( -0954) Dr. Peter McCullough, RFK Jr & the Newborn-Jabs-Cause-Autism CDC Storm - & Naomi Wolf & Sam Antar on How Non-Profits Launder Campaign Financing

( -0954) Dr. McCullough, RFK Jr and the Jabs-Cause-Autism CDC Storm, & Naomi Wolf & Sam Antar on How the Left Launders Campaign Finances.

Includes an excerpt from this Robert Scott Bell channel's show (please support him and follow him): https://rumble.com/c/AskRSB?e9s=src_v1_cbl

Autism, CDC, chaos, ousting, resignations, firing, Susan Monarez, Demetre Daskalakis, Dr. Peter McCullough, campaign, finance, Mamdani, AOC, director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, fraud, mRNA, Covid-19, vaccines, EUA, childhood schedule, non-profit, tax evasion, money laundering, white collar, offshore

TRANSCRIPTION:

Premeditated bio-weapon release.
He has killed all U.S. funding to Bill Gates's global vaccine administration.
They are dismantling the globalist system.
It is real.
In 1978, the biggest epidemiological study in history was done in Wisconsin.
They looked at 900,000 children and they were looking for autism.
They knew what it looked like.
They were very, very precise about it.
They found an incident rate of 0.7, in other words, less than one per every 10,000 children.
Today, our most recent numbers are one every 31 kids.
It's probably actually much worse than that because California,
which has the best collection system, is reporting one out of every 19 children,
now American children, as odds as one in every 12.5 boys.
I was going from less than one in 10,000 in 1970 to one in 12.5 boys.
Think of those numbers as, so there has to be something artificially causing this,
meaning a drug or something.
And the last one of these was in 2019 October.
It was hosted by Bill Gates, my fellow Jane, and Mike A. Farhains.
And interestingly by George Gayle, who is the head of the Chinese CDC in New York City.
And any of you, I'm sure a lot of you, have gone and looked at this on YouTube, it's called Event 201.
And the fourth simulation that day, the last one, is all about how do you use the pandemic
as a pretext for planning down to Deloitte's first button, a bridge to the freedom of speech.
And particularly, how do you stop people from talking about allowances as a source of these virus.
Well this is in October 2019. Nobody, not a person at that time, never knew the government.
We now know that COVID was almost certainly circulating by mid-September.
On September 12, the Chinese government took down the tour of the lab,
all the general ways which is an iron-woods expert from the People's Army,
to run the lab and remove all the data function studies from their public-case websites
and all the genomic sequences from all the viruses.
The Chinese government clearly knew that the virus was circulating by September, so months later you have this.
That same week, Bill Gates, who was overseeing this simulation,
made a point in which one believed he shared a BioNTech vaccine, which later became a Pfizer vaccine.
He then sold that, almost all that stock, 87%.
Two years later, as a $242 million profit.
And a week after that, he announced the vaccine didn't work.
He was a guy who was on TV with his many, and Peter Holt has looked at $52 million from Gates,
for his institution, by the pair of them pumping up the stock for two years,
and then dumping it a week before he goes on TV and says, "Oh, it didn't work after all."
Bobby, autism, if I could just, and I don't want to go too long because we have a lot of people,
but the autism is such a tremendous horror show, what's happening in our country, and some other countries, but mostly our country.
How are you doing on that?
We are doing very well. We will have announcements as promised in September.
We're finding interventions, certain interventions now that are clearly, almost certainly causing autism.
And we're going to be able to address those in September.
It's such a big day. I'm looking forward to that day because there's something wrong when you see the kind of numbers that you have today versus 20 years ago.
And those numbers, what are those numbers, Bob?
In 1978, the biggest epidemiological study in history was done in Wisconsin.
They looked at 900,000 children and they were looking for autism. They knew what it looked like.
And they were very, very precise about it. And they found an incident rate of 0.7, in other words, less than one for every 10,000 children.
Today, our most recent numbers are one in every 31 kids. It's probably actually much worse than that because California,
which has the best collection system, is reporting one out of every 19 children, now American children, has autism, one in every 12.5 boys.
So it's gone from less than one in 10,000 in 1970 to one in 12.5 boys.
Think of those numbers. So there has to be something artificially causing this, meaning a drug or something.
And I know you're looking very strongly at different things and I hope you can come out with that as soon as possible.
So one in 10,000 and now it's one in 31 or 34 or 12 if it's a boy. Can you imagine that? One in 12. That's for a boy.
It's not even believable that that could be. And that was one in 10,000 not so long ago.
I've been hearing these numbers and they get worse and worse every year. There's got to be something.
I think there's nothing, including favored nations and everything else, there's nothing that can be.
If you can find out the reason that that's happening, and I know we're going to do some things.
I think we maybe know the reason and I look forward to that press conference to be with you on that press conference.
That's going to be a great thing. Thank you, Bob. You've done a great job.
Some med nursing schools still requiring COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy moving against that.
But look at this clip. R.F.K. Jr. explains how Bill Gates had the foresight to buy over a million shares in BioNTech, Moderna,
before COVID happened. The same week Bill Gates, who was overseeing Event 201, getting ready to release it situation,
bought the shares. And then what he did after that with his billions in profit.
So, and Kennedy's looking at wireless radiation, slow childhood development. Oh, there he's, you know, oh, well, where's the indictments?
That's coming. But they're banning it all and they're exposing it publicly. Used to you had to be on underground shortwave to know this stuff.
OK, I see how far we've come. Give me an analogy. Here I get on the air in 1994.
This is a dead reckoning. And let's say Public Awakening was about that. You can't even see it on the line.
And over the years it's done this and now it's done that.
So we're right here. And the curve is about 500 feet up in the air.
So I know it's fun on social media, people in little silos to bitch and complain and say we're all screwed and it's dumb and everything else.
You're wrong. We've not moved the needle. We have rammed the needle. It is.
It's spinning. Do you think it was a clock with 12 hours? So we're going to move it. We were so far behind.
We were millions of years behind in tyranny. Now we're getting millions of years ahead and about to go past the enemy.
We're moving the needle so fast it's like. So thank you, Jesus.
But yeah, look at the look at the VAERS reports and that's even a whitewash government report.
Look when the shot starts. That was their big gamble. That was their big depopulation. They thought we'd buy it.
It blew up in their face. So we keep hammering it, having scientists on, not letting it die. It gets stronger. They get weaker.
