Broken Truth

February 19, 2025

House Testimony from Feb 12, 2025.

On February 12, 2025, investigative journalist Michael Shellenberger dropped a bombshell before the U.S. House, accusing the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) of orchestrating an "illegal and even treasonous" campaign to impeach then-President Donald Trump in 2019. Known for exposing the Twitter Files in 2022, Shellenberger claimed this operation repurposed foreign regime change tactics against an American leader—an accusation that reignites long-standing debates about institutional overreach tied to the 2020 election cycle. His testimony, delivered in a hearing titled "Eliminating Waste by the Foreign Aid Bureaucracy," challenges the integrity of U.S. democratic processes.

Shellenberger’s case pivots on a 2019 OCCRP report that fueled Trump’s first impeachment. The report spotlighted Soviet-born businessmen Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman—associates of Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani—alleging they pressured Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden’s family, particularly Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma Holdings. Cited four times in a whistleblower complaint, this narrative drove House Democrats’ assertion that Trump sought foreign interference in the 2020 election through a July 25, 2019, call with Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky. Shellenberger argued that USAID, which approves OCCRP’s "key personnel" and "annual work plan" (per a 2024 German documentary), and the CIA used OCCRP as a front to destabilize Trump—a move he labeled "highly illegal and even treasonous" for undermining an elected president.

This isn’t a fresh thread for Shellenberger. His February 6, 2025, X post first sketched this theory, claiming USAID’s $40 billion budget powers "regime change abroad"—and now, he contends, at home. Testifying before Senators, he pointed to USAID’s covert HIV program in Cuba under Obama as a blueprint, arguing the 2019 impeachment plot flipped these tactics inward. The treason charge—implying betrayal of the nation under the U.S. Constitution’s Article III, Section 3—escalates the stakes, suggesting a conspiracy that taps into broader suspicions about government actions around the 2020 election.

Those suspicions weren’t baseless in 2020. Georgia Tech’s Dr. Wenke Lee warned in 2018 that Dominion Voting Systems’ ballot-marking devices (BMDs)—used in Georgia’s 2020 election—lacked a verifiable paper trail and were vulnerable to tampering, a concern later validated by J. Alex Halderman’s 2022 findings. Wenke Lee created a document for the GA Secretary of State titled “Cybersecurity Considerations for Voting Systems” which is now deleted by Brad Raffenberger’s GA Sec of State website. Thanks to Wayback Machine, we have an archive of this document as well as an archive of the LinkedIN article by Wenke Lee.

Christopher Krebs, then-CISA Director and a former Microsoft executive (2015–2017), championed these systems and pushed states to adopt DNS tools from Google, Microsoft, and Amazon, as outlined in Ohio’s 2020 election directives (https://www.ohiosos.gov/globalassets/elections/directives/2020/dir2020-12.pdf;

Krebs declared the election "the most secure" on November 12, 2020—Trump fired him five days later (November 17). Shellenberger’s prior reporting, like his 2025 exposé on CISA’s Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), reveals the agency censored dissent—hinting at a pattern of institutional overreach.

Shellenberger’s evidence—OCCRP’s report, USAID’s control, CIA involvement—draws from his Public news outlet’s investigations, though public testimony excerpts remain light on specifics (House hearing, February 12, 2025). Critics counter that the whistleblower’s reliance on OCCRP wasn’t CIA-orchestrated—Trump’s Ukraine call triggered it independently (Anadolu Agency, February 13, 2025). Yet, Shellenberger’s claim—that institutional actors conspired against Trump—resonates with a gut suspicion from 2020: that unseen forces shaped the election’s narrative. The later scrutiny of NIH’s actions (e.g., BrokenTruth.tv’s #NIHGate series, 2023) adds weight to this unease, suggesting a broader betrayal of public trust.

Shellenberger’s call for USAID reform—and his invocation of treason—demands attention. Whether it holds up legally or not, it amplifies a lingering 2020 echo: that hidden hands, from election tech to foreign-aid proxies, may have tilted the scales. The question remains—how deep did this go?

A new updated to our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud” was recently posted. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. With new updates, statistics and retractions sprinkled throughout, it’s a movie anyone concerned with medicine, media and public policy should see.Watch now.

