Dr Malone Testifies Covid non-Vaccine Is Known As Toxic, Always Failed Animal Studies, Can't Work & The Health Authorities Knew It! Insists The CIA's Fingerprints Are All Over It.
Direct transcript below
For those who missed it Congress Woman Marjorie Taylor Greene held a hearing on Monday November 13, 2023. We really applaud all speakers who testified, the whole thing was phenomenal, but in particular the final testimony was pretty damn compelling by Dr. Robert Malone.
Yes, in our opinion, this is the same Dr. Malone who is credibly accused of being a contractor of DOD (the main perpetrator of the mass murder), and he is a financial investor and beneficiary of the biological weapons marketed as "vaccines”.
Is the new testimony just controlled opposition damage control?
Was the "hearing" just a clown show so that Malone can spin another cycle of lies covering up for his previous lies and pushing the toxic product on elderly?
We are glad Attorney Tom Renz was sitting right there to override Malone’s wishy washy testimony that it may just be a mistake and not malice, to chime in that Renz felt it IS INTENT TO CAUSE HARM. Someone needed to get the real motive on the record because Dr. Malone is not willing to go that far and kept downplaying the concept of intentional depopulation. Aside from Dr. Malone walking the fine line and pandering to please both sides, and pretending covid-19 virus exists, we thought it was excellent that he testified to the SV40 plasmids and the known failure of the mRNA platform which was known long ago could only cause harm due to its genotoxicity. The more these facts get on the record the better.
“The CIA absolutely has his fingers all over this” - Dr. Malone
Congress Woman Marjorie Taylor Greene, Malone, Renz, Dr. Kimberly Biss Of The United States
This is the last 30 minutes of the hearing and transcribed By AI so there may be possible errors.
Monday, Nov 13, 2023
SPEAKERS
OBGYN Dr. Kimberly Biss, Robert Malone, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Mr. Wentz, Tom Renz
Robert Malone 00:00
Designed against the Kraken variant, which was already extinguished at the time that these boosters quote unquote were rolled out that were displaced by Eros. So we've got a situation in which we clearly have products that are not safe. You know what this this mantra of safe and effective is propaganda. That's right. It is
Marjorie Taylor Greene 00:21
talking about though, in my opinion, what we're seeing widely across America is violations of the First Amendment. And that's happening in the military. I also talked to parents and also individuals themselves, that are in nursing school or in residency. And if they refuse to boost or refuse the vaccine, they're not able to continue. And they're looking for ways to find exemptions so they can continue their studies. Many of these are women in nursing school, and now we're talking about what it can do to them and their future as far as fertility and having children are carrying safe pregnancies. But I believe what we are seeing from this regime is what I call it is an absolute violation of the First Amendment across the board
Robert Malone 01:10
more than just the First Amendment what you're seeing is weaponized medicine for a political objective.
Marjorie Taylor Greene 01:18
I think so too. I have a question for you, Dr. Malone, and your research and studies for mRNA vaccines. I'm sure you studied on animals and so forth, or they were tested on animals were the same same side effects seen years ago. And these tests and studies when it was being developed, are those same side effects, the same side effects were seen in people today. The
Robert Malone 01:45
reason why I dropped this and I used to work for the California Regional Primary Research Center as well as doing a lot of murine research mouse research, I say, if mice are at the pearly gates I'm never getting in. But we abandon the technology in my laboratory, because these products are highly inflammatory. And we we tested in developed and I have multiple other patents other than the ones that we talked about the nine RNA ones, on other catalytic lipid, lipids and formulations. And those we we could never overcome the toxicity in vivo, nor could Gilead that invested far more than we did and trying to develop an advanced this technology. Now, the caveat is that largely the group of Peter Colas at University of British Columbia did some fun made some fundamental advances in the nature of the structure of these chemicals, in their formulations credit to Peter and his colleagues, and asserted that this had addressed a lot of these toxicity problems and resulted in products that would have the behavior we talked about Mr. Massey, of injection of the deltoid and heart targeting just to the draining lymph nodes, clearly that that those to the extent that their word data, those data, were not predictive of humans. So the answer to your question is, in my experience, we could never overcome the toxicity. The toxicity was profound. It involved direct cellular damage and incredible inflammation associated with that. We don't see that degree of inflammation, acute inflammation with these products. So it does appear that colorless at all, together with the pseudo urethane or modified pseudo Euro Dean did find a way to suppress that adverse event. And now that's revealed all these other toxicities that we hadn't encountered before because basically, it was killing off the animals in short order, because of that toxicity. I have Yes, I'm what am I was absolutely known that these are toxic, these are toxic products, and they should have never been developed.