It's a marathon. But I'm not communicating out through that. I'm communicating to Trump.
You got to know how the ballgame works, folks. This is Kennedy on the cause and roots and history in the report on autism.
And the last one of these was in 2020 or 2019 October.
And it was hosted by Bill Gates, my fellow Jean and by April Hanks.
And interestingly by George Gayo, who is the head of the Chinese CDC in New York City.
And I'm sure a lot of you have gone and looked at this on YouTube. It's called Event 201.
And the fourth simulation that day, the last one, is all about how do you use the pandemic as a pretext for planning down to Deloitte's first bomb.
A bridge to the stream of speech and particularly how do you stop people from talking about alchemy as a source of these virus.
Well, this is in October 2019. Nobody on Austin at that time ever knew who was going to be out.
We all know that COVID was almost certainly circulating by mid-September.
On September 12th, the Chinese government took down the tour of the Wuhan lab.
All the general ways to reject the virus experts from the people's army to run the lab and remove all the data function studies from their public-based websites and all the genetic sequences from all the viruses.
The Chinese government clearly knew that the virus was circulating by September.
So months later, you have this, that same week, Bill Gates, who has overseen this simulation, made a $1.1 billion shares of BioNTech vaccine, which later became the Pfizer vaccine.
He then sold that, almost sold that stock, 87%.
Two years later, that was a $242 million profit.
And a week after that, the bucket announced the vaccine didn't work.
The $10 million skater, as he was the guy who was RGD with his minion, Peter Holt, has looked at $52 million from Gates for his institution.
By the pair of then, pumping up the stock for two years, and then dumping it a week before he goes on TV and says, "Oh, it didn't work after all."
This is what we voted for.
Said, it's not only illegal for a 501(c)(3) to engage in direct political advocacy. It's there's so many like major important guardrails around that because it's so illegal.
And you can think for yourself about why it's so illegal, right?
You'd have people donating to charity, getting a tax deduction, but then the money going right to people running for office who then would enact policies that would help the donors.
It would just create a circle of corruption.
So our laws, not just IRS laws, but FEC laws, Federal Election Commission laws, absolutely prevent C3s and C4s from coordinating around, certainly around supporting political candidates.
So let me ask you this, and I know this because many reasons, but as a former political consultant to the Clinton campaign and to Al Gore, I remember how carefully the lawyers sat in the room with the campaign, which is political activity, and made sure that C4s had no coordination with us.
Well, what I found was that there was coordination.
I found, for instance, they would claim on their tax returns that they were related entities.
The auditors would find more additional information and would consolidate them, treat them as one entity because substance over form.
And more than that, even when they didn't, when they said they weren't related entities, I'll give you an example because we haven't gone through the process, but I'll give you this example.
Toys has a 501(c)(3) and a 501(c)(4). They claim that the 501(c)(4) is not related to the 501(c)(3).
When you look at the officers, the people that are working for them, the resources that they're sharing, they're related.
It's like John McCain once said, "I know pornography when I see it."
Yes. Yes. Well, let me do this because I know that you're so highly trained that you might get into a lot of detail.
That's right.
And I want to just like spell out this circle for our lay audience who are not CPAs and maybe totally unfamiliar.
And then we'll go back to you telling me if this is correct.
So basically, look at this circle, guys. I don't know if you can see my cursor, but it starts with this Soros funding source, right, which is one of the biggest nonprofits in America, if not the world.
It's a $4.2 billion nonprofit.
Then some of it goes to OSI, which as a former Democrat, I'll tell you the Open Society Institute funds everything.
Again, a nonprofit foundation to promote open society nonprofit. You can see there if you really look, it says C3.
Yeah, we got this.
Okay.
I should say this to you.
There's much more lines on that chart.
I just did it as of what I knew at the time.
Yeah. Yeah. And so that goes to like the Tide Center and the Tide Foundation.
But you get into the pink ones and money's flowing to them when it shouldn't. And that's advocacy.
That's a C4, right? Yeah, that's correct.
And the Working Families Organization is C4.
And then you go up here and money's going directly to Open Society Action Fund, fund for policy reform, C4, C4.
They can take out ads saying homelessness is an issue, health care is an issue that don't say vote for this candidate, but help the candidate.
And then you've got more C4 activity there.
And then what you've pointed out in addition to this illegal IRS violating, you know, laundering, you're quite right, of C3 money into C4s is that they are supposed to be totally separate.
But you're pointing out they have the same offices and this took such forensic accounting on your part, the same staff, you know, the same addresses.
And that's what you mean by form over function, right?
All those years of doing for train me good.
Let me just say this to you. I'll give you one instance.
Okay, there's a company called Make the Road, not a company, nonprofit, 501 C3.
They received 16 million dollars of government money in 2023.
We're working off 2023 numbers because 2024 is not yet available.
They received 16 million dollars in government money.
It's about 51 percent of their revenues, right?
But you look at the you look at whatever they're sending one hundred and sixty thousand dollars to their own 501 C4, which shares the same personnel.
Unbelievable. Totally illegal.
You know, exactly. That's why I said, you know, something screw this stuff, just not just blog about it.
I filed a whistleblower submission to the IRS and five more submissions.
As you should. Now, let's get to the green ones.
Those are super PACs. So there's those can engage in direct political activity.
Right. And so look at those green arrows pointing right to the Mom Donnie campaign.
New Yorkers for lower costs. It's a super PAC.
Stop. What is this? Oh, the Working Families Party National IE Committee is a PAC PAC.
Working Families Party building account, Working Families Party National PAC.
By the way, Working Families Party is literally communist.
And then that money flows to the Mom Donnie campaign.
That's the target. So that's why you get, you know, this full blown campaign character we've never heard of is suddenly so famous overnight
because millions went illegally through this money laundering to his campaign.
Let me just add one more thing and I promise I will pause.
That's not the end of the circle.
What happens is Sam Antares just indicated is that same Mom Donnie gets elected then or, you know, these other people are supported, get elected.
They then, as you pointed out, send our government money back into the NGO ecosystem to get laundered again in the same circle.
And this is the part I really want you to explain.
They also park the money in an offshore tax deductible instrument, which could also include foreign money.
Right, Sam? That's right.
Some of the Soros entities have that.
So what you have here is that these entities, which I believe should not be tax exempt.
That's why I reported them to the IRS to take away their tax exempt size because they're not operating as tax exempt entities.