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

In a compelling interview on Broken Truth, host John Davidson sat down with Nicole Sirotek, a prominent figure from American Frontline Nurses, to discuss her whistleblowing efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic and her latest initiative to investigate the controversial drug remdesivir. The conversation, which aired on February 18, 2025, highlighted Sirotek’s firsthand experiences in New York hospitals in 2020, her powerful testimony at a Senate event hosted by Senator Ron Johnson, and the launch of a grassroots research study aimed at uncovering the true impact of remdesivir on patients.

A Whistleblower’s Testimony

Sirotek gained national attention in 2020 as a nurse on the front lines in New York, where she witnessed what she describes as egregious medical mismanagement during the height of the pandemic. A clip from Davidson’s documentary Epidemic of Fraud was played during the interview, showcasing Sirotek’s stark allegations. Sirotek claimed that patients receiving more than two doses of remdesivir had a less than 25% chance of survival—a statistic she says was derived from data collected by American Frontline Nurses.

Reflecting on her appearance at Senator Ron Johnson’s event, Sirotek recounted how her unscripted testimony came at the end of a rushed session. “None of that was scripted,” she said. “That was all the hand of God, just saying exactly what we saw at American Frontline Nurses.” Her words resonated widely, contributing to a viral video that she credits with raising public awareness—and potentially reducing COVID deaths as patients began refusing remdesivir.

The Remdesivir Study: A Grassroots Response to Censorship

The centerpiece of the interview was Sirotek’s announcement of a new research initiative: the Remdesivir Adverse Effects and Mortality Study. Frustrated by what she perceives as a lack of unbiased, transparent research—often skewed by funding sources—Sirotek and her team at American Frontline Nurses decided to take matters into their own hands. “We have thousands of hours of clinical research and education between us,” she explained. “Why don’t we just conduct the research ourselves?”

“We have thousands of hours of clinical research and education between us,” she explained. “Why don’t we just conduct the research ourselves?”-Nicole Sirotek

The study, now live at americanfrontlinenurses.org, invites participants to complete an extensive pre-screening form to help build a population sample. The goal is to analyze medical records and determine remdesivir’s mortality rates and long-term complications, including potential birth defects in children born to mothers who received the drug during pregnancy. “Nobody believes them,” Sirotek said of affected mothers, drawing parallels to the gaslighting she believes has occurred with vaccine-related concerns.

While the study’s design aims to minimize selection bias by not disclosing specific criteria, it asks detailed questions about patients’ experiences with remdesivir, including dosage, pre-existing conditions like kidney issues, and outcomes. Sirotek emphasized the need for independent validation of their findings, noting that funding remains a significant hurdle. “This is a complete exercise of free will,” she asserted. “I don’t need anyone’s permission to conduct research.”

Davidson highlighted the study’s potential legal implications, asking if participants could opt to share their data with attorneys pursuing class-action lawsuits. Sirotek confirmed that such an option would be included in the consent forms for selected participants, urging affected individuals to submit their information as a step toward justice.

Reflections on a Broken System

The interview took a broader turn as Davidson and Sirotek critiqued the public health response to COVID-19, playing clips from prominent figures like Deborah Birx, Paul Offit, and Francis Collins. Birx’s recent admission that COVID vaccines were not designed to prevent infection but rather to reduce severe disease in high-risk groups drew sharp rebukes from both. “They fired firefighters for refusing it,” Davidson exclaimed. “Children couldn’t go to school. And there was evidence of myocarditis from the beginning.”

Sirotek agreed, pointing to the societal fallout: “It polarized the country. You weren’t allowed to go into restaurants, you were denied services.” She recounted being banned from a county commissioner’s restaurant for advocating against vaccine mandates, underscoring the personal toll of speaking out.

The Offit clip revealed internal debates among health officials about whether natural immunity should count as vaccination—a discussion that never reached the public. Collins’ reflection on the “public health mindset” prioritizing lives saved over collateral damage—like economic ruin and educational setbacks—left both Davidson and Sirotek incredulous. “A mistake?” Davidson questioned. “That caused thousands of people to die and become permanently disabled. They intentionally suppressed early treatment options.”