Robert Malone 04:04
In that's I abandoned the technology in the 90s because I thought that it was a dead end and we could never overcome the toxicity.
Marjorie Taylor Greene 04:13
Why would they continue?
Robert Malone 04:16
There was a so so this gets to something that Mr. Renz was saying. The CIA absolutely has his fingers all over this and the CIA decide. So the logic appears to be that there's an absolute need for a rapid response capability to mitigate the risk of the bad guys developing new pathogens and deploying them and the risk of emerging infectious disease from environmental disruption. You know, the climate, whatever the excuses okay? So, the logic is just like akin to the logic that we have 3.4 sent mortality. And therefore we have to do this all in a rush right? When in fact, the data show that it was about 0.0 to 5% case fatality rate across the board a total life. But in this case, the logic as someone who's worked intimately with the military biodefense industrial complex, in this space of vaccines and biodefense, there is a logic that we have a compelling unmet need to protect the public from emerging infectious disease and engineered pathogens, and that's going to require the ability. Let me give you Ms. Green a fact. It's currently projected that we will have vaccines for all bio warfare agents deployed up until the end of World War Two by 2050, known as a full century, okay, that's how long it takes to develop vaccines that's in that's, that's high risk. Okay. So in the face of that, there's the belief that we have to have something better. And I think we can all agree on that there is a need to have some way to protect the public from emerging infectious disease and, and engineered bio weapons, right. And so the thesis was that this technology would do the trick. Whereas monoclonal antibodies have failed, and largely, and adenovirus vectored vaccines have failed. And so it appears that in there in the enthusiasm of the moment, let's give them the benefit of the doubt, as opposed to asserting that this is a global depopulation weapon, specifically designed for that purpose, which is another theory. But let's give the DOD and bio defense to talk about that, that there was this need, okay. And this is what the Nobel was given for is that this was enabling for this rapid response. But in fact, what was really enabling is they throw the rulebook in the trash can, okay, that the the part of all of this discovery, the Soviets, I'm sorry, of football, the Russians, were able to feel the vaccine in a very similar timeline, more traditional technology by also throwing out the rules. So what really enabled this was circumventing the normal processes that FDA has for vaccine development. It wasn't the RNA platform itself, but that's how it's been sold to us. Okay, so that's the logic as I understand it. And, um, the story that we've all been told about this is yet more propaganda. It's another approved narrative that's been reinforced through every channel including through the Karolinska, but upon scrutiny, it doesn't withhold, it doesn't stand up to examination. What happened here was they bypassed all of the established FDA rules and guidance for this type of technology, in this rush to push some product out, under the thesis that 3.4% of every 103 point for every 100 people were going to be dead on the street, which was a lie. That's, that's how we got here. Have I answered your question? You have feel passionate about that? Yeah. And the problem with that
Mr. Wentz 08:37
is, those those safeguards were in place, those decades of experience, that they basically put a penny in the fuse box, they just shorted all that. But downstream of that, we've got the courts and stuff were set up to give immunity to the pharmaceutical companies or the government and
Robert Malone 08:59
the only way you can break that is if there is clear evidence of fraud. That's my understanding. I'm not an attorney. Now I'm crossing over into his space, but that's what I'm told. And, and so that's the importance potentially of this issue of DNA contamination because it appears to third parties to meet the criteria for evidence of fraud
Mr. Wentz 09:22
that they knew they may have known about the DNA and and
Robert Malone 09:26
