"SECRET" Cover Stories to "Protect" RFK

Today’s topic is something I’m calling the cover stories—intentional narratives designed to protect Bob Kennedy. Now, if you’ve been with me for a while, you already know I’ve been exposing this man’s double talk—his forked tongue. He’s become what I call a public serpent—someone who serves evil under the guise of good. And I say that with confidence because I’ve been showing you his own words for years. People are finally waking up to the truth about this untrustworthy man.

Now let me be clear: I’m not out to get him. I’m not out to get anyone. I’m out to get the truth and expose it no matter the cost.

Let’s talk about the new spin coming out designed to make it look like RFK is being attacked by Big Pharma and the powers that shouldn’t be. And I hope you’ll follow me as I connect the clots.

First, let’s go back to the beginning when all the hogwash started. People like you and me didn’t fall for the government coercion and tyranny. We stood up.

Millions lost jobs over that stance. The government, without any true authority, was mandating (or rather coercing) people into a medical intervention against their will. On what planet is that even remotely moral, ethical, or legal? Whether or not you went along with it, I think we can agree: forcing people into medical decisions is not freedom. It’s not safety. It’s not health.

It’s control.

So, many of you, like me, didn’t go along with the hogwash. We pushed back. And the powers that shouldn’t be realized that not everyone would march in lockstep.

That’s when they brought out tier two, as a Substacker Vigilant Amalek Snow Leopard described it. Yep. Those of us who resisted the initial phase and are now supposed to be swept up in a second wave with people we could trust.

Enter: Bob Kennedy. Bob Malone. Steve Kirsch. Del Bigtree. The faces of so-called resistance. The trojan horses of "health freedom."

And yes, at first glance, it might look like they were fighting for freedom. But look closer.

Let’s take Bob Malone, who is often credited with helping lay the groundwork for mRNA technology. That’s his legacy and he seems proud of it!

Why would you want that to be your legacy?

Most people don’t cling to something unless they believe it has value. The only conclusion I can draw is that he’s genuinely proud of it. He wants to be remembered for it. And maybe that’s the most revealing part.

Now, he claims he didn’t know how harmful it would be.

“We were just trying to save lives,” they’ll say.

The bigger picture I’m after is that there are still people who are lukewarm. People on the fence. People who didn’t fall for the first phase, but who might fall for the second if it comes in a more convincing package.

Now, the powers that shouldn’t be stopped using the obvious enforcers like governors, employers, health officers, and the cashier at Trader Joe’s. Instead, they are trotting out the “heroes” of the resistance. People like Bob Kennedy. The ones who said, “We just want you to trust us. Trust the government. Trust the CDC. Trust the process.”

The problem is, Bob’s policies actually support Big Pharma—more testing, more products, more money funneled to the system.

And who profits from all the vaccine testing? Pharmaceutical companies, of course. Paid with your tax dollars that are stolen straight out of your paycheck and redirected to programs you probably don’t support.

Here’s the next phase of the script: the fake attack.

We’re now being fed “leaked” info that Big Pharma wants RFK gone. Fired. Shut down!!!

And that’s supposed to make the average person think: “If Big Pharma’s against him, then he must be on our side.”

This new cover story came out through James Lyons-Weiler and Bob Malone reshared it on his substack.

You probably remember how excited people were when Malone first came out on the scene. “He’s one of us! He’s speaking out about the jabs!”

He himself said he got the jab because he wanted to travel. As if that would convince others to do it too.

Well, not me. Never have, never will. And I know many of you stand firm on that too.

The “Plot” to Get RFK Jr.

So, I clicked through the article. And buried several paragraphs in was this little gem: “If the leak is genuine.”

They’re running headlines based on a leak that’s not even verified. It says that the document is unconfirmed—no one has authenticated it. But the damage is already done. Because whether it’s true or not, that headline gets lodged in people’s minds. It gets recycled as “proof” that RFK must be the good guy.

“If Big Pharma wants him gone then he must be fighting for us!”

No. That’s exactly what they want you to believe.

The Organization Behind the “Leak”

The article Malone shared says the leak came from someone inside BIO—the Biotechnology Innovation Organization.

So the story goes that this “whistleblower” from BIO leaked meeting notes saying it’s time to lobby Congress to get RFK out of the picture.

Really? Why would they want him out?

He just came out and said the DTaP vaccine is safe.

His team is still pushing vaccines for infants and pregnant women.

Friends, I know you can read between the lies with this phony pharma piece.

Let’s Talk About RFK’s ACIP

To wrap up, I wanted to share a sharp analysis of the new Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) from my friend, and freedom advocate, Laura Hayes.

Under RFK, the old committee was fired.

“Out with the old, in with the new,” right?

But what did the new do?

They voted on clinical trials for infants.

Let that sink in.