A Call to Action

Sirotek closed the interview with a plea to viewers: “If you or a loved one was negatively affected by remdesivir, even if they survived, go to AmericanFrontlineNurses.org and fill out that form.” She stressed the urgency of the research, particularly for pregnant women whose concerns about birth defects have been dismissed. Davidson, meanwhile, expressed hope that grassroots efforts like this, coupled with emerging leadership like Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s, could finally unearth the truth buried by years of institutional cover-ups.

The conversation between Davidson and Sirotek painted a picture of a healthcare system rife with mistrust, where frontline workers and affected families are stepping up to demand accountability. As the Remdesivir Study gains traction, it may well become a pivotal moment in the ongoing reckoning with the pandemic’s legacy—one driven not by official narratives but by the voices of those who lived it.

A new updated to our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud” was recently posted. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. With new updates, statistics and retractions sprinkled throughout, it’s a movie anyone concerned with medicine, media and public policy should see.Watch now.

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Last week Vice-President JD Vance spoke to EU military leaders in Munich and pointed out Europe’s disastrous denial of democracy and human rights in recent history. Vance referenced the people punished for the thought crime of silently praying near abortion clinics as well as how a former European Commissioner was delighted when Romanian elections were thrown out because the ruling elite didn’t agree with the results. *One note of interest - Romania has been one of the few countries helping families escape Norway’s state sponsored child abductions.

Needless to say, these EU representatives did not agree with what was said. One admonished Vance when given the opportunity, and another leader was left in tears on stage after the Vice President exposed their actions. Highly unusual considering these were supposed military leaders.

A few days later, Sec of State Marco Rubio was on CBS’s Face the Nation hosted by Margaret Brennan. In an incredible exchange that shows how networks will go to any length to reject anything associated with Donald Trump, Brennan tried to claim that in WWII Germany “free speech was weaponized to conduct a genocide.” The problem? That is a completely false.

1933 Germany Removed Free Speech

In 1933 as Hitler was rising to power, a fire was allegedly set in the Reichstag, Germany’s parliament. The fire was used to restrict and remove citizens rights, including free speech, and paved the way for Hitler and the Nazis to take total control of the country. According to wikipedia:

The Reichstag Fire Decree (German: Reichstagsbrandverordnung) is the common name of the Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State (German: Verordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat) issued by German President Paul von Hindenburg on the advice of Chancellor Adolf Hitler on 28 February 1933 in immediate response to the Reichstag fire. The decree nullified many of the key civil liberties of German citizens. With the Nazis in powerful positions in the German government, the decree was used as the legal basis for the imprisonment of anyone considered to be opponents of the Nazis, and to suppress publications not considered "friendly" to the Nazi cause. The decree is considered by historians as one of the key steps in the establishment of a one-party Nazi state in Germany.

Viewers Call Margaret Out

Viewers on X were merciless in their attacks on Margaret and CBS with thousands of comments attacking her statement.

CBS Then Shows Free Speech in Germany is Dead

CBS then allegedly aired footage during 60 Minutes of German police raiding a home and seizing electronics over a meme, validating every point in JD Vance’s speech.

As of press time, CBS had not issued a retraction for Margaret Brennan’s incorrect statement.

A new updated to our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud” was recently posted. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. With new updates, statistics and retractions sprinkled throughout, it’s a movie anyone concerned with medicine, media and public policy should see.Watch now.

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

*Note: The questions I submitted Gates Foundation are at the bottom of the article.** Wikipedia defines cyberstalking as: Cyberstalking is the use of the Internet or other electronic means to stalk or harass an individual, group, or organization. It may include false accusations, defamation, slander and libel. It may also include monitoring, identity theft, threats, vandalism, solicitation for sex, doxing, or blackmail.

In a recent turn of events highlighting the intersection of philanthropy and medical research, we sent an urgent email to members of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) two weeks ago in anticipation of a story I was doing regarding Gates Foundation’s undisclosed relationships with clinical trial researchers.

The email, dated January 28, 2025, raised critical questions about the foundation's involvement in clinical trials concerning hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) during the height of the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the pressing nature of the inquiry, the BMGF did not respond, although they did track me online, with evidence of their visit to his website captured by web trackers.

The first site they visited was based on my email address. You can tell because they have their own ISP.

A few days later, I got another hit to my Broken Truth website.

