, 2, and 3. The experiments are. Some of them are likely important scientifically and they're worth doing. At least some of them are, well, going to do a review of that as well. But no matter what the scientific benefit might be, it's not worth the risk of harming human populations at scale with a lax safety culture. And I won't reopen the lab until I'm satisfied that that has been redressed.

Vince (38:52)

That'S the proper course of action? Of course. But do you. So do you know, first and foremost, if the person who cut the hole in the other person's biohazard suit has been charged with any crime? Additionally, the person who had the hole cut in their suit, were they at any time exposed to any of these pathogens?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (39:12)

There's an ongoing FBI investigation, Vince, so I shouldn't step in front of it. And I actually have not been briefed yet on what they found on that specific. On those specific questions. So. But as far as I know.

Vince (39:24)

But. But you're.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (39:24)

What do you got?

Vince (39:25)

You're satisfied?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (39:27)

Yeah, as far as I know, no one got.

Vince (39:29)

So are you satisfied that there's no threat to the public right now?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (39:33)

Yeah, I'm satisfied there's no threat to the public. I mean, I was more. I think that if there was A threat to the public. We would have known before I got into office. I mean, that's the kind of agents we're talking, like the kind of experiments we're talking about. So I'm satisfied that there was no threat to the public, no damage to the public, no risk the public from this Inc. But I'm not satisfied that we won't have a threat to the public in possible future incidents, because it's the safety culture of a lab like this that determines whether that what that risk actually is. And BSL4 Labs, there's no room for error. You cannot have any actions like this. And a safety culture that waves aside says it's normal. I mean, you can't have people like that running the labor.

Vince (40:22)

I mentioned at the outset, Dr. Bhattacharya, that at the NIH, you have a huge budget. $48 billion. About $48 billion. The president has asked you to try and trim things. His proposed budget tries to cut things down to, I believe, around $30 billion. You can, of course, correct me if I'm wrong, but that's a lot of money. And one of the things we've discovered about huge pots of government money with little accountability is that there's often a lot of corrupt interests trying to guide that money. As the NIH director, how much pressure have you discovered from various US Senators and congressmen who are trying to have you serve their various pet projects rather than the scientific interests of the public?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (41:01)

You know, it's interesting because this job normally is bipartisan. Everyone loves you because you're giving, doing experiments that advance human health. You go around the country giving talks, bragging about the scientific advances that actually. So, you know, in normal times, it would be a really fun job. I landed in this job in a setting where one of the most prominent people in this institution had to be pardoned by the outgoing president. I mean, it's an institution kind of that it's in a little bit of a crisis. But as I said at the beginning, at the same time, there's a lot of, a lot of goodwill toward the NIH because it has produced advances that have, that have improved human health. Like we are able to treat childhood cancers that we weren't able to treat before the NIH's research. We're able to have advances in how we manage heart, heart disease, treat diabetes. These are big advances that we now have essentially a cure for sickle cell anemia, which, I mean, these are big advances. And so when I talk to folks in Congress, it's popular. The NH is popular. You know, I think it ought to be popular in that sense. If you. What I hear from folks in Congress essentially is, you know, please keep doing this research that advances human health, that improves human health, but please don't do any of the politicized stuff that divides people. So that's one of the things I'm really quite proud of. This even started before I got in the office. There were parts of the NIH portfolio that, that would. That essentially were like DEI politicized nonsense. They weren't actually science. The NIH is absolutely committed to advancing the health of minority populations. I mean, minority populations are Americans. And we are. Our mission is to advance the health of every single American, no matter what race you are, no matter what sex you are, no matter what your beliefs are. There's no Democrat or Republican science. There's just science. Right. We're committed to that. But we shouldn't be doing work that politicizes science. And we've managed to get rid of almost all of it, at least I hope most. Almost all of it. There's a. Let me, let me make the analogy with something that happened at the usaid. That agency that DOGE sort of looked into first. At the usaid, they were doing some really good things. They had a program called pepfar, really universally popular because it provided cheap HIV drugs to patients in Africa, saving millions of lives. It was a really good program. I've written about that program in the past. It's a program that was actually rescued and I think brought by Marco Rubio into the State Department. The same agency had in it a program to add a third gender to the Bangladeshi census. Now, Bangladesh has all kinds of problems. There's arsenic in the drinking water, hundreds of thousands of children dying of diarrhealous illnesses. I mean, poverty at scale. And the US Government was doing, was adding a third gender to its census. If you take something that's good pepfar and then you surround it and marble it with absolute politicized nonsense, you leave the good things open to political attacks that should never happen. And it was irresponsible for the leaders of the USAID to allow the good things to be surrounded and marbled with politicized nonsense. And I think that in a sense, the transition is to making sure that the NIH focuses on actual science that actually advances human health. That's. That's what we've been doing. You know, I don't want to get too far into the budget because this, it's a. Budget fights are always not, not fun to talk about. But I think that there's a lot of support, even from the President himself wrote a letter to his science advisor, Michael Kratzios, committing the US to be the premier nation in biomedicine in the 21st century. And the NIH is going to play a key role in that aspiration.