They also accrue loads of interest income that no income tax is being paid on.
So we have actually two avenues of I would say potential fraud.
I told the IRS something a little bit more direct, but for public consumption potential fraud.
All right.
So the two avenues of potential fraud are the money going illegally from C3s to C4s and then to PACs, number one.
And number two, the money being parked in these opaque offshore instruments.
By entities that should not even be non taxable.
OK. Now, let me ask you this.
If those opaque offshore instruments, and by the way, do you know where they are?
Like in the Bahamas or in like where are they?
I haven't looked deeply into it because I'm still deeply into adding more lines to that chart that you have over there.
But I will tell you this.
One of the things that I found recently that I didn't have at the time that I reported,
I see also money going back from some of these organizations.
In other words, it's kind of like, you know, crazy Eddie's had 15 stores, right?
And each store was a separate corporation, right?
It was all consolidated and money would go back and forth as each account needed it.
OK. That means you're acting in concert.
That means you are in substance one entity.
What I'm finding is the same behavior amongst these people.
I haven't come out with it yet because I want to vet the truth.
I don't like everything that I put in my blog goes to the original documents.
But now I'm seeing this kind of behavior.
I say, what the hell is going on here?
This is not this is not separate entities.
This is a simple. Sorry.
Like, you know, you know, one point five million goes out from one entity to the other.
And then the exact same amount goes back.
Is that what you're saying? Yes, that is correct.
What would be the purpose of something like that?
I'll give you two examples of reverse flows that I haven't published yet.
But you're going to be the first. OK.
Working's family organization that had received money from tides gives back 225 million dollars to its 501 C4.
OK, 501 C4, the 501 C4. Still crazy.
And then they give money back to a 501 C3, a hundred thousand dollars.
What the hell is it's kind of like they're doing like.
Any chain of retail stores does.
It's really all one pocket.
Doesn't matter if it's in different corporations.
It's all consolidated.
It's considered as one entity.
Wow. So the nonprofit might have just needed an extra hundred thousand dollars.
And they and instead of going out and raising it, they just got a check.
It's like a crazy any store that's underperforming.
It needs money. So we're going to move money from this store to that stores corporation.
Would the non would the working families party entity get a tax deduction by sending the money?
No, they're not getting a tax deduction.
But when you go to the source that's getting these tax deductions, right, open it people on top.
You could see that this whole thing is just an orchestrated screen scheme.
I call it grassroots laundering.
Right. It is. It is definitely grassroots laundry.
And just to give people a contrasting example, conservatives and can't do this.
Not that, you know, as you rightly noted, I'm not even a conservative.
I'm just an independent who can't stand the Democratic Party anymore.
But I'm a John Fetterman, Bill Moore, Democrat.
OK, fair. That's a cool new designation.
Oh, that's really that makes sense.
But just for the sake of like a contrast, there's very strict policing by the IRS of churches, right,
which are C3s so that they won't engage.
They can't engage in political advocacy.
And they're threatened with losing their tax deductible status if they say vote for President Trump or even vote pro life.
Right. They have to be so careful.
But this, what you just shown, shows that on the Dem side, there's no such policing.
They're just wallowing in one gigantic laundered money pit.
Isn't that correct? That's correct. That's what I see.
When I connect all of the dots, when I add more arrows to that shot, which I hope to have a completely messed up job because there's so many arrows all over the place.
Nobody there's no way to do it in a clean way. Right.
Well, but that tells the whole story, right. It's intermingled like a giant ball of yarn.
Not everything. A lot of it is coming.
A lot of it is coming.
And the other thing just stepping back sociologically that you get from a structure like this is you get rich people who are oriented a certain way politically,
constantly getting their wealth protected through tax deductible donations that then illegally elect their guy or their girl to further protect their wealth and their interests and further make sure that no one else can ever unseat the elite that they're creating.
Right. Correct.
It's kind of like this. I'm the CFO of crazy 80 back in the days and I'm supporting this anti-fraud crusader because it makes me look like I'm anti-fraud, but I'm really pro-fraud.
It's kind of like that's why they're supporting the progressive candidates.
It looks like they're these candidates really hate billionaires, but where are they getting their bread and butter from?
Right.
Wow. So let's talk about these offshore instruments, which are the other the second way you said there's a fraud being committed.
And it's so visible to me knowing like I'm in this space.
Right. We create political advertising and I'm you know, I can't take money from nonprofits.
And I've told people they're like, oh, we're a nonprofit.
Take, you know, this big for us amount of money and help us get, you know, get the vote out.
I'm like, I can't do that. That's illegal.
I can't coordinate with you. That's correct.
They do it. Yeah.
And I say talk to your lawyers.
You can't do that. You have to be very careful.
But if I were behaving like this, I would be like, sure.
Write me a check. I'll, you know, when I add more arrows to that shot, which I hope to have a completely messed up job because there's so many arrows all over the place.
Nobody there's no way to do it in a clean way. Right.
You have. Well, but that tells the whole story.
Right. It's intermingled like a giant ball of everything.
Not everything. A lot of it is coming.
A lot of it is coming.
And the other thing just stepping back sociologically that you get from a structure like this is you get rich people who are oriented a certain way politically constantly getting their wealth protected through tax deductible donations that then illegally elect their guy or their girl to further protect their wealth.
And their interests and further make sure that no one else can ever unseat the elite that they're creating. Right.
Correct.
It's kind of like this. I'm the CFO of crazy at ease back in the days, and I'm supporting this anti-fraud crusader because it makes me look like I'm anti fraud, but I'm really pro for it.
It's kind of like that's why they're supporting the progressive candidates.
It looks like they're the these candidates really hate billionaires.
But where are they getting their bread and butter from? Right.
Wow.
So let's talk about these offshore instruments, which are the other the second way you said there's a fraud being committed and it's so visible to me knowing like that I'm in this space right we create political advertising and I'm, you know, I can't take money from nonprofits and I've told people.
They're like, Oh, we're a nonprofit take, you know, this big for us amount of money and help us get you know get the vote out and I'm like, I can't do that. That's illegal. I can't coordinate with you.
That's great.
They do it. Yeah. And I say talk to your lawyers, you can't do that you have to be very careful. But if I were behaving like this, I would be like, Sure, write me a check all, you know, illegally, you know, do do something that you're not supposed to do.
But moving to this offshore instrument, which is the second way fraud is being committed, as you say, isn't it possible for China or, you know, Dubai or North Korea to put money in there to then feed into this machine that changes our elections.