My email was directed to several key figures at the foundation, including Peter Dull, known for his expertise in vaccines, asking for clarity on several points that touch upon ethics, transparency, and potential conflicts of interest in medical research:

* Selective Engagement in Research: I questioned the criteria used by the BMGF for choosing which clinical trials to engage with on a continuous basis, especially those involving HCQ. He highlighted the disparity in communication where some researchers were contacted once, while others enjoyed an ongoing, confidential relationship.

* Funding and Influence: He specifically inquired about a significant donation of $3.2 million to the University of Minnesota, aimed at finding scalable treatments for COVID-19, questioning the influence of such a large financial contribution on smaller or new researchers.

* Conflict of Interest: The involvement of Peter Dull with Dr. David Bouleware's research on HCQ prophylaxis was under scrutiny, particularly since the foundation was also heavily invested in vaccine development at the same time.

* Ethical Concerns: I pressed for an explanation of a statement made by Dull in an email to Bouleware, which seemed to trivialize the gravity of the ongoing global health crisis by suggesting "the fun begins (continues)" after results showed no efficacy of HCQ.

* Transparency and Whistleblower Claims: Questions were also raised about the foundation's response to a whistleblower complaint to the IRS regarding their tax-exempt status and whether they would release all relevant emails to the public to dispel any concerns over their research involvement.

* Political Influence: Lastly, I sought comments on allegations that BMGF had funded efforts against Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s nomination for U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary, a role that could have direct implications on public health policy and research focus.

The lack of response from the Gates Foundation to these pointed queries has fueled further speculation and debate regarding the accountability and transparency of one of the world's largest private charities in influencing medical research. This silence is particularly striking given the foundation's alleged commitment to transparency, especially in areas where public health and significant financial interests intersect.

The controversy isn't just about hydroxychloroquine; it's about the ethical conduct in medical research, the potential for undue influence by large donors, and the broader implications for public trust in science and health policy. The foundation's visit to my websites suggests an acknowledgment of the inquiry, but without a public statement, the questions remain unanswered, leaving room for speculation and concern among those who follow the intersection of philanthropy, science, and public health.

The absence of a response from the BMGF should lead to further public discourse on the responsibilities of private foundations in global health initiatives. This situation underscores the need for clear, ethical guidelines and perhaps more stringent oversight on how research funding is managed and reported, especially when it involves treatments that have been at the center of global health debates.

But also…is stalking journalists standard operating procedure for multi-billion dollar organizations?

Questions Submitted to Gates Foundation

From: John Davidson <[email protected]>Subject: Time Sensitive: Inquiry Regarding Gates Foundation for Upcoming ArticlesDate: January 28, 2025 at 3:35:00 PM PSTTo: Gates Foundation (addresses redacted)Dear Peter Dull and Gates Foundation staff,

We have an upcoming article regarding the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s undisclosed involvement in clinical trials.

We have a few questions for you.

According to the Association of Clinical Research Professionals Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, researchers are encouraged to "publicly disclose relationships and potential conflicts of interest in publications" and "avoid dual relationships that could impair professional judgment”.

1. What was your criteria for ongoing engagement in clinical trials regarding hydroxychloroquine? Some clinical trials researchers were contacted once and never again, while others indicate you had an ongoing “closed and confidential relationship.”

2. Who was your contact at the University of Minnesota regarding the $3.2 Million donation "to provide effective, accessible, scalable treatment for covid-19”.

3. What effect does such a large medical benefactor as The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have on small or new researchers whose clinical trial results could negatively impact your organization’s investments in other areas of public health?

4. Why was Peter Dull, a vaccine expert, closely involved in Dr. David Bouleware’s prophylaxis research when Gates Foundation was devoting significant efforts towards vaccine research and development in 2020?

5. Does TBMGF have any statement regarding the current whistleblower complaint to the IRS regarding your current tax-exemption status in Miami?

6. In an email to David Bouleware on June 3, 2020, in response to Dr. Bouleware’s study claiming results showed no efficacy for HCQ on COVID-19, Peter Dull stated:

“Now the fun begins (continues).”

Considering the global trauma occurring across the planet at the time that was written, what did that statement mean?

