Robert Malone is a medical professional who over the course of a wildly successful career as a leader and innovator in his fields helped the US government solve complex problems. Last thing on his mind was that the national security establishment might pose the biggest threat to American peace and prosperity. But when the outbreak of the pandemic and the response to it gave evidence it was, Malone spoke up to tell the truth. His new book Lies My Gov’t Told Me: And the Better Future Coming is his account of the last several years and how it compelled him to rethink what he thought he knew.
In a recent interview with him for an episode of my Epoch TV show “Over the Target,” Malone spoke about the CIA’s mysterious role in the pandemic, how Anthony Fauci became America’s biodefense czar and how self-described do-gooder Bill Gates’ profits from inside information, and more. Here’s an edited transcript of our conversation.
LS: You open Lies My Gov’t Told Me with an interesting detail to explain how your journey started amid the origins of the pandemic. In January 2020, you received a phone call from another public health professional, and whom you also identify as a CIA official, Michael Callahan. How did this phone call from Michael Callahan upend your world?
RM: I've known Michael for years and just to put a pin in it: All of the individuals that seek to delegitimize me, many of them assert that I'm a CIA officer myself, and I've never worked for the CIA. I've never worked for DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency]. I have been a contractor for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, which is a different branch that reports up through the DOD chain of command, not through the CIA chain of command. But years and years ago, one of the senior officials that was managing one of the key branches of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency — or DTRA, the chem-biodefense group that I had worked with closely — retired, and we decided to hang up our shingle as a joint venture, Gallagher and Associates, as a consulting business. Turns out he was trained by the CIA. I hadn't known it when I set up the business arrangement. And he introduced me to other CIA agents, one of whom was Michael Callahan.
Michael is arguably our top expert in gain-of-function research. His experience in biodefense goes way, way, way back. I would suggest that it really includes biowarfare experience. He's been an adviser to multiple presidents. He's frequently in the White House, he is often dropped, sometimes literally, into hot zones, including for Ebola, repeatedly, and also has historically a strong footprint in China.
His kind of cover academic appointment is at Harvard Medical School Mass General. And he works in the ICU emergency care. He's a specialist in intensive respiratory care in particular. Michael and I had published previously during Zika, concerning repurposing drugs for Zika. And some of the information that he was gathering, as we were all trying to make sense of what was happening during the Zika outbreak, and it spread from the Pacific Islands into Brazil. And he had a lot of information about that. And so he was on two of my papers.
So I knew this guy. I knew him professionally. I knew what his background was. I had actually been introduced to his handler at Harvard at one point, and he calls me out of the blue on January 4 of 2020, telling me that there's a novel coronavirus, circulating in Wuhan. He at the time is in Wuhan. Or it's not clear. He shortly after that call arrived at Wuhan. There are different stories. One of the problems with dealing with intelligence community people is they are trained liars, just to be blunt. And it's always difficult to kind of triangulate what is true and what is a story that's been circulated for some political or other purpose.
But I understood that he was in Wuhan at the time. And he certainly was there shortly after, under the guise of his Harvard appointment. And he was invited to participate in clinical care, both directly on one day, and then following that via zoom link, with the main hospital in Wuhan that was handling these respiratory virus cases. And Michael, also, by the way, was the one that managed the Diamond Princess outbreak. And then came back to the United States reporting to Bob Kadlec in HHS [Health and Human Services], and managed the design and implementation of the tent hospital cities in New York City. And also the initial responses to the outbreaks in elder-care facilities. And he really is the one that set up a lot of the initial policies about ventilator use, which turned out to be so harmful.
So, Michael is a key player in all of this. He has written a couple pieces together with the, quote, journalist that he works with routinely named Brendan Borrell. And you can find those pieces in the likes of National Geographic, Science Magazine and others, covering Michael's version of the cascade of events early on in the outbreak.
Michael called me because I have a history of assembling teams to solve complicated problems for the government, and then converting those into successful government contracts, which is a not a trivial skill. And so he asked me to set up a team to respond to this novel coronavirus. And I got busy. I wrote a threat assessment in which I determined that the most appropriate response was not going to be development of a vaccine, let alone a novel vaccine technology, but rather to focus on drug repurposing.