they absolutely did know, they absolutely did know about the existence of SV40 sequences, not the whole virus. In the presence of this, it it appears that what happened was they had a manufacturing process process one in which they produced the DNA using PCR that would not require use of bacteria in this bacterial plasmid technology, the circles, okay. And they discovered near the end of the clinical trial, so they did most of the clinical trials based on Process One, and they discovered near the end of the clinical trials, they could not make enough stuff. They couldn't make the RNA. And so they had to suddenly switch. And it appears that what they did is they took research grade material off the shelf and repurposed it for this new manufacturing process, which was not the one used in the clinical trials. And that's that, and they rushed all this through. And they didn't take the time to engineer the manufacturing process. So they could extract the residual DNA to give them a pure RNA product. And there was, as was mentioned, by Senator Johnson, the appearance of willful blindness. So just to close
Mr. Wentz 10:44
the loop on that, and I know we've brought it up before, probably in a different context. What is the harm of having the extra DNA in there? And did they know about the potential
Robert Malone 10:55
harm? Okay, so this was part of I, I hope that the congresswoman will grant that my testimony which I'm not been able to give to you, because we've been busy talking about things will be entered into the record, but this is something that I address, explicitly. His historically, the related technology of DNA vaccination, which I also played a key role in which preceded this RNA vaccination has been under intense scrutiny through its entire lifecycle as a technology is still essentially failed, okay. But FDA required very rigorous assessment of the risks of DNA integration. What that means is a fragment of DNA goes into your genome. And when it does, so, it disrupts existing genes. And it can also if it has highly active regulatory sequences, it can turn genes on round in the area or turn them off around in the area where it integrates where it goes into your DNA. So this is the essence of Geno toxicity, damage to your chromosomes, whether they occur in your regular body cells, like skin cells, or muscle cells, or they occur in stem cells, like as in your bone marrow, or they occur in fetal cells in the developing fetus. Okay. So integration is genotoxicity. It damages your DNA, and DNA foreign DNA delivered into cells can cause this, the FDA, let me let me cite their specific response in responding to questions from press on this risk. The claim that the FDA is required to take off any of the authorized or approved mRNA COVID-19 vaccines off the market is false. With over a billion doses of the mRNA vaccines administered no safety concerns related to the sequence of or amount of residual DNA have been identified. With regard to the FDA approved mRNA vaccines available scientific evidence supports the conclusion that they're safe and effective. That's the official FDA position. Okay. Is it so could
Mr. Wentz 13:15
it be possible the FDA thought that and they were being misled by the manufacturer, um, the
Robert Malone 13:21
rules are, that you don't draw a conclusion without data. Okay. And normally, historically, one has to perform rigorous genotoxicity and insertional mutagenesis assays, we now have a the most highly effective, highly active non viral delivery system in the history of man. And we now know that that's delivering not just RNA, but also DNA fragments, DNA fragments are more common genic than circular DNA, which is what's used in the DNA vaccines. Okay, so more risk, higher active material, and yet the FDA did not require because this is the tension, okay, that the way it works with pharma is because of US law. It's different than the European Medicines Agency. But the law that you guys have put in place is basically says that the FDA cannot tell pharma what it has to do. Pharma has to propose what it's going to do to demonstrate safety, effectiveness, purity, potency, blah, blah, blah, okay. And then the FDA can concur or disagree. And if they disagree, they can hold up further development until pharma comes up with a better plan. That's how the the game is played here in the States. Okay. And so, pharma, FDA historically has drafted these guidelines that that farmer can choose to