Back to episode — Episode 2893 CWSA 07/10/25
Context —
ought into the idea that your government can lie to you. So don't act like you're all above it. We're not above it. I wake up knowing that my country has a CIA and that their job is to not tell the truth. I mean it's built into the job and I don't expect them to tell me the truth, but I do expect them to keep me safe. So they're not going to be perfect and there'll be some corruption that gets in…
← Previous segment →erpretation as more likely than the other. I feel like the most likely interpretation is that they know it would be bad for the country to be fully disclosing what they know. It doesn't mean that they're bad people. It could mean the opposite, that they're protecting us, but I don't know. Maybe someday we'll find that out.
As Alex Jones says and others have said, maybe the other possibility is that Trump found it really useful to have all that blackmail for himself. So let's say you wanted to do a deal with some other country that's an ally. Wouldn't it be useful if that ally was fully knowledgeable that you knew everything in the Epstein file and if you wanted to, you could release it. You could leak it or you could announce it. Wouldn't that make you very flexible when dealing with the United States? Yes, it would.
So one possibility is that once Trump found out what the actual blackmail was all about, and we have no evidence that he did this by the way, I'm just this is more of a what if, wouldn't it make sense for him to use it instead of ruining the asset? Because imagine how valuable that asset would be. What if it felt like the difference between getting the Abraham Accords done and not? I'm not saying Israel's the target or anything like that. I'm just saying there are things that are way bigger than what Epstein knew or videoed or blackmailed about.
What if keeping that blackmail alive is what allows Trump to get a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia, which I don't think is going to happen anytime soon. But what if it did? Wouldn't you be better off if he didn't tell you and just used that leverage and got a peace deal for the world that kept us out of World War III and a nuclear holocaust? I don't know. I wouldn't feel bad about it.
So we'll probably never know what the truth is, but let's see.
Apparently there are several healthcare organizations. I saw this on a post by the Vigilant Fox who's a real good follow on X. If you're not following the Vigilant Fox, you might be missing a lot of stories. But RFK Jr. had said that kids and pregnant women should not be getting the COVID vaccination. Now you probably said to yourself, well I'm pretty sure the science strongly indicates that it doesn't make sense for pregnant women and children, young children, to get the shot. But you might be wrong.
According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Physicians, the American Public Health Association, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America, because they all got together and they are filing a federal lawsuit against Kennedy for banning the COVID vaccine from kids and pregnant women. Now do you think that they have the data to back up that lawsuit? Because the reason for banning it was the data. Is there two sets of data? One that says it's a great idea and one that says it's not. How in the world is this even a decision? Is there really just two completely different worlds of data? And one says that oh yeah, give these to those pregnant women for sure. And the other says whatever you do, don't give it to pregnant women. What? How is it even possible?
Well, the thing that you would have to wonder about is are these four associations heavily funded by big pharma? I wonder. And is it really just big pharma trying to increase their revenue and they're doing it indirectly through these organizations that look to us like they're legit, right? If I told you that the American Academy of Pediatrics decided that something was safe for children, wouldn't you automatically think, well that doesn't sound like criminals to me. It's the American Academy of Pediatrics.
So if I were big pharma, I would use my clout with big organizations that I fund or I fund maybe speaking fees for people in the organizations, that sort of thing. And I would use them to go after RFK Jr. so that it didn't look like it was me. I don't know if that's what's happening, but that's how I would see the world.
Kristi Noem, head of Homeland Security, said that after the Maui fires and while Biden was in charge of FEMA, I don'
Context —
t know if I believe this, but one in six survivors of the Maui fires had to trade sexual favors for basic supplies to survive. Do you believe that one in six? Now I assume that we're not counting men in that. So if you eliminate men, there might have been some gay men or whatever who were offering sex for food. But it feels like it'd be more like one in three. If one in six survivors, but let's sa…
Next segment → →