7. Why did the Gates Foundation seek ‘closed and confidential’ relationships with researchers in regards to Hydroxychloroquine?

8. Would you be willing to release all emails from TBMGF staff from 2020 to the public so that any concerns about your foundation’s involvement in clinical trial research can be alleviated?

9. Do you have a comment on the latest allegations that your organization funded in part the effort to block Robert F. Kennedy’s nomination for HHS secretary?

We will be publishing our story in approximately 48 hours.

Thank you,

John Davidson

A new update to our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud” was recently posted. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. With new updates, statistics and retractions sprinkled throughout, it’s a movie anyone concerned with medicine and policy should see.Watch now.

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

I can't say as I'm surprised by the hostility on the other side. I'm highly disappointed in it.

When you called me up and you were contemplating setting your political differences aside, joining forces with President Trump in an area of agreement addressing chronic illness, trying to find the root cause of all these problems facing this nation.

My first response was, Bobby, this is an answer to my prayers. We need to get to the answers of this.

We need to heal and unify this divided nation.

We've got enormous challenges facing this nation.

Here's somebody from the left, somebody I don't agree with on many issues politically, coming together with President Trump and focusing on an area of agreement, something that the American people desperately want?

Finding out the answers.

What has caused autism?

What is causing chronic illness?

Mr. Kennedy, I think I've come to know what's in your heart.

I think I know the personal and political price you've paid for this decision.

I want to say publicly, I thank you for that.

I truly appreciate what you're doing here.

Can't we come together as a nation and do this?

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The Truth Behind Hydroxychloroquine: A Conversation with Xavier Azalbert

In a revealing conversation on "Broken Truth," host John Davidson sits down with Xavier Azalbert, an investigative journalist and scientist from France-Soir, to delve into the contentious debate surrounding the drug hydroxychloroquine during the COVID-19 pandemic. This discussion not only revisits the scientific controversy but also sheds light on the broader implications for scientific integrity and public trust.

France-Soir: A Brief History

France-Soir, originally founded in 1944 by Pierre Lazareff, was one of France's leading daily newspapers, known for its sensationalist coverage and significant influence during the post-war period. Over the decades, it transitioned from print to digital, facing numerous ownership changes and financial difficulties. By the 21st century, France-Soir had transformed into an online news platform, with Xavier Azalbert steering its direction towards investigative journalism, particularly in health and science. This pivot has allowed France-Soir to maintain relevance by tackling controversial topics like the hydroxychloroquine debate with in-depth analysis.

The Hydroxychloroquine Debate

Azalbert discusses his new study aimed at conclusively understanding hydroxychloroquine's role in treating COVID-19. He emphasizes the drug's long history of use for other conditions like malaria and lupus, contrasting this with the sudden vilification it received during the early stages of the pandemic.

* Politicization and Public Perception: Azalbert points out how hydroxychloroquine became a politically charged topic, especially after endorsements by figures like former President Donald Trump, leading to a polarized public discourse.

* Scientific Bias and Misconduct: The conversation highlights multiple studies, including the RECOVERY trial and others, where hydroxychloroquine was allegedly tested under conditions designed to fail. Azalbert mentions the overdose levels used in some trials and the lack of adherence to the protocol advocated by French scientist Didier Raoult, who suggested a combination therapy with azithromycin.

* Data Transparency and Integrity: A significant part of the discussion revolves around the lack of data transparency in many studies. Azalbert contrasts this with the approach taken by Raoult's team at IHU Méditerranée Infection, where raw data was made publicly available, certified by a bailiff, to ensure credibility.

* Media and Public Trust: Both Davidson and Azalbert critique the role of media in shaping public opinion, often without critical examination of scientific studies. They discuss how misinformation or biased reporting can lead to public health missteps and skepticism towards scientific bodies.

Implications for the Future

* Reform in Scientific Publishing: Azalbert advocates for a change in how scientific studies are published and reviewed, suggesting open peer reviews and legal repercussions for publishing fraudulent data, drawing parallels with environmental laws that penalize polluters.

* Restoring Trust: The conversation touches on the need for decisive action from new leadership in health institutions to restore faith in medical science, with references to potential roles of figures like Jay Bhattacharya under a new U.S. administration.