Vince (45:10)

All right, well, Dr. Bhattacharya, I'd be remiss if I escaped this interview without asking you about what other things you discovered that have shocked you while you've been in the job. You mentioned, of course, what's going on at Fort Detrick. Shocking enough to hear that a lover's quarrel resulted in a potential massive, massive problem there. What else has shocked you that you've discovered? What are you finding?

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (45:32)

You know, one of the things. Okay, so this is probably not. Shouldn't be. It shouldn't have shocked me, but it did. The way that the press reports some things are so distorted, it's almost. I mean, it's mind blowing. Let me give you an example. We found. One of the things I found is that. So researchers often work with foreign. Foreign universities, foreign labs. It's normal. I mean, it's not like international collaboration. Science is normal. The way the NIH paid for these things was by something called subawards. So an American university, some university in the United States researcher says, I'm going to work with somebody in France. We give money to the American university, then the university then gives the money to the lab in France or something like that. Anywhere. Right. Doesn't matter. What I found out is that the nih, which gives money to the US University, can't track really effectively or audit the money that's spent in that foreign lab. So this, like, the most like crucial example of this is the. Is Wuhan. We can't get them to give us the lab notebooks. Yeah. For their experiments, we sent them money. And, you know, it's. So I put in a system that requires the same level of auditing power and scrutiny over the foreign labs that we give money to as we have of our American labs. It's a system. It's a little bit of a transition to get there, but it's not that disruptive. We're still allowing for foreign collaborations to happen. It's just that now the NIH is going to be able to audit what's happening over there. The media reported as if I were banning all foreign collaborations. What we're doing is we're being able to audit what's happening with American money in foreign institutions. I just. It's it's mind blowing to me, Vince. Like how distorting a reporting can be something that's really good and allow, in fact will allow foreign collaborations to happen in a, in a way that's like that the American people can be proud of. Instead is reported as. We're like some, we're some anti science group that wants to kill all scientific collaboration. It's so far from the truth, it's remarkable. And yet the media reported it happily without even really asking me what was going on.

Vince (47:56)

Yeah, well, that's a consistent theme in your life. Anytime you do anything, Dr. Bhattacharya, the media is attacking you, which I think means you're over the top target. Thank you, Dr. Bhattacharya, Director of the National Institutes of Health. I'm so grateful that we got some time with you today. I look forward to talking to you again in the future. Best of luck, sir.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (48:12)

Thank you, Vincent. So it was nice to talk.

Vince (48:16)

Great stuff, great stuff out of Dr. Bhattacharya. Thanks again doc, for doing that. That's a really big deal. Great to have him with us. We'll have him back. I want to talk to all these health officials because they really, really do matter getting to the bottom of all of this. And I know he's got, he's got a lot of sophisticated ideas, a lot of great thoughts on these MRNA vaccines and how out of control they are and we shouldn't be doing this to the kids. All stuff that he said before. But we'll have him back to talk more about that because he's really good on that subject. Before we go today, I've got a couple of other things I wanna share with you. One thing that we really need to get to I think right away is that Ed Martin has now done another interview, this time with Tucker Carlson. Ed Martin, remember he was going to be the U.S. attorney in Washington D.C. he already was the U.S. attorney in washington D.C. president Trump wanted to make him full time Thom Tillis, the bastard got in his way, stopped that from happening. So now Ed Martin's gonna be dedicated full time at the Justice Department gap to going after all of the weaponization of our government against its own people. But he had an update on his collaboration with Dan Bongino. Ever heard of him? Over at the FBI, here's Ed Martin talking with Tucker about what he's been doing with our friend Dan.