Yes, it is possible, but I have not studied it yet. And I just like to stay with the stuff that I absolutely know. I have seen it in some of the filings you are describing, but I haven't looked deeply enough into it to master the subject to discuss more of it.
In theory, in theory, could foreign money go in into that offshore entity.
Yes.
Well, and now thinking about a nonprofit like nothing prevents foreign people from writing big checks to nonprofits, right?
Yeah, I don't think they're allowed to I'm not sure what the exact rule is. But there's ways to learn the money into a nonprofit, you can give it to an American. It doesn't matter. You can. And a foreigner can pierce the system very, very easily.
Well, I guess what I'm getting at there and thank you for, you know, that information is that it's there are many forms of scrutiny around packs and campaigns, right?
The money is accounted for, it's looked at, it's you have to, you know, you have to you have to take care of where it goes back when you're done with your campaign, whether you've won or lost. But there are far fewer similar kinds of ways of scrutinizing and controlling who contributes to nonprofits.
So this is a very good way this machine you've set up here that you've traced for money of all kinds, you know, good money and bad money and nefarious money and, you know, maybe foreign money, maybe domestic money to flow into nonprofits, which seems so benign and kosher.
But then from there, two people on the ground getting out the vote, right. And getting these lightweight. They're all the same, right, like telegenic brown people. I'm not saying that in a racist way, but it is a racist construct that, oh, let's, you know, mint an AOC, let's mint an, you know,
remember from Seinfeld, who are these people? How did they get there? How did the AOCs and Mamdani's of the world? Paper thin bios, exactly. And very little grassroots support. But Mamdani's campaign said, we have 50,000 volunteers knocking on doors, then they changed that to 20,000. Well, again, I'm a former, you know, political operative. That's a lot of volunteers. You can't.
Where did they come from? Where did they come from? And if they're being funded in this way, then maybe someone's paying them, right? Like another.
Somebody I forgot his name. He was actually mentioned by Trump, not that I like Trump. We call that that he's found that a lot of these volunteers or people that do these protests are being paid by some group. Some foreign group. Yeah, well, my husband.
I'm going to call you closely. Go ahead. Yeah, no, no. A number of reporters have looked into this and it's true. My husband, Brian O'Shea is an investigative PI, basically, after his life in the intelligence community. He's found the money flow exactly from one entity, much like what you found.
The Arabella project to all of these packs and all of these seafoors can heard of that, but I haven't looked at just this word right now to me. Right. Right. Anyway, it's just a very similar model that from what you have sketched out here.
So now now talk from a CPA's point of view, unless there's anything else we haven't like addressed with this schematic, which I think is going to go down in history. What what people can commit crimes, but the feds are stupid. They don't determine it. That happens to how could something this big not have been investigated.
Well, here's what the problem is. Most people and a lot of Ford investigates. I call them headline lazy. They look at the title and they think you see these on the talking heads on TV all the time.
And they think they know everything. That's not the way he goes. What I did was I worked from the mom Danny campaign backwards. I pulled about 20 different tax returns of associated entities, and I cross check everything against each other.
We once said they donated because they don't close their donors. But I do know that one said it donated to this on this schedule. All right. And I put everything together. Now, of course, you're trying to put together 1000 pieces. You may have typos on 405. That's going to happen. That's normal, because these things progresses. Time goes on. You change the way that you're steering a little bit to the right, a little bit to the left, whatever. But that's the way that I did. I put the puzzles together.
Me. Why I did it because I like puzzles. I did. That was why I initially did it like the movie. The account. This is what I do. I've been doing it for 20 years until, of course, 2021. This is what I do. I did similar cases where actually one whistleblower rewards with the SEC outside analysts, no access to inside information, no access inside the company, just on pure analytical tools using their disclosures against them to find inconsistencies.
Incredible. So how much money would you estimate? Mom, Donnie's campaign has received improperly both literal money and in kind.
That I can't determine, but this is what I estimate as far as potential tax collections by the Internal Revenue Service. If they agree to what I'm saying, you're talking about 250 million dollars to 300 million dollars a year in taxes over at least the last four years.
Wow. 250 million. Per year. Over the last four years. I provided them with a calculation. Have you heard back from the IRS? The government only takes. They don't give.
All they can do is tell you the case is open. They won't tell you anything else, which is okay. There's privacy rules. I get it. I've worked with federal investigators before.
That's the way it goes. One way you can get an indication is when they call you and ask you a question. You can get some indication, but that doesn't happen that often.
Has Mom Donnie himself committed a crime by accepting these funds improperly?
That is up. That's up to the lawyers, but I do know this that he's an utter liar when he says, you know, everybody knows that Cuomo is not grassroots, that Adams is not grassroots. We all get that. He's the one that says he's grassroots. He's not grassroots. That shows that he's a liar. The fact that he's a liar means he can potentially commit a crime.
You have to stay healthy and well at times like this. You know that I often have suffered from mobility issues, and now I don't. Part of my lifestyle is Native Path collagen.
So Native Path's collagen formula is made with ingredients that are scientifically developed to increase bone mineral density, support tissue recovery, reduce wrinkles, enhance hair thickness, and strengthen nails. Who wouldn't want more collagen with all of these benefits?
So right now when you visit getnativepath.com/dailycloud, you can stock up on Native Path collagen for up to an incredible 45% off today plus free shipping. Every order comes with a 365-day money-back guarantee. You can try it risk-free today.
It is a single ingredient formula with no fillers, additives, or artificial sweeteners, and it's third-party tested for heavy metals, which makes sure that it's pure and safe. It's flavorless. You can add it to anything. I add it to my oatmeal. You can add it to coffee or smoothies.
Its formula makes it more bioavailable, meaning it's absorbed more easily and mixes without clumping. And the best part is Native Path is offering amazing bundle deals, three or six packs at a fraction of the price of other brands.
With over 4 million jars sold, 1 million happy customers, 8,000 five-star reviews, and a 365-day no-risk guarantee, Native Path is a trusted choice. And they offer an 800-number. You can ask any question. A real person is waiting to help.
You can join a private Facebook community. I love these people. Share recipes, success stories. So that's getnativepath.com/dailycloud and start your experience of transformation today.
His campaign finance person, I forgot her name, she threatened to sue me.
What? Are you serious?
I said go ahead and sue me. I don't give a shit. She has sued me.