* Global Perspectives: They briefly compare the inefficiencies and potential corruptions in aid distribution between U.S. agencies like USAID and France's Agence Française de Développement, linking these to broader systemic issues in global health governance.

Download and read the study here.

Conclusion

The dialogue between Davidson and Azalbert serves as a critical examination of how scientific debates are conducted and perceived in the public sphere. It underscores the necessity for transparency, accountability, and an unbiased approach to science, particularly in times of global health crises. As the world moves forward, this conversation is a call to action for reforming how medical research is conducted and communicated to ensure it serves the public good rather than special interests.

A new update to our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud” was recently posted. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. With new updates, statistics and retractions sprinkled throughout, it’s a movie anyone concerned with medicine and policy should see.Watch now.

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Unveiling the Truth: Major Mike Gary on Military Mandates and Accountability

In a revealing episode of "Broken Truth," Major Mike Gary, a veteran with 27 years of service in the Army National Guard, came forward with his story of facing military vaccine mandates and the subsequent personal and professional fallout. His experiences illuminate broader issues of health policy, individual rights, and the need for accountability within the military and governmental structures.

Major Mike Gary's Military Journey

Major Gary's career journey is diverse, having served in various capacities including field artillery and as a chemical officer. However, his path took a challenging turn in 2021 when he was subjected to what he calls a "fraudulent 15-6 investigation" for his refusal to comply with mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations. His narrative highlights the conflict between personal beliefs and military directives, leading to significant repercussions for those like him who sought exemptions or challenged the legality of such mandates.

The Impact of Vaccination Mandates

Gary's personal account reflects a wider national debate about balancing public health policies with individual freedoms. He emphasizes the direct and indirect effects these mandates had on military personnel and their communities, especially in Maine, where he lives. He advocates for health and readiness through lifestyle changes, which he personally adopted, suggesting a potential model for health improvement within the military.

RFK Jr.'s Confirmation Hearing Context

Coinciding with Gary's story, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s recent Senate confirmation hearing for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) has brought some of these issues into the limelight. His nomination has sparked discussions on health policy, with Maine's Senator Susan Collins playing a role due to her position on relevant committees. While the hearing adds context to the ongoing debate about health mandates, Major Gary's experience remains central to understanding the personal and systemic challenges within the military.

Political and Legal Challenges

The conversation with Major Gary touches on the political and legal landscape that influenced his situation. He points out the need for more support from figures like Senator Collins, who could advocate for policies that better protect servicemen and women's rights. His story calls for a reevaluation of how health policies are implemented within the military, emphasizing legal and ethical considerations.

The Human and Community Impact

In Maine, the ramifications of these mandates have been severe, affecting local businesses, healthcare, and community trust. Major Gary's narrative is one of many, reflecting a broader community's struggle to reconcile with stringent health policies and their execution.

Conclusion

Major Mike Gary's story is a poignant reminder of the complexities when personal convictions clash with institutional policies. As debates on health policy continue, including those influenced by figures like RFK Jr., the need for a balanced approach that respects both public health and individual rights becomes clear. His experience calls for an examination of how policies are crafted and enforced, ensuring they align with the values of freedom and justice that the military is meant to uphold.

A Call for Action

This narrative invites reflection on how future health policies can be more inclusive and considerate of personal liberties. It underscores the importance of transparency, accountability, and a commitment to evidence-based decision-making in the military and beyond.

Please watch out our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud”. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. Watch now.

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

RFK Jr.'s Nomination Sparks Debate on Medical Freedom: Insights from "Broken Truth" Interview

Wilmington, Delaware - In a recent episode of "Broken Truth," hosts Christine Dolan and John Davidson sat down with Abraxas Hudson, president of the Delaware Medical Freedom Alliance, to discuss the implications of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s (RFK Jr.) historic nomination for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Abraxas Hudson's Stand for Freedom

Hudson, an artist turned activist, recounted his personal journey into the medical freedom movement, triggered by what he saw as an unjust lockdown policy during the early stages of the COVID-19 crisis. "When the lockdown started, I said, wow, there's something very wrong with this," Hudson shared, highlighting the disparity between large corporations remaining open while small businesses like his art gallery were forced to shutter. His refusal to comply with what he perceived as illogical regulations led to personal and professional challenges, including threats of arrest for non-compliance with mask mandates.