follow or not, but if they don't follow them, then it's going to be harder to get the thing through. They're going to have to say why not. Okay, so normal Li, they require genotoxicity and integration tests for this type of technology and always have in the past. In this case, they basically just ignored that. Okay, so normally there's this tension between the regulator in the pharmaceutical industry in which you approximate something that that protects the interests of the public through this tension, right, but here in this case, what you had was in the Pfizer documents that have been revealed and Nomi, Wolf is an analyze, they can find evidence of a Pfizer saying, Well, we think we're not going to do those studies. And the FDA is basically saying, okay, not a problem. Functionally. Okay. So, the FDA does not have the data to support this claim that they're making. Okay. And normally, if I was the sponsor, the developer, and I made this claim, FDA would hammer me for false advertising. Okay. But here the FDA is making this with absolutely no data to support it. Now, here's the kicker, okay. Maderna has a patent on the use of RNA for vaccines, it happens to be patent number 20 1902 4031781. And in that, Madonna explicitly acknowledges that that RNA is superior to DNA for vaccine purposes, because problems including the possibility of insertional mutagenesis, which could lead to the activation of oncogenes or the integration of tumor suppressor genes. Okay, so, FDA says they're not aware of any concerns, but Maderna in its own patent, lays out exactly the same concerns that exist about DNA and insertional, mutagenesis and Gene and, and genotoxicity. Okay, so Maderna knows it was a DNA, a contaminant, it is a contaminant, it is probably it is left in because the way they make it and process to is they purify circular DNA from bacteria. They make the RNA RNA makes DNA, I'm sorry, DNA makes RNA, RNA makes protein, okay, so they use DNA to make the RNA, and then they degrade the DNA. And then they have to purify that graded DNA away from the RNA. And the process that they're using is apparently not very good. And so they still in this was just revealed, it was just detected because some scientists, both in the US and in Canada, managed to get their hands on some unopened vials with clear chain of custody, sample those vials, and these are people who their business is to do deep sequencing on samples and rebuild information about whatever DNA they find on that. So they were just doing the technology that they know how to do in their business that they're experts in. And they found lo and behold, that there were these large numbers of DNA fragments in this RNA preparation. And they could apply standard tools that they have to reconstruct what those circular plasmid DNA is look like. Okay, none of this was disclosed to the public. And it appears that the documentation is that there are certain sequences present that are are normally not allowed in anything that's going to go into humans, not the least of which is an antibiotic resistance gene. Okay. So this is going these these are going into our bodies, including an antibiotic resistance gene for Canna myosin or Neo myosin. Normally, you're not allowed to do that if it's up DNA engineered for human use, okay. And they include these sequences from simian virus 40, not the whole virus, but highly active promoter sequences, which is exactly the thing that the FDA in their older regulations said must be avoided, because it confers even more risk for insertional mutagenesis. And what appears is that Pfizer when they provided these documents to the FDA, and to the EMA, and to Health Canada. They took these standard plasmid maps that are generated through programs that we all have access to, and they deleted the little notation that said there's SP 40 sequences in there. And the FDA, apparently, out of I can only think in calm Prince didn't take the raw DNA sequences, reconstruct those plasmid maps and look at them themselves. They just took for granted what Pfizer had given them. And now this is all come out because of these researchers that did functionally something akin to the lot release testing. That is not happening.
Mr. Wentz 20:20
So there was probably somebody at Pfizer who knew they were what they were doing. Absolutely.
Robert Malone 20:24
Okay. And Maderna.