That's newsworthy, Mr. Antar. When did she do that? Can you send me the --
It was a few weeks ago. I published it in my blog. I showed where she threatened to sue me for libel or whatever. Whatever the case is, you want to sue me, sue me. The facts are the facts.
Did she say you got something wrong or did she just threaten to sue you?
She made a statement, okay, and then I published based upon her statement. Then she retracted a statement and she says, well, you did was a lie. My retracted statement is the truth you're committing libel.
Did you have her initial --
I know, Judy.
Did you have her initial statement in writing?
Yes, it was posted on Twitter.
Unbelievable. What did she initially say? What did she contest?
She says she knows nothing of dark money coming into the Mamdani campaign.
Okay. Wow.
I'm surprised if there's anything going on in the casino, that famous thing in Casablanca.
Casablanca, exactly. Oh, my gosh. She threatened to sue you. Well, you must be over the target.
Listen, people have been wishing me dead and bad things since crazy age. I tell people, take a number, patiently wait on line, don't cut in front of the line to get what you wish for.
God forbid. Well, I'm kind of stunned. I mean, it would be the campaign finance director who's directly responsible for making sure the funds are kosher or not.
And she oversees the campaign finance director in the org chart, right? Or is it the campaign finance director?
They hired a company that does the compliance for them. So she's a compliance officer, I think, and treasurer, whatever the case is.
They don't have their own campaign finance director. That's interesting.
They hired a company, yes. She ran the Fetamine campaign.
She's not important enough for me to remember all the facts. She's just a little thing that's there.
But, you know, listen, let's put it this way. The FBI gave me a very hard time, as they should have given me a hard time.
They give me a lot of beatings. I'm not talking about physical beatings. I'm talking about mental beatings.
They drain me. But all of that made me into a better person. That's why I don't give a damn if they're going to threaten me. Oh, what are they going to do?
I can't retaliate against me. Everything I did is from public documents. Right. I don't have any inside information.
You want to retaliate? Retaliate. Right. Right. No, absolutely. My goodness.
Well, so right now, Scott Bessent, who's the acting commissioner of the IRS, as well as secretary of the Treasury, as I understand it, has all this information.
I also called on him to open an investigation. I think they should freeze the money flow to Mom Donnie until it's investigated.
Would that be possible with this? But you have to understand within the Department of Justice and the Department of Treasury, these are huge bureaucracies.
You know, I learned this from when I used to do whistleblower work. It's not the agency you give it to.
It's who's on which whose desk it falls on. I see there are lazy people. There are aggressive people.
There are politically motivated people. There are non politically motivated.
We don't know the chemistry of what's underneath the surface or the labels of what's going on within these agencies.
So it's difficult to predict what they're going to do.
In the Crazy Eddie case, OK, there was a prosecutor on the case that didn't believe a word I was saying after the Fred's flipped me.
And I had given them all this new information and showed them that other witnesses lied. So what did the FBI do?
They engineered his release from the case. They put in a different prosecutor. This kind of stuff happens.
We don't have a justice system. We have a legal system.
Right. Right. I understand. Sorry. If Scott Bessent heard from all of you to, you know, push him to open an investigation and freeze the funds while the investigation is underway,
then whatever desk it falls on, they'd have to do what the boss says. Right. So I guess they can do it aggressively or lazy.
You know, I see what you're saying. I just around the world like I have. Does the IRS have the power?
Because I'm looking at a train wreck coming toward New York. Right. In culminating in November, the IRS brought up a very good point.
The amount of criminal investigative division agents that are on duty now, right, that are in the IRS is less than they were when I was doing crime.
Crazy Eddie's and the economy is 10 times bigger. But I got to show you something. OK.
We've only got a minute or two. So I'm looking forward to it. This is very fascinating. See this mug over here.
Yeah. This is from the Internal Revenue Service and appreciation of my efforts. That's so cool.
Appreciation of my efforts to train their their staffs. This is amazing.
For whatever. That's very well. Congratulations. That's really quite moving.
I was going to say your life would make a fascinating movie, but it sounds like it's already been made into a fascinating movie. Is that right?
No, there's no movie about crazy. You know, the way Hollywood's a problem.
Yeah, whatever. Give me your life rights and three out of three years on the shelf so you can't go anywhere.
You know, it's a big assess pool and what we're describing today. It's Hollywood.
Totally. I do feel honored that you shared this incredible story with us.
And I do feel so honored that you took the time to walk us non CPAs through this very clear, like obvious set of gigantic frauds and crimes.
If you know, and you link the documents so people can check for themselves and see if what you're saying is true.
I am just going to end this by calling on Scott Bissett to open an investigation immediately with your most aggressive agents,
because this is not how our system is supposed to work. And there are many, many crimes represented in your chart.
Is there anything you want to say in conclusion?
There's no statute of limitations on civil liability relating to tax fraud.
Criminal liability. Yes, I think it's six years, but civil liability.
You can go back 20, 30 years because I've done cases like this.
This is happening now. Yes, like these crimes are happening.
What happened in 2015 can still be, they can still be assessed on.
Okay. So in other words, over a decade of criminality could be under the scrutiny of the IRS if they.
That is correct.
All right. Well, you've been warned New York and Brooklyn and Braun, Staten Island and Queens.
You've been warned and Sam and.
Tarzan the case.
And hopefully the IRS will be on the case soon.
Thank you so much for joining us. Where do people find you?
I want to thank you and I want to thank your audience.
You can ask me on the phone.
It's called white.
That would be an honor and you can be found at white collar fraud.com.
Right. You cut out for a minute.
So I want to make sure.
At Sam and.
Got sucked up into it.
And that's what we wrote in this book, vaccines, mythology, ideology and reality.
Oh, yeah. I'm hoping everybody picks this up.
It's another validation and I'm not looking for the stamp of validation.
But also, as we've talked about Peter, the idea that there's only one form of medicine and that's it is ridiculous.
Like the history of man and humanity and healing, so many diverse options that were wiped out during the 20th century due to the flex and report and economic interests, the point where they program doctors in a very narrow way to petrochemical patent medicines.
And although there's always going to be a place for that, the fact is the place shouldn't have been to replace everything else that preceded it.
Why not bring it all back together?
And we do have to discuss, as you do in your book, historically, accurately, that we're all likely to be programmed.
I was programmed in my young life being raised in a medical pharmaceutical family.
I knew none of this.