RFK Jr.'s Nomination and Public Health

The conversation pivoted to RFK Jr., whose nomination by President Donald Trump has become a focal point for those advocating for a change in health policy. Hudson expressed hope that RFK Jr. could bring much-needed transparency and accountability to HHS, overseeing agencies like the FDA, CDC, and NIH, which have been at the center of controversy over the past few years. "We need someone in there who is actually going to not suppress dissenting voices," Hudson emphasized, suggesting that RFK Jr.'s history of challenging mainstream health narratives could be beneficial.

The Call for Accountability

Hudson did not shy away from critiquing the government's handling of the health crisis, particularly the suppression of alternative medical opinions. He pointed out the lack of accountability for what he describes as the "rebels" being correct from the outset about the risks and mismanagement of health policies. "Where's the official apology? Where's the accountability?" he asked, underscoring a widespread sentiment that there should be repercussions for what many see as policy failures.

Public Trust and the Media

The dialogue also touched on the role of the media, with Hudson recounting experiences where journalists initially attacked him only to later apologize for their reporting. This reflects a broader theme of media responsibility and the importance of providing a platform for all voices in health debates, especially during crises.

Looking Forward

While the upcoming Senate hearings and the vote on February 4, 2025, for RFK Jr.'s confirmation hang in the balance, the "Broken Truth" interview focused more on the philosophical and practical implications of his potential role. Hudson sees RFK Jr.'s nomination as a potential turning point, not just for HHS but for the broader conversation on medical autonomy, informed consent, and the integrity of public health policy.

Conclusion

As RFK Jr.'s nomination moves towards confirmation, discussions like the one hosted by "Broken Truth" illuminate the deep-seated concerns and hopes for a health system that respects individual freedoms while ensuring public safety. Hudson's insights provide a grassroots perspective on what's at stake, emphasizing the need for a leader who can navigate the complex landscape of modern health challenges with an eye towards transparency and reform.

Please watch out our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud”. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. Watch now.

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

RFK Jr.'s Nomination for Secretary of Health and Human Services: A Beacon for Health Reform

In a recent episode of "Broken Truth," host John Davidson, along with Dr. Sheila Furey of the Virginia Medical Freedom Alliance and investigative journalist Christine Dolan, discussed the nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr.) for the position of Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). The conversation highlighted RFK Jr.'s potential impact on health policy, focusing on his advocacy for transparency, medical freedom, and reform within the healthcare system.

A Vision for Change

Dr. Sheila Furey expressed strong support for RFK Jr.'s nomination, stating, "I think it's great. I think it's a necessity for America. It's a necessity for the health." She emphasized the dual importance of physical and mental well-being, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis. Furey believes that RFK Jr.'s understanding of the health landscape could lead to significant changes, advocating for a system where individuals have choices in their healthcare.

Christine Dolan, while not a practicing medical professional, provided insights from her investigative journalism work on health issues. She noted the long-overdue need for accountability in the health industry, commending RFK Jr.'s efforts. She stated, "The entire health industry needs to be held accountable and that patients have been suffering for decades with no accountability." Dolan highlighted the potential for RFK Jr. to shift focus from pharmaceutical profits to patient welfare, suggesting that his leadership could initiate reforms prioritizing patient care over industry profits.

Senate Hearings and Political Pushback

The discussion also touched on the upcoming Senate hearings for RFK Jr.'s confirmation, expected to be revealing. Dr. Furey questioned the motives behind potential opposition, pointing out the financial ties between senators and pharmaceutical lobbying groups. She remarked, "People need to take a look at the finances that these senators have received in terms of campaign donations through the years."

Dolan shared observations from her work, where she has seen patients increasingly demand alternatives to conventional treatments, including those related to childhood vaccinations. She mentioned, "I've had the privilege of witnessing children, their growth and development, that had been unvaccinated... I've never seen healthier children in my life," based on her reporting and research, not medical practice.

Challenges and Expectations

The panel acknowledged the significant challenges RFK Jr. might face, including resistance from established pharmaceutical interests and those who have historically benefited from the status quo. Davidson noted the narrative around RFK Jr., often painted as anti-vaccine, has been misconstrued, explaining, "He's always said that he wants vaccine research to be robust and transparent... He just wants it to be safe."