Mr. Wentz 20:29
And then the what are the specific downstream? You know, diseases or, or bad outcomes that come from having the
Robert Malone 20:42
anything, anything that is associated with DNA damage, for instance, cancer, birth defects in cancer being the notable ones. Okay. Very disturbing. It is. It is shocking to me that we have communication from the FDA that is stonewalling. They're, they're asserting there's, there's no, there's nothing to worry about here. And yet we have in Madonna's own patents, the acknowledgement of something that those of us that have been in the field for 30 years, like I have, have known as a fundamental property of these types of DNA fragments,
Marjorie Taylor Greene 21:23
it's to admit they know about it is it would be assuming liability, right, Mr. Rents, I would think if they admit that they knew, and then the government mandated vaccines on the population, telling them that they're going to lose their job, if they don't take the vaccine, they get kicked out of the military, they can't go to college, they can't go to school. They can't fly airplanes, they can't go to work. They can't feed their families, if they admit to knowing all
Robert Malone 21:51
these cog have now admitted. So what happened was that the press approached these regulatory agencies
Robert Malone 21:58
and said, Here's the data. The data are so overwhelming, that they what they came back with remarkably fast, as opposed to the kind of stuff that you guys get, they came back with responses to trial site news and Epoch Times, almost within days, acknowledging that these contaminations are occurring. And now all we're left with is arguing about whether or not those contamination levels are acceptable or not. But they have no data to define what's an acceptable level. And so now we're arguing about whether or not it's contamination or adulteration, and within some iteration, it crosses the Rubicon, in terms of the Code of Federal Regulations, this is what you guys get the FDA to do, is to prevent adulteration,
Marjorie Taylor Greene 22:49
rather than the problem here in Washington. A lot of our colleagues get donations from big pharma, and they, I'd say, vote and make the budget that sounds that FDA problem in Washington,
Marjorie Taylor Greene 23:03
Mr. Wentz.
Mr. Wentz 23:07
Expect your colleagues, they're going to have to decide whether the health and safety of the American people is more important than the paychecks that they're getting from big pharma and the paid lobbyists. This is one of the most egregious and outrageous things I've ever seen. And I don't get the same benefit of the doubt that doctrine alone goes. I think that there's this is stuff that people are well aware of, I think they were aware all the way through those are revolving door between the FDA and Big Pharma. You just shut your mouth. So you'll get your paycheck from big pharma after you leave, or vice versa. This is absolutely, absolutely the reason that we had the Nuremberg Code informed consent, preventing medical experimentation, you know, I mean, they've admitted, you have different cap colors, to designate different lots that have different dosages, in these vaccines, why are they putting different dosages? If they know what they're doing? Why do they got to tinker with it? They didn't know what they were doing. They were experimenting. This is the largest experiment on the human population in history. And it was entirely done without informed consent. There is no question what's occurring here. are the only people denying this are the cooks were implicated.
Marjorie Taylor Greene 24:17
Right. I think the data that's needed is the numbers ticking across the screen like we saw COVID cases and covered deaths on TV every single day. We should have data of heart attacks and myocarditis and miscarriages and so forth. Dr. Bras, I wanted to follow up some questions with you, particularly about women that are breastfeeding their babies that are vaccinated. Do you know of any side effects are seen in their in their babies that they're breastfeeding that may be transmitted through breast milk? Have there any been any studies on that?
OBGYN Dr. Biss 24:50
Personally, I don't have any data on my patient population. But I know in the spring of this year, there was a huge number of babies Babies admitted. It might have been Scotland it was somewhere over in the UK with myocarditis newborns that were breastfeeding. Have
Marjorie Taylor Greene 25:07
you ever heard of babies with myocarditis? No,
OBGYN Dr. Biss 25:10
but I'm sure it's normal, like heart attacks and pediatric age patients is apparently normal. So
Marjorie Taylor Greene 25:19
Oh, I know. I'm sorry. I was just stunned. I've never heard of a baby with myocarditis. Nor have I. And this is actually happening. The FDA authorized the use of Madonna and Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccines for Children six months and up on June 15 2022, followed by CDC recommendation on June 18, of 2022. At what age and I'll go with any of y'all At what age is it suitable for children to be vaccinated for COVID? Dr. busty,
OBGYN Dr. Biss 25:51
I don't feel that anybody should get these vaccines because they're not safe and effective. They don't do as promised, they're causing harm. But the infection fatality rate in somebody's the age zero meaning birth to 19 years of age is point 00 3%, which is three and a million children will die if they get a COVID infection. So why are we giving them a vaccine for this?
Marjorie Taylor Greene 26:20
I completely agree. It's shocking. Dr. Malone, do you see any any reason for children to receive these vaccines?