Ed Martin (49:31)

Get it out or I'm gonna die trying. Pipe bomber as a prosecutor. I've got the pipe bomber case in my office. The FBI, Bongino said to the FBI, change all the agents, everybody look at it again. It's been going on for about five weeks. It's like Keystone cops, you know, they didn't interview some of the people that were. That you would have said that might be a suspect. They hadn't interviewed him. I mean, so the question becomes, what's happening here? Is it incompetence? It feels worse than incompetence. Right. And so that information does it does.

Vince (50:03)

What do you think?

Ed Martin (50:04)

Well, I think. I think it's worse than incompetence. And. And I think. But I think the only way forward is to not describe what I think of the motives, but to expose over and over again what's happened. If you expose what's happened and the truth gets out, then accountability is possible. If you don't expose what's happened, the accountability looks like targeting, Right? So you got to do this one to get to this one, and the other side just does this. And then they count on the media to tell us it's okay, we have to do this and this. And that's my answer to some people that say, what's Dan doing? Bung. You know, I talk to him every week or so. He's going hammer and tongs at this stuff right here. You can't arrest everybody the first month, but you got to get this going. And it's a challenge. But I'm glad people are holding us, you know, pushing everybody. It's good, but it's harder than it looks. It really is.

Vince (50:56)

He's glad we're all pushing, but he says it is harder than it looks on the inside. It is good to get updates, though. All you want is just some information. Give us something, and there's an update. Ed Martin saying, hey, as a U.S. attorney, he's been working closely with the deputy director, and did you hear he gave a timeframe. He said it was five weeks ago that Dan said we really have to get to the bottom of this January 6th pipe bomber. This is, of course, as you know, an obsession. A good obsession of Dan's and also a good obsession of Ed Martin's. So Dan says about five weeks ago. Now, five weeks ago, depending on when that interview was filmed, that dates us back to around the beginning of April. Today's May 15th. We go six weeks back. That's the beginning of April. So very early in Dan's term, he gets his bearings, he arrives. He is meeting everybody at the FBI. He gets all of the assignments that he needs. And then he says, as one of his first priorities, we're getting to the bottom of the January 6th pipe bomber case. That's what Ed Martin just relayed. That's what he just relayed. So we'll keep plugging away on that, as Ed told this audience, because he really values this audience. He said his plan is to be back here 20 times and maybe we'll hold him to even doing more than that. But I'll take 20 for a starter pack with Ed Martin to get more updates on what they're doing, what they're digging, which I think is very, very important. Grateful for Ed Martin and of course for Dan doing all of that. And one other thing just on Dan and what the FBI is doing. I just want you to keep this in mind. I've been talking about this on the radio, too. This is a one, two punch arrangement. The Federal Bureau of Investigation investigates crimes, the broader prosecuting arm of the arms of the Department of Justice. They prosecute the crimes. You can't have one without the other. So Dan and Cash can only carry the ball so far up the field. If they don't have prosecutors to support them, it's no good. So the rest of this job falls to Pam Bondi and the prosecutors who work for her. So eyes on everybody here. It's not just a. Like, where's the, you know, where's accountability was Dan. Did Dan succumb to the deep state? No, stupid. He did not succumb to the deep state. If there's anything I can tell you with confidence. Also, here's a great picture. Leo Terrell got together with Dan Bongino. These. These guys are great. I saw Leo at Dan's birthday party last year. Leo's a great American. He has an aura of energy all around him when he's walking through a room. Everyone, there's Leo Terrell. And so the two of them get together, it looks like on the steps of a government building. I'm not precisely sure where they were. Fair minded friends. Do you recognize who I'm with? Leo Terrell. Great shot between two good friends. So that's very cool. Look at that guy. Very, very cool to see. I've got some other interesting things to share with you. RFK had a awesome testimony yesterday. Speaking of health, we were just talking to Dr. Bhattacharya a few minutes ago. RFK testifying before Congress yesterday and said, man, this government is so slow. And it doesn't have