Well, yeah, I think the other competing issue is that, you know, MDs like myself were dealing with very, very sick patients.
And so, you know, my focus is on, you know, is the pacemaker working, the ICD, advanced heart failure, you know, surgeons are working with.
I just dealt with a patient who had a large kidney cancer surgically removed.
And, you know, we're dealing with such advanced things that something like vaccination, honestly, is in the background.
It's not critically evaluated.
And even when I look back on it now, I don't remember a single lecture on the vaccines.
And interestingly, I don't remember a single lecture in medical school on autism.
Nothing.
Yeah. And yet the definitive response or retort to parents, moms, particularly that would bring up these issues with their physicians is like, well, no, it absolutely doesn't.
We know it doesn't. We don't know what causes it, but we know that doesn't.
And I'm like, on what basis did you say that other than you were told to say that?
And again, this is the vulnerability.
And I think highly intelligent people sometimes are more vulnerable to programming than people that are just street smart.
Yeah. Programming are just, you know, they're so busy with other things.
It's not a point of critical evaluation.
It's kind of easier. Let's say if you're a surgeon, you're dealing with a kidney cancer.
You know, listen, if the story is vaccines don't cause autism, fine. You know, that's so far from present day practice for that doctor.
It's just one less thing to worry about.
But we bring this up in our book and we do a deep dive and really spend time on it.
And, you know, we have this chapter called Intrigue in the Federal Court of Claims.
Now, the 1986 Vaccine Injury Compensation Act removed liability for the vaccine manufacturers.
And then there was an explosion of vaccines where there were so many cases of autism that it built up.
Over five thousand cases. There were omnibus hearings in 2007 and 2008.
And so they had test cases. Well, the first test case was a girl named Hannah Polling.
And she was 19 months old. She's the daughter of a Johns Hopkins neurologist, Jonathan Polling.
Yes, she misses some vaccines. So she gets a big bundle of vaccines to catch up on at 19 months, gets very sick afterwards, develops a rash.
And then within a few months develops classic autism. And Polling chronicles all of this.
He publishes a case report. Now he does do genetics on her. She has a genetic variant in mitochondria protein, which is, you know, may or may not be causative.
But, you know, we nowadays with genetic testing, we find certainly a lot of polymorphisms.
But listen to this. So it's a clear cut case of combination vaccination triggering autism without a doubt.
It's in the peer-reviewed literature. Father said Johns Hopkins neurologist and he's in this test case.
The federal officials pull him to the side and say, you know what, we're going to give you a settlement and you sign off on this.
They removed her as a test case and then they dismissed all the other five thousand cases. No, they vaccines don't cause autism.
Now that happened in 2007, 2008, and it shows you in this entire narrative, the depth of corruption that exists.
Yeah. And it is a sickening story because think of all the thousands of Americans who have children that were harmed and were just completely summarily dismissed.
And if you brought up the A word autism, you weren't even considered to get compensated in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
And then we have, of course, during covid the prep act and the absolution of any, let's say, injuries or deaths or untoward events due to merge use authorization injections.
And I think about this honestly, Peter, from a spiritual perspective, the idea that you would take a whole series of companies in an industry and say you could put a product on the market, we'll even mandate it.
And if it harms people, it doesn't matter. Nothing will come back to harm you. That seems to me spiritually bankrupt, much less morally.
Dare I say it, you know, immunologically bankrupt to allow companies to do that. They're not going to have any incentive to make safer, effective products.
And it wasn't just regarding medicinal products, but, you know, the prep act covers all kinds of things.
Countermeasures like masks and and lockdowns and hand sanitizer. We just interviewed Tony Nikolik from Australia.
He's a barrister there here in McCullough Foundation. We interviewed him and he showed us the video of this woman walking down the street in Australia.
And she's tiny, a huge police officer grabbing her because she didn't wear a mask. And he grabs her by the chin and literally lifts her three feet up in the air and is choking her for not wearing a mask.
And then he slams her on the ground. These things happened. And, you know, we went back in time.
We asked the question, could this madness ever have happened before? And the answer is yes. Late 19th century, if if parents did not have their kids vaccinated for smallpox.
And this is an early vaccine that wasn't sterilized, purified. Nobody knew if it worked or not contaminated.
The police were put in jail. Jail time for not taking the smallpox vaccine. It led to a complete uprising.
And in the UK, it led to the Anti Vaccination League. There was a formal league of parents that were fighting this.
An entire town, Leicester, said we're not using the smallpox vaccine at all.
They used the Leicester method of isolating the children, reducing the contagion, supporting them and getting them better. And Leicester had lower smallpox mortality than all the surrounding towns.
And so that this whole thing kicks off in a very sordid manner. This history of vaccines.
And we expose it all in our book. And it's not a boring medical book or history book. It's a gripping, page turning story. And you get to know these characters.
Peter, I probably asked you this before. I'm going to ask you again because this now goes into a whole different realm from when we first met and all the times we've been together at different conferences.
But what surprised you most about that history? Was there anything that shocked you to the core?
I mean, even the Hannah Polling case in more recent history is shocking when you look at it. But other things that you look back on, like how did we miss that?
Something that jumps out and goes, my gosh, we are something.
We start off with a bang. We can find some evidence of some experimentation with this idea of inoculation from Africa and in Turkey.
But it really we start the story in 1721 with Cotton Mather. You may not have heard his name, but he was an intellectual at the time in Boston.
And he was a Puritan minister and Cotton Mather had two of his two or three of his kids die of measles. So you can tell the family had a, you know, a fear of infectious diseases like most families did.
And so he took up with Dr. Bailston the process of variolation.
So variolation was actually taking a scalpel and taking a little bit of pus from one smallpox pustule from a kid with smallpox and then nicking the skin in a healthy kid and trying to put some of that pus in the healthy kid.
Well, you know, this had various results.
And Benjamin Franklin was critical of the of the notion that sure enough, Ben Franklin's kid, Frankie dies of smallpox. And then Ben Franklin does a 180 and starts promoting variolation.
Now, this is, you know, half a century before Edward gender and the cowpox use vaccine.
Very early on. But listen to this cotton Mather declares, and he's a very influential person that this method is a gift from God.
It's a gift from God.
And cotton Mathers also known for something else. You're going to be shocked about this. He was an advisor to the judges in the Salem witchcraft trials.
He believed in witches. So this whole thing starts with vaccines and vaccination being presented to us as a gift from God.
