BUCK: They’re trying to gaslight you on a thermonuclear scale — I mean, just going all out with the gaslighting — and then beyond that they’re also now playing this game of, “We just discovered something. We just learned — oh, my gosh — it turns out that some of the numbers were wrong, that there might be far fewer hospitalized and dead from covid than we had been told!” Over at CNN, you have a classic example of this with Jake Tapper and Sanjay Gupta. Suddenly it’s okay to have a discussion about the numbers being inaccurate. Listen to this.

In this clip, @JakeTapper is absolutely right that counting all people in the hospital WITH COVID as being there FOR COVID is wildly misleading — especially since it applies to close to 50% — but it’s so striking how many arguments that were long taboo are now all being aired. https://t.co/3F6P7fxnJj

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 10, 2022

TAPPER: If 40% in some hospitals — 40% of the people who have covid — don’t necessarily have problematic covid — they’re there because they got in a car accident, they’re there because, you know, they bumped their head — and they’re being included as in the hospital with covid, that number seems kind of misleading.

GUPTA: Yeah, you agree, Jake. It surprises me that they have not been able to parse out that data more carefully.

BUCK: So he’s agreeing. That’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Just, Clay, before we allow them to get away with this, Elon Musk May of 2020 on the Joe Rogan program. Play it.

MUSK: Just to give you a better information. Definitely diagnosed with covid or had covid like symptoms. We’re conflating those two. So that it looks bigger than it is. Then, if somebody dies, is, was covid a primary cause of the death or not? I mean, if somebody has covid gets eaten by shark, we find their arm, their arm has covid in it, (laughter) it’s going to get recorded as a covid death.

ROGAN: Is that real? Not…

MUSK: Basically.

ROGAN: Not that bad, but heart attacks. Strokes.

MUSK: Get hit by a bus.

ROGAN: Cancer.

MUSK: If you if you get hit by a bus, you go to the hospital and die and then find that you have covid, you will be recorded as a covid death. Why would they do that, though? Well, right now, so you know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. It’s mostly paved with bad intentions, but there is, you know, some good intentions having stones in there to.

BUCK: Clay, how are they just figuring out now at CNN what Elon knew a year and a half ago? You knew. I knew. Oh, gosh! Worth a discussion?

CLAY: Not only did we know it, if you tried to say this on social media, they would try and ban you. There were ample numbers of stories out there about guys who got shot, murdered, and were recorded as a covid death, and so that’s what’s so dishonest about what Jake Tapper and Sanjay Gupta are doing in the discussion that you had that you played. CNN is suddenly seeing the light, so to speak, and they’re pretending, “Oh, looky here! It turns out that every single person who is in a hospital with covid is not there for covid.

“They’re there, a lot of them, ‘with covid’ as opposed to ‘because of covid,” and what this also opens the door for, Buck, is the question of how many of these 800,000-some-odd deaths that are reported as covid deaths are actually “because of covid”? In other words, if covid had not existed, those people would still be alive. We don’t know, but if we’re talking about 50-50 in the hospital, that would suggest there’s a decent percentage of covid deaths that are not attributable to covid.

You had hospice and a severe form of cancer, and you died really of the cancer, but you also had covid at the time of your death. And, Buck, the bigger picture here is, why is this happening? And I think what’s happening is, the Democrats have gone way underwater on covid. They are massively underwater suddenly with Joe Biden. That was the only thing that was keeping Joe Biden’s approval rating in decent position.

Now as we start to pivot and look towards the midterms, there are suddenly going to be contextualizations of the data. Yes, we may have had 1.4 million covid cases yesterday which was a massive new high and we may hit two million this week before all is said and done — which, by the way, is certainly a lower number than the actual covid cases because many people don’t actually report that they got covid.

If they’re doing a home test or if you feel poorly at home, you just stay home. You don’t know a hundred percent that you had covid, whether it was a cold, whether it was the flu. So what’s going on, Buck, is — to your point — I think they are attempting to rewrite history, and they are now going to gaslight all of us and try and convince us, “Oh, this data has changed,” when the reality has been you and I have been talking about this exact data for years now, and CNN is claiming, “Oh, we just became aware that this existed!”

BUCK: The “conspiracy theorists” keep getting proven right about every six months. As we rolled out vaccine mandates, as we rolled out a vaccine that doesn’t stop the spread despite them saying it did, even though we knew… People can go back and listen. We had Berenson on in July, remember?

CLAY: Yeah.

BUCK: And we would have discussions about how the vaccine — based on the U.K. and Israeli data — just doesn’t stop the spread very well at all. Now we know that’s true. The conspiracy theorists keep being correct, and you and I have people writing to us, doctors — some that we know, others saying, “Hey, I’m a doctor,” but we can’t necessarily verify. But some of the doctors that write in I know personally —

CLAY: Yes.