Robert Malone 26:29
So it's been a position of myself and the physicians that I'm affiliated with position Health Associates in global COVID summit as of about two years ago, that we believe that these products are neither safe nor effective and should be withdrawn across the board, even for the elderly? We do have the doctor focused on your questions would have mentioned that the FDA is now acknowledging that seizures are a side of acting known side effect that raises above the threshold level associated with the product in the very young. They also have acknowledged without consequence, that the recommendations are dosing I think the magenta product were quite a bit higher than what they should have been for the pediatric population. In this just seems to be blithely dismissed as nothing. There. She mentioned this case fatality rate is extremely low. And she didn't mention that of those very few children that die on in one study that attempted to identify those children, there were none that were identified that didn't have major pre existing conditions. So these are not healthy children. That adverse event or death cases we tolerate that she's talking about. These are children that already were on death's door for mother causes in this gets to another one of the core lies that we've had a million dead from COVID in the United States, that is false data. The case fatality rate in Sweden, where they did not impose all of these non pharmaceutical and pharmaceutical interventions is point two 3% and what that equates to is we lost, perhaps at most something in the range of 171,000 Americans to COVID. Other studies have estimated rigorous studies have estimated that we had in the range if you take the effects of the suppression of early treatment, non pharmaceutical interventions like the lockdowns, etc, plus the vaccines we have in excess of 500,000 deaths in the United States at a minimum attributed to these top down management measures imposed by the government. We have we have fallen the word that the data increasingly are demonstrating that we have far more death just not in the pediatric cohort. But across the board, American citizens as a consequence of these authoritarian measures that have been imposed in a top down fashion compared to those that can actually be attributed to the virus as opposed to people that have died with the virus based on the PCR test. And the financial incentives that we produce financial incentives that we put in place for over reporting. It's fascinating on on that topic. If you look at the report of of deaths in the United States track those Data what you find is when those financial incentives expired, suddenly, within days, the event rate of death in the United States plummeted, illustrating again that we were incentivizing over the reporting of death with COVID as death from COVID. So, really quick to that point. Ernest Ramirez 16 year old son, Ernesto. Yeah, I've met Ernest as well, in Kentucky it is at a summit is his son died five days after receiving the Pfizer vaccine. And then he was contacted by FEMA, who said that they will pay for his son's burial if he would claim that his son had died of COVID. It's disgusting.
OBGYN Dr. Biss 30:50
I wanted to get back to the child deaths in our country, Marty Makary out of Johns Hopkins demonstrated in the year 2020, that we had deaths in the pediatric population was somewhere in the three hundreds. But when you drill it down, most of them had stage four leukemias, they were already going to pass away. There was not one child that died simply because they had COVID. In 2020, we have that there is no reason why they needed to be vaccinated.
Marjorie Taylor Greene 31:19
Thank you. This is in my opinion, the worst thing that's ever happened to our country in my lifetime in the world, and the government's role cannot be denied. And I share all your sentiment as well as most Americans that are outraged and angered and continue to be angered over the fact that no one has ever been held accountable. And it continues today. These vaccines are still mandated. Thank you, Doctor this doctor Morning, Mr. Reynolds, thank you so much. Thank you, Congressman Massey, that we had other members that were here today, that due to different scheduling, they couldn't stay. They very much wanted to talk to you. And they apologized that they had believed so this concludes our hearing, and we will be having more of this hearings for anyone that's watching this. I plan to continue this I know Congressman Massey will will be involved in so many other members. I think it will grow and that is my intention to push this issue here in Congress where it's it's continued to be silence pushed aside and nobody wants to talk about it. So thank you so much.
Malone isn't wishy washy. IMO-----and based on his past history in the belly of the beast for 30 years (NIH, HHS, BARDA, WHO, DOD) sucking up lots of grant money for himself and others he is paid, controlled opposition. You don't swim in the swamp for as long as he has without being part of the swamp.
So, after knowing all that, Malone still took the jabs? Doesn't add up, does it?