The conversation also ventured into the broader implications of RFK Jr.'s nomination on public health policy, particularly regarding the transparency of vaccine safety trials. Dr. Furey highlighted past legal battles RFK Jr. has engaged in to access these trials, illustrating his commitment to transparency over industry secrecy.

Looking Forward

If confirmed, RFK Jr. could herald a new era for HHS, focusing on genuine health outcomes rather than bureaucratic or corporate interests. Dolan expressed hope that under his leadership, basic health advice like dietary guidelines could be reformed, specifically mentioning the detrimental effects of current food pyramid recommendations on diabetics. She said, "If we can have freedom of choice in medicine and we can understand and advocate for what we want in terms of our healthcare decisions, that is what needs to happen."

The panel concluded with a call to action, urging citizens to engage with their senators, emphasizing the importance of this nomination not only for health policy but for the broader discourse on medical freedom and accountability.

As the Senate hearings approach, RFK Jr.'s nomination stands as a pivotal moment for health policy in America, potentially steering the country towards a more patient-centered, transparent, and effective health system.

The interview ends with a montage of hidden truths about healthcare produced by Christine Dolan in 2021.

Please watch out our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud”. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. Watch now.

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Alaskan Father Shares Journey Through Injury and Advocacy

In a compelling interview hosted by John Davidson on Broken Truth.TV, Rob Forbes, an Alaskan father, shared his harrowing experience with vaccine injury following his first dose of the Pfizer vaccine in March 2021. Joined by guest host, investigative journalist Christine Dolan, the conversation delved into the health complexities and political implications of Forbes's journey. His health deteriorated from being a fit, active individual to facing severe heart complications, diagnosed initially as Arrhythmogenic Ventricular Cardiomyopathy (AVRC). "I was diagnosed with a condition called AVRC when I was in the hospital after my initial V-fib, or excuse me, heat attack episode," Forbes recounted, highlighting the start of a long journey through misdiagnosis and disbelief.

Forbes's story is not just one of personal struggle but of advocacy for recognition and accountability. "My main course of action here is acknowledgement. It's the understanding that these harms did in fact happen," he stated, pushing for a more transparent discussion about vaccine injuries, with Dolan nodding in agreement, her experience in investigative journalism lending weight to his call for truth.

The interview took a political turn with Forbes expressing his views on Senator Lisa Murkowski's role in the upcoming confirmation hearings for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Secretary of Health and Human Services. He argued that Murkowski shares the same principles as Kennedy, stating, "Lisa Murkowski, if she were able to actually tell the truth and sit down with you, Christine, or you, John, and actually talk about those things, she believes deeply in the same principles as Bobby Kennedy." This sentiment underscores Forbes's belief in the alignment of Kennedy's health-focused policies with Alaskan values, with Dolan emphasizing the need for political figures to prioritize public health over political gain.

However, Forbes was clear about his stance if Murkowski does not support Kennedy. "If she's not gonna get behind somebody like that who stands on principle, then clearly she's not standing on principle. She's looking for an easy out in the boat that the people of Alaska aren't gonna understand what it means," he remarked, indicating his readiness to mobilize against her in future elections. "I will do anything in my power until I'm not on this earth to make sure that she loses the next election," he added, with Dolan noting the importance of voter accountability in such scenarios.

Forbes also underscored the significance of Kennedy's nomination for America's health governance, saying, "This is literally the most important nomination at this point for our country for the next 20 years to get us back on a path of being responsible for our own health, taking power back for our own health." His advocacy extends beyond his personal experience, aiming at broader changes in how health policies are shaped and implemented, a point Dolan reinforced through her investigative work on similar issues.

Through his story, Forbes, supported by Dolan's insights, not only seeks acknowledgment of his vaccine injury but also champions a system where the truth about such incidents leads to better support and policy-making, reflecting a deep concern for the intersection of health, transparency, and political will in the United States.

Senate confirmation hearings will be on Wednesday, Jan. 29, and Thursday, Jan. 30, with a Senate vote for Kennedy expected on Feb. 4.

Please watch out our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud”. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. Watch now.

BrokenTruth.TV is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.