What say you, Robert Malone?

Expand full comment

I can assure you that no particle of this dangerous junk will be entering my body or the bodies of anybody in my family. We need to demonize this rubbish before the whole world is poisoned - if it has not already been poisoned. Good health does not depend on drugs.

Expand full comment

Very interesting to say the least. I remember the information on Dr. Jill Glasspool Malone's LinkedIn page where she stated that her "influencers" were Bill Gates, Melinda Gates, Justin Trudeau and Richard Branson who is a billionaire and associate of Bill Gates and involved in food ventures with Gates. The number one company she was interested in is Sanofi Pharmaceuticals. Interestingly enough, her husband was employed by them for a while, and as Dr. McCullough shows, they were number one in mRNA. Also listed are Zoetis, Pfizer, US Health and Human Services, US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, TED Conferences, etc.

Here is the 4 min. video of her former LinkedIn page before she removed all the pertinent information.


Expand full comment

And then of course the trickle down effect (link below) reaping massive $ wins for even little known biotech co's. No wonder it was all seemingly impossible to halt. The money train keeps whipping along ... health of human race be damned! We have a protracted battle and we all must be ready to do our part large and small. Please God give us your grace.


Expand full comment

McCullough concludes with, " It will be interesting to see their next move since both safety and efficacy failed miserably with mRNA commercialized by Pfizer and Moderna."

Using THEIR self-serving vernacular . . . and wondering why we are losing?!

The whole simple and BLATANT point is that the "safe & effective" issue/verbiage should not be anywhere in these 11 December 2020 FDA EUA based discussions; and McCullough knows it. So why the cat-n-mouse game? LIABILITY IMMUNITY. . . . an issue that medical doctors such as McCullough avoid like the proverbial plague. (The Courage to Face COVID-19 mentions this topic in-passing and was almost dismissive in tone; compared to what is URGENTLY needed.)

Back to the cat-n-mouse question . . . As is well-known to McCullough, thee central point of an EUA is the descriptor "emergency." In addition to the secret albeit unstated favorite among medical doctor (LIABILITY IMMUNITY), we have the intrinsic dictate of DIS-allowing promotional sales claims.

That is, since the entire EUA affair stipulates a(n alleged) EMERGENCY, and since the trials (yeah . . . right) were therefore truncated and harried, there is IMPLICITLY no justification for sales blurbs such as "safe and effective." In fact, as I pointed out to twenty Ivy League administrators, IT IS AGAINST THE LAW. See Page 8 of 12 here ( https://www.pvsheridan.com/sheridan2ivyleague-3-21april2023.pdf ), quote :

"The Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), issued by the FDA on 11 December 2020, is key to the legalistic fraud that shields mRNA technology in-particular! That scenario was sought long before Event 201. But by-definition, an EUA does not allow claims of safety and efficacy, let-alone effectiveness; especially for the never-before-used mRNA needle. An EUA implicitly declares that such claims are unsubstantiated; and therefore illegal:

Mr. Fauci, Ms. Pollack, Mr. Bourla, and Mr. Trump cannot have it both ways. When deployed under, and still shielded by an EUA, the phrase 'safe and effective' is not merely a misnomer . . . spewing that phrase under an EUA is a crime."

But perhaps we should not task the Ivy League dolts too harshly (especially the five that tout law schools!?! ). After-all, the twelve Blue State attorneys general openly violated that law as early as 24 March 2021! See their vile letter to Facebook / Twitter here:


My letter to those criminal attorneys general here:


But perhaps the more egregious part of McCullough's post is the regurgitation of THEIR vernacular:


That term, their marketing term of many decades is deliberate and purposeful; albeit dishonest, deceitful and in these contexts CRIMINAL. The veneer of their "mRNA" portrays Motherhood and apple pie . . . messenger RNA. As McCullough is fully aware, that is NOT what was deployed under the 11 December 2020 FDA EUA:



In my recent letter to Congresswomen Mace and Luna, and Congressman Jordan, Page 12 of 22:

"That prefix, mRNA, has long stood for ‘messenger ribonucleic acid,’ or messenger RNA. mRNA is a naturally occurring protein molecule. That prefix is deployed to portray the Pfizer needle as harmless; merely a wonderful extension of Mother Nature. In other words, they cannot even tell us the most basic truths about the precise content of needles that they mandated into millions of human beings worldwide." ( https://www.pvsheridan.com/sheridan2mace_jordan_luna-1-3august2023-cvr.pdf )

As one of many bases for asserting WILLFUL MISCONDUCT, the Pfizer/Moderna lie just described leads to elimination of LIABILITY IMMUNITY . . . a topic that medical doctors like McCullough/Risch refuse to forthrightly and continually and publicly denounce AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE (not just some legalistic exercise).

Memo: On 22 December 2020, a mere eleven days after the FDA EUA, the liars at the CDC posted the following to their website, quote:

"(The vaccines) are safe and effective as determined by data from the manufacturers."

Guess who telephoned the CDC, focused on their "safe & effective" sputum, and demanded that that statement be removed (it was)?

Regarding the upcoming legal onslaught on modRNA (the true needle technology/descriptor), note that the CDC continues to market mRNA, and goes so far in their strawman routine as to tell us that Ivermectin is not in the needle (as if we asked):


Expand full comment

Like any technology, there are early pioneers and innovators wherein the technology advances to endpoints that may look nothing like that of the original technology. Jet engines, light bulbs, telephones, radios etc... look very different today than when they were first invented or introduced. Then there are the technological concepts that are developed sometimes long in advance of a tech introduction. One notable example is Leonardo da Vinci's depiction of a helicopter, published over 400yrs before the first flying prototype.

Expand full comment

We've tried mRNA, it was a disaster, now they want more of it?

Expand full comment

All this data and…where’s Malone’s signature?

Expand full comment

The hope for the mRNA platform has been badly shaken. Malone could not find a safe carrier lipid back when he was trying to develop the process over considerable time. Then he consulted with others trying as well and all failed, apparently. But the promise remained - much stalled behind the lipids. Malone noted he did get the jab early-on because he assumed after all these years the lipid issue had been resolved and data now suggests it has not but the payload, spike, has been modified so it's not "messenger" RNA but modified RNA. Thus in addition to the lipid issues we have confounded eternal modified spike trying to replicate rather than allowing the immune system to destroy it.

Fascinating to see all the mRNA patent work, much of it abandoned when adverse effects were observed. Not so with warp speed which seems less well tested. We might ask why not?

I'm no expert, just my assessment.

Expand full comment

So no mention of Robert Malone. Hmmm.

Expand full comment

What are the long term effects of anything mRna that we put in our bodies?

Expand full comment