BUCK: — and I know you do too, and they say, “This is what’s happening in hospitals, but I can’t say this publicly because my hospital administrators will fire me. I can’t go against the Fauciite narrative because I don’t want to not just risk my career. But also, I can’t tend to my patients and there are people who count on me and I got a family to feed,” right? Everyone’s got their concerns here. Meanwhile, back in the reality of what we’re dealing with, you have the CEO of Pfizer.

I mean, you’ve got to hear this. Two vaccine doses! This is from the CEO. If I had written on Twitter “the vaccine does not work well” a month ago “to stop the spread…” We have to keep adding that proviso, ’cause they’ll say, “It stops death and hospitalization.” Okay. But that’s not what they told us. The initial push for mandates was about spread. Here’s the actual Pfizer CEO saying straight up, it doesn’t work that well.

ALBERT BOURLA: We know that the three — the two-dose of the vaccine offer very limited protection, if any, the three doses with a booster. They offer reasonable protection against hospitalization and deaths and less protection against infection. Now, we are working on a new version or vaccine — the 1.1 — that will cover Omicron as well. And of course, we are waiting to have the final results. The new vaccine will be ready in March.

BUCK: Oh, great. We’re gonna have a new vaccine in March, Clay, a new vaccine for Omicron. Why would we think that that will be the last one? There’s no reason to think that will be the last one.

CLAY: This is crazy, Buck. The CEO of Pfizer said that the two-dose vaccine — which Biden is trying to mandate and which the Supreme Court is now considering whether that mandate is constitutional. The CEO of Pfizer himself said the two-dose version of the vaccine against Omicron provides very limited protection, if any — the actual CEO — and then he’s going to tell us we’re gonna have a new shot in March, which the government will also try and mandate, probably, as long as Joe Biden is president, and they say that’s gonna work.

But by the time we get to March, Buck, we’ll likely already be through Omicron. I hope there’s not another variant that is also going to rise up in the wake of Omicron. I’m hoping that we’ll have so much natural immunity because millions of people are getting Omicron every day. But, Buck, what we’re talking about is a never-ending cycle of vaccination being distributed by a for-profit drug company based on mandates from your government requiring you to consume their product and therefore make them tens of billions of dollars.

This is a scandal of the highest magnitude, and I hope the Supreme Court is paying attention to the current data. I question whether they are because we saw what some said, what Breyer said, and they were just so far outside the bounds of understanding covid. But what CEO of Pfizer just said, Buck — make no mistake about this — is that the United States government mandating a two-shot vaccine that has no impact, very limited protection, if any, against covid. So how in the world can 84 million people out there be mandated to get a vaccine that the CEO of the company that created the vaccine says offers very little, very limited protection, if any?

BUCK: If they were to switch — and I think this is the big problem. This is my worry going into this year obviously with the midterm elections. There’s a huge political dynamic that’s added into things. If they were to do what we’ve been advocating for for a long time — since before you and I teamed up on this show when we had our own respective shows — which was the focused protection that was described in the Great Barrington Declaration.

Which, of course, the corporate-Democrat media buried — buried, you know, as far underground as they possibly could — attacked, undermined. If they did that and we could all then see, “Well, it’s basically working and it probably would have worked all along,” then there will be in recognition of what the heck was all this masking and social distancing and Lysol your groceries and put up the Plexiglas dividers and mask up between bites, all of this lunacy to anybody who still has a functioning brain?

They would say, “Why the heck did the experts and Fauci and the rest put us through all this stuff? We could have just done what we basically do for flu, which is protect those who are vulnerable, get them the shot.” You know, they keep saying, “Oh, the unvaccinated are so much more likely to…” Well, if we had gotten every single senior over 65 vaccinated based on their numbers, what would the death count actually be over the last six months?

I’d be very curious to see that mathematical extrapolation because we know from the data very few people who are under the age of 65 are at a risk of mortality from this unless they have a risk of mortality from any number of viruses, ’cause they have essentially a nonfunctioning immune system — or, you know, you could also look at, I think it’s Professor Ioannidis from… I’m sorry. I never could get that. That’s one name I never could get.

CLAY: That’s a tough one to pronounce. I think he’s at Stanford, right?

BUCK: Yeah, Stanford, Stanford University, who, from the very beginning he looked at, what was it, the Princess Cruise line ships —

CLAY: Yes.

BUCK: — which was essentially a covid petri dish, and said, look what the mortality of this really is. If you’re under 20, the most recent study from this professor, Ioannidis — who’s been right all along, by the way, about essentially all mortality data. If you’re under 20, the chance of you dying from the… You have a 99-point — I think it’s 99.987% chance of surviving this. This is now getting into, “I won’t leave my house as a 20-year-old because I’m afraid a brick is going to strike me in the forehead and kill me,” territory, which does happen, by the way, but no one worries about it and that’s what we’ve been turned into as a society.

CLAY: If you’re under 20, you’re far more likely to be murdered or die in a traffic accident as college-age kid, than you are to die of covid even if you get it.