to be. We can move faster. Look at this. Congressman DeLauro, you say that you've worked for 20 years on getting food die out. Give me credit. I got it out in 100 days. I'll give you that credit. All right, so let's work together and do something that we all believe in, which is have healthy kids in our country, for God's sake. Ms. Dane, it's not. There's no such thing as Republican children or Democratic children. There's just kids, and we should all be cared. Be concerned with them. Yeah. RFK goes. Rosa DeLauro. You've been working for years to get the dyes out of the food. I did that in a hot second. Now I have to say something. You can't talk about di and Rosa DeLauro without mentioning what her hair looks like. Fellas, Justin, can you please pull a photo up of Rosa DeLauro? Rosa DeLauro. Speaking of dye. She is. How old is this woman? 100, and she's got streaks of purple just going through her hair. How about get the dye out of your brain? How about that? Why don't we start there, and then we'll get the dye out of the food. She's been working for years to get rid of all the dye. What? Has she been hoarding all of the dye to herself to try and to stop it from getting into the food. It's. Look at this lady. Dye's bad for you. Says the woman known for the hair dye that's infecting her brain. Oh, Rosa d' Lara, Come on, baby. Come on. Get the dye out of the food and the dye out of your hair. Please, please. Amazing, amazing stuff. Really, really good. Yeah. Now, the House, whether it's Democrats or Republicans, the House, they are full of all sorts of people that just are not doing a very rapid action job, are they? Have you seen these tweets from the House Republicans this week? Not exactly impressive. Take a look at some of these tweets that the House Republicans have been putting out. We need to get Americans off the sidelines. Who the hell tweeted this? House Republicans. We need to get Americans off the sidelines. I don't know about you. I'm sorry. Chad, are you on the sidelines right now? No, nobody's on the sidelines. We're not on the sidelines. We need to get lawmakers off the sidelines. We need to get your butts in the game. You guys have to be doing something to get us off the sidelines. We got off the sidelines. We put you in office. And then this one. Oh, my God. What are they doing? Here we go. Audio podcast listeners. There's a tweet up from House Republicans. It starts in English. It says House Republicans. That's right. I said it starts in English. House Republicans believe in every American's potential to thrive by embracing the power of work. And then they translate it into Spanish, which apparently involves a lot more words. Apparently in this translation. Los republicanos en la comera. Cremos en que cada ciudad. I'm sorry, ciudadano. I don't even know how to say that. Americano, tienne el potencial de prosperar y beneficiarce de las opportunidades de trabajo. My apologies. Not great at Spanish, but why are you including Spanish in your stupid message? House Republicans. What kind of passive aggressive melodrama anti Trump animosity is that? Didn't Trump do a whole executive order that declared that English is the official language? How hard is it for the House Republicans to get on board? Who's running the House GOP account? Get rid of that person. Idiotic. Thank you. Yeah, the chat's saying, good try, Vince. Thank you. Thank you for. I love how encouraging you are. Thank you very much that I appreciate it. And then finally, I've got a clip for you of the Indian Congressman Sri Tendahar, who is trying to make a name for himself by impeaching President Trump. Take a look at how ridiculous and hilarious this Democrat is. But they talk about my hair. They talk about my hair. They talk about my appearance. They talk about where I was born. They talk about everything. My looks. They talk about my age. They talk about why I should be deported back to the country where I was born. They talk about my past business dealings. And they distort my business. They do everything. You know, at some point, maybe the conclusion should be, maybe it's you. Maybe you're the problem, Sri. Maybe it's not the rest of us. If everyone agrees that you're the problem, maybe look in the mirror, you're the problem. That guy's 80 years old. They talk about my age. Yeah, 80. How are you 80? And how old is your wig? Questions we need to get the answer to. I'll keep plugging away for answers on that. Thanks for joining us today on Vince. We'll be back tomorrow with you. You can listen live. Rumble.com Vince also, we've got a nationwide radio show. We do it 12 to 3 Eastern every single day. Rumble.com Vince. Or go to thevinceshow.com and get your local radio listings. Thanks for listening to us today.