And what we saw through this entire history, tremendous fear of infectious diseases, bold claims by these vaccinologists saying here, do it.
It works without any back then. They didn't even know what caused the illness.
They didn't even know if it was an infectious disease or not. It just works.
And then a tremendous amount of power and money.
So you take fear, arrogance and hubris, power and money and mix it together.
Oh, my Lord, this thing takes off like one of the biggest false religions of all time.
You said it so well. And we know that the so-called anti vaccination protest didn't start with Andrew Wakefield either.
I mean, there are signs held up historically about people that were protesting because they saw with variolation and then later with Jeter some really nasty adverse events, including sepsis limbs being cut off death, of course, from these things.
And listen, I'm a freedom guy. But at the same time, when it comes to coercing and enforcing and mandating, these are the things that I think are I'll just say it as an American.
They're fundamentally a violation of the constitutional protections were supposed to have.
Yeah, so true. And, you know, John Leake and I had quite a discussion about this.
He thinks most of the deaths and he's reviewed the original records, the archives, most of the deaths, let's say with variolation, this first round of smallpox vaccination, most of the deaths were actually smallpox.
That this was actually giving people smallpox. And so King George III had 15 children and two of them died directly from the process of doing this directly.
And yet the king and queen continued to promote this for all of England.
So you have to ask yourself the question, what was in their mind? Was it, listen, losing two kids is not so bad? Or, you know, because we've seen this in the modern day.
We've seen public figures take the COVID vaccine and have terrible complications, well recognized complications.
And yet they don't mention the vaccine at all. They continue to press forward. Like Dion Sanders being a recent example, vaccine blood clots, clear cut vaccine blood clots.
He had prior, you know, altered anatomy in the foot and multiple amputations and now a turbo cancer.
A bladder. Didn't they remove his bladder?
They removed his whole bladder. And you know, there are peer reviewed papers on this clearly demonstrating it's related to the spike protein, maybe from the infection, but certainly from the vaccines.
Now emerging data were told that the bladder is actually filtering spike protein fragments. So it makes sense. They're they're oncogenic and they're sitting there in the bladder.
Yeah. Now, as far as your wheelhouse, of course, with the cardiovascular issues, myocarditis, pericarditis and young people talk to me about the evolution post COVID.
Are we still seeing, as I'm hearing reported in the media, young people dying at larger numbers than ever before?
As far as what we'd expect mortality be of much older generations. I mean, there's still some things that are, if not inexplicable, we might be able to explain them because we're willing to look at causative relationships.
You know, the wave of acute vaccine myocarditis that is developing it within five to 10 days, chest pain, hospitalization, positive blood test, EKG changes.
And in one Japanese study, a death rate of acute vaccine myocarditis in healthy young people of 9.5 percent.
This is a stunning mortality rate for young people. That wave, I think, is largely ended because no one's taking the vaccine anymore.
Now we're left with subclinical vaccine myoparacarditis.
So, you know, several years of intermittent chest pain, palpitations, erratic blood pressure, a problem called POTS or this dizziness, posterior orthostatic tachycardia syndrome,
unexplained arrhythmias like atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter in young people.
Like I've had like a 25 year old kid hospitalized with vaccine atrial fibrillation, for instance.
That continues to roll on. And here's the scary reality here.
It may take several years for the vaccines, particularly the messenger RNA vaccines, to produce enough spike protein to manifest a clinical problem.
So, you know, the spike protein does build up in tissues and it may take some time for it to build up in the heart and have enough there to cause inflammation, scarring, and then trigger a cardiac arrest.
And so a paper by Koyosmo and colleagues from Japan published in the Journal of American College of Cardiology demonstrated years after taking the shots.
Now, this was several cases and they took several boosters.
But years after the shots, cardiac arrest and they died actually with micro scars in the heart.
You never see it on MRI, would not see it on EKG or ultrasound.
And this is the great concern today.
The next public figure we see going down with unexplained cardiac arrest.
You know, could it be due to the vaccine?
I think on average the data support it is.
And we had U.S. Senate hearings on that May 21st, 2026. And, you know, the report has been generated.
The report says the U.S. government was covering this up the entire time.
Well, you know, what's different from the historical vaccines that were given antigen to antibody concept with other adverse events associated with other things in it?
This mRNA platform, you bring it up, is like, wait, wait a second. My thoughts, you know, if I'm not hearing anything just for the first time hearing, I'm like, wait, Peter, you got the shot a year ago and you're still producing more spike protein accumulating.
Does this indicate that mRNA platform technology kind of directing your own DNA protein synthesis to produce these things?
There's no off switch.
There's two possibilities. One, messenger RNA may be very long lasting and be passed from cell to cell and produce spike protein.
The other possibility is that, you know, it reverse transcribes the entire code goes into our genome or even just fragments of the code, little cDNA fragments for spike readily get into the genome.
All of those are possible. We're working with a lab in Germany called in Modia in Modia and your patients can send samples there if they want to participate in research.
And I can tell you this. I have a patient who took the shots.
He developed blood clots and pulmonary embolism and proven myocarditis by MRI.
And three point two years after the shots, we have circulating spike protein in his bloodstream and we have evidence of Pfizer in his DNA in all over his body and his white blood cells.
We've taken skin biopsies. And this is a horrifying reality.
And additionally, papers by John Cantos, our own at Neo7 Bioscience show that gene expression have another one of my patients in Cantos, our study is markedly abnormal.
So you take a COVID-19 vaccine and then the gene expression from from the native nucleus has an abnormal profile for autoimmunity, for oncogenesis and for, you know, immune defense.
Yeah. Dr. Peter McCullough is my guest here. He's got a new book out with John Leake.
I hope everybody gets it. Vaccines, mythology, ideology and reality.
There it is. And we have it linked up in the show notes at robertsgatbell.com.
It's another addition to our library of great research done on the history of these V words that we couldn't even say without getting banned in media during COVID.
Now, thankfully, we can talk about it again, but I'm still banned on YouTube and Spotify and LinkedIn.
Speaking this this truth. And, you know, Peter, I opened right before you joined us about a good new scenario.
Secretary Kennedy said they've revoked or rescinded the the emergency authorization, but still allowing the shots to be given to certain vulnerable populations based on some of the things you're seeing.
And they're known. I'm just saying, how can you justify keeping it on the market and aren't the most vulnerable among us, the most vulnerable also to adverse events?