The results of yesterday’s ACIP meeting: No elimination of any vaccines currently recommended for pregnant women, children, or adults. No required elimination of mercury-laden thimerosal from vaccines, or aluminum for that matter, or any of the other toxic, poisonous, heinous ingredients that comprise each and every vaccine. No recall or withdrawal of any improperly and unethically tested and approved vaccine, which is all of them. No moratorium on vaccines issued, despite known corruption and fraud from manufacture to mandate, and known dangers, including death, disability, chronic illness, and infertility. No declaration that bodily autonomy, parental rights, religious freedom, informed consent, and the ethical practice of medicine cannot take place in the presence of mandates, and therefore, mandates must be eliminated. And it was apparently more important for the panel to discuss the chikungunya vaccine than what happened to your children and mine after their “routine” vaccines. More of the same. Unacceptable. Inexcusable. A travesty. —Laura Hayes, Age of Autism. June 30, 2025.

Laura goes on to write:

Speaking of the ACIP panel’s recommendation of the newer monoclonal antibody RSV shot for babies, below is what I found. So much for “gold standard science”. Additionally, this practice of using newborns, including premature ones, infants, babies, and children for vaccine and drug testing must stop. It is cruel, inhumane, and immoral. Nutrition, breastfeeding, rest, exercise, love, interaction, and a safe environment, these are what lead to robust health and proper development, not vial after vial of unconscionable ingredients, painfully jabbed into defenseless babies and children. Child sacrifice of a modern form.

Here is what I replied to someone yesterday who asked me if the newer, now-recommended RSV shot had been tested against a placebo. If anyone has additional insights, or a different take on Merck’s press release, please share in the comments.

I did a little research on this “newer” RSV shot, using this press release from Merck:

https://www.merck.com/news/u-s-fda-approves-mercks-enflonsia-clesrovimab-cfor-for-prevention-of-respiratory-syncytial-virus-rsv-lower-respiratory-tract-disease-in-infants-born-during-or-entering-their-fir/

In 2 of the 3 trials, it states that a saline placebo was used (in the third trial, on infants at increased risk, they used another RSV shot (!), not a saline placebo).

HOWEVER, if one reads down a ways, it then says this:

“In clinical trials, when ENFLONSIA was given concomitantly with routine childhood vaccines, the safety profile of the co-administered regimen was generally comparable to the safety profile when ENFLONSIA and childhood vaccines were administered alone.“

In other words, routine childhood vaccines were given at the same time as the newer shot/placebo/older shot to some participants (how many? what percentage?), and what does “when ENFLONSIA and childhood vaccines were administered alone” mean…a few hours apart, a day apart, a week apart? It does not say. Giving other vaccines concomitantly, or in temporal proximity, wipes out any type of true placebo being used. This is not “gold standard science”, and declaring that a vaccine that causes adverse side effects is “safe” because it caused “generally comparable” adverse side effects as another wrongly-declared “safe” vaccine(s) is like saying heroin is “safe” because it is no more dangerous than crack. This is not science, this is deception.

Additionally, don’t miss the use of the carefully-crafted legalese “generally comparable” a number of times, and “safety profile” (versus “dangers profile”), or the unscientific “was established by extrapolation of efficacy”.

I also find it unacceptable to constantly read in vaccine studies that certain post-vaccination events, often described as “most common”, and classified as “mild” or “moderate”, are meant to translate as no big deal, to the point of being benign. Not one is anything you would want an infant to experience, and it cannot be claimed that those “mild” and “moderate” adverse events are not the beginning of that which will become a chronic illness, permanent disability, future infertility, or premature death that would not have happened minus participation in the vaccine trial.

Lastly, only the “most common” side effects are listed (not one of which is acceptable to intentionally inflict on an infant, in my opinion). What were the “less common”, “uncommon”, and “severe” side effects, and why were they excluded? Did they include any of the known life-altering and life-threatening risks that can result from the use of monoclonal antibodies, as covered in this article:

https://www.uspharmacist.com/article/reviewing-monoclonal-antibody-adverse-effects

There can be no full and complete informed consent when this type of information is the extent of that which is shared, and when “placebos” are administered concomitantly, or in close temporal proximity, with “routine” childhood vaccinations.

Most importantly, how is it at all moral or ethical to do this type of testing on precious babies?

That’s not science. That’s child sacrifice.

And while this so-called “whistleblower leak” says Big Pharma wants RFK gone… not a word is mentioned about any of this. Not the testing. Not the babies. Not the damage.

RFK supports these clinical trials.

This entire agenda enriches pharma and endangers children.

Friends, Laura asked the most important question of all:

“How is this at all moral or ethical to do this kind of testing on precious babies?”

And not a word from Kennedy or Malone or anyone in the MAHA camp. The silence speaks volumes.

Truth matters and I just couldn’t let this cover story go unanswered. The idea that “Big Pharma wants RFK gone” is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. And when you read the fine print you see the document “has not been publicly authenticated.” So why share it at all?

I’ll tell you why: They want to build sympathy. They want to sell you the idea that RFK is some brave outsider when in fact he’s in the pocket of the very system he claims to oppose.

Read Next:

Questions for Kennedy

Bob Kennedy Wants "WEARABLES" for ALL Americans -- and is launching the LARGEST ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN in HHS HISTORY to Promote it

RFK Says (Some) VACCINES are SAFE