Oh, that's such a good point. And you absolutely nailed it. That let me just give you a clear cut example.
A patient of mine who before the pandemic, he has bypass surgery.
He has a weakened heart and he has a defibrillator, but he's working as a consultant. He's perfectly managed.
His cardiologist convinces him to take a COVID-19 vaccine.
He takes one shot of Pfizer and within hours he goes into cardiogenic shock, heart failure.
He's airlifted into Emory University Medical Center, ultimately needs a heart transplant, gets a mediastinal infection, has a stroke.
He's in the hospital six months. He's totally ruined.
He gets a hold of me in a hotel room outside of Emory. He says, Dr. McCulley, you got to get me out of here.
He goes, my transplant team wants to give me a second shot.
Well, he had a weak heart to begin with and just some myocarditis took him down.
Now, a healthy athlete probably can take more myocarditis without going into shock or having a cardiac arrest.
But you hit the nail on the head. The most vulnerable people are going to be most vulnerable to side effects.
So let me give an example. Cancer patients are more prone to developing blood clots.
So our patients who are immobile, for instance, those with prior blood clots. So there you go.
So we're just going to have a greater risk of blood clots with each shot.
Patients with prior heart disease are more likely to suffer a cardiovascular death.
Patients with cancer would be theoretically more likely to have reactivation of their cancer or progressive spread, metastatic spread of the cancer.
Patients with autoimmune syndromes, in my experience, have tremendous risk of flaring. They flare lupus, rheumatoid arthritis.
Patients with established kidney disease will get more kidney disease. And the list goes on and on.
So, no, this idea that we should give a vaccine that's loaded with serious side effects to people with baseline disease, baseline comorbidities is a giant mistake.
And you know what? We need some doctors with medical authority in Washington.
You can tell people coming up with these recommendations are not seeing patients. They don't understand clinical medicine.
Yeah, I was going to ask you if you had any impact on any of the new members of the ACIP committee and/or Secretary Kennedy, who I know you've met as well, and know this kind of information.
Or do you think this is a, dare I say it, political move because the people aren't ready to hear a total ban on these shots because they're just dangerous for everybody?
Well, you and I have known this for several years. I guess all I could say in kind of like a Trump-like manner is remember how Trump said that he was going to end the right path?
He was going to end the Russian-Ukraine war on day one. Remember that? Yes.
Well, listen, if I was the Health and Human Services Secretary or the FDA Commissioner, I would have pulled the COVID vaccines off the market on day one.
Period. Period. Say, listen, I've got medical and executive authority to do this. I'm doing it. Sorry.
Well, and you also have the clinical experience to back it up without question. There's no hemming and hawing about the science.
It's like if you've observed, and you're not the only one observing this, you have many colleagues that have reported this, both in the allopathic realm and the holistic realm.
So it's not like it's an anomaly you've heard once in a while.
That's why there are legitimate critiques or criticisms as much as I support Bobby Kennedy and want to see him succeed.
I still think we got to push for these things because every day we don't. There's another injury, another death that didn't need to happen.
Yeah, you're right. And I have over a hundred peer-reviewed manuscripts in the National Library of Medicine, Index, Medicus, Scopus and other indexing agencies.
Over a hundred peer-reviewed papers, seven hundred total in the National Library of Medicine.
So, you know, I have the academic authority because these publications are laying out the evidence that the vaccines are not safe.
And this is critical for people to understand. It's not just, you know, it's not just an errand medical opinion.
So we have tremendous scientific and medical authority to say the vaccines are unsafe for human use.
And here's the problem. You know, we're eight months into the new administration. Let's just say this new committee does an evaluation and then concludes the vaccines are not safe.
We're pulling them off the market. You know, the first thing people are going to say is what took you so long?
Right. And now look at these deaths and your rights. Just since the new administration has come in, there's been several hundred more vaccine deaths.
COVID vaccine deaths, several hundred. And, you know, after I testified in the U.S. Senate in May of 2025,
Rasmussen did a survey, a valid population based survey, and found that 51 percent of Americans now know the vaccines cause heart damage.
No one in their right mind would take a shot that damages their heart. But that means 49 percent don't know.
And so we can't wait for the entire public to wake up. This is one of these adult decisions.
It should have happened a long time ago. If I was in the first Trump administration, again, as HHS secretary, FDA commissioner,
these I wouldn't even let these go on come on the market. Or if they did, it would have been a quick safety review.
And I would have pulled them off the market even before Trump left office.
Well, that's the difference between, let's say, pure academicians, which you have both. You have your foot in academia and clinic clinical experience,
which is so vitally important because, you know, academicians will come in. Well, look at my peer reviewed literature.
It counteracts yours. I'm like yours plus the clinical. Dude, that's what I'm talking about.
Why we need clinicians in these positions. And I, you know, I don't you know me. I'm talking about all healing modalities.
Ultimately, we'd like to have them rise to be able to engage and discuss and debate and argue about all of these things,
because we're all going to be better clinicians by being exposed to these other options. We might not have been trained in.
You know, so true. And, you know, I'm dealing with it every day.
That patient I had today just a little while ago, she developed a turbo cancer after two Moderna shots.
And this was a uterine cancer that was rapidly moving. And, you know, fortunately, she was able to get a curative hysterectomy.
And she declined actually chemo and radiation and is now using an alternative approach with ivermectin and nutraceuticals and supplements.
And she examiners perfectly fine. Her follow up cancer marker scores and CT and everything's fine.
But we had this discussion of, you know, it happened in the context of just receiving one of these vaccines.
And when cancerous tissue is examined and Kevin McCarnan and several others have reported this,
the vaccine and the spike protein are physically in the cancer. They're at the scene of the crime.
Peter, you know, we talk about fear of germs that led to a lot of, let's say, insane responses because fear is not it doesn't bring clarity.
You know, it's one thing to have fear and then all right, let's chill out. Let's look at this and assess it.
But I think a lot of doctors still fear what they weren't taught.
Like we talk about as colleagues, the ability to engage in debate and discussion about things you don't know or I don't know.
And we come together and we learn. Are we are you afraid of that as a doctor?
Oh, my gosh. What if people learn about natural medicine? No, no one will come see me.
There's always going to be a place for all of these medicines.
Yeah. But you know what the difference is? Self participation. This is very important.
I'd like to talk with this year. Very prestigious place to lecture.
You've had the Roosevelt's lecture there and so many others.
And it's really a h