And I happened to be working with some real experts in rational drug design in computational drug discovery. I got that team to volunteer their time to start working on this novel coronavirus. I downloaded the sequence of what was called the Wuhan seafood market virus on January 10 or 11th —I forget what it was when it originally became available. Did X-ray crystallography modeling based on other related coronavirus proteins like SARS 1 and then we were off to the races with computational docking in our drug discovery efforts, which among other things led to the discovery of famotidine as an agent and the role of mast cells eventually in the genesis of the COVID-19 pulmonary disease.
LS: I think a lot of people didn't quite understand how important the biodefense portfolio is in the US government. You'd been working in that field as a contractor for a while.
RM: Since the anthrax attacks.
LS: Is that when the government started to stand up the biodefense industry?
RM: It's really a spin-out of the biowarfare infrastructure that goes all the way back to Operation Paperclip, when a lot of the Japanese biowarfare scientists after World War Two were literally imported into Frederick [the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease, USAMRID, is based at Fort Detrick in Frederick, MD]. And that ostensibly used to be the nation’s biowarfare capital, and it claims to be the nation's biodefense capital. We could argue about that. A lot of that's been outsourced now to contractors, like Emergent Biosystems, based in Rockville and many others. So the predominance of the Department of Defense and USAMRID in biowarfare, and biodefense, kind of transitioned after the anthrax attacks and the blaming of the DOD for those anthrax spores, and specifically the blaming of the scientists at USAMRID.
Dr. Fauci very effectively lobbied to pull the capital out of DOD and put it under his control, which was the point in time when Dr. Fauci got a huge salary boost and a major upgrade in his political power within the entire US government. Basically, he captured control of the funds that were previously appropriated for the Department of Defense for developing biodefense products primarily for the warfighter.
LS: Is NIAID the center of America's biowarfare complex?
RM: DTRA, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, is also an arm, USAMRID is also an arm. But what has happened is under Fauci, all of this got consolidated under a single administrator position and including what was then BARDA [Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, a unit of HHS]. Basically, if you wanted to make any decisions — this is one of the reasons why Rick Bright [BARDA director 2016-20] got kicked out of BARDA is that he acted unilaterally as director of BARDA to authorize funding for the J&J vaccine without getting Tony Fauci’s approval. That's the way I hear the story. So that was the start of Rick Bright's slide into leaving the government and joining the Rockefeller Foundation.
LS: Is there a difference between biodefense and biowarfare?
RM: I think that this is a domain in which there's a lot of wordplay, a lot of euphemisms intended to obscure inconvenient truths. To be in this world is to be surrounded and immersed in the logic of the intelligence community because they largely dominate that space. Most of the deputy secretaries of HHS have ties into this space and into the intelligence community, those responsible for oversight of these biodefense type activities. And it is absolutely a derivative after the, quote, biodefense treaty was signed, which really is a toothless thing. It was signed by the United States, not by Israel, for instance, and Israel still serves as an American surrogate in this space and other military industrial defense spaces.
There are big gaps in the biodefense treaty. For instance, you saw that in the testimony of the undersecretary of state that was handling Ukraine, I think Victoria Nuland was her name, when she testified about the biolabs in Ukraine and said that they were not engaged in offensive bioweapon development. Okay, that is directly taken from the language that the UN has interpreted. It's not actually written into the biodefense treaty, that nations that are signatories are prevented from offensive bioweapon development but not defensive bioweapon development. Now as an expert in the area, I'm a little hard pressed to draw the line between one and the other.
This gets to another euphemism, “dual-use research,” which is the language that's been used to justify the gain-of-function research. Or what's the euphemism for gain-of-function research now is “directed evolution.” There's all kinds of this very Orwellian manipulation of language in order to obscure underlying activities.
LS: Can you talk about what the biodefense community calls countermeasures?
RM: Medical countermeasures is another one of these phrases that are kind of the accepted bureaucratic language. For instance, one does not talk about soldiers, one talks about warfighters. There are many different types of countermeasures for potential bio threats and nuclear threats. And these include things like protective suits, they can include detection systems, drones that have detectors that are able to be deployed into a hot zone. There's many, many types of physical and psychological and, of course, medical countermeasures that can be used in the event that there is an identified threat that involves a biologic, chemical, or a nuclear threat. And these are usually packaged together.
The Defense Threat Reduction Agency has a subdivision for chem-biodefense, another one for nuclear and they are the ones that scooped up the loose nukes in Russia, for example. And there's another branch called threat mitigation branch, which happens to be one of the ones that funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology, just to put a pin in that one. And they were the ones, the threat mitigation branch, that scooped up the loose nukes and Russia. So this is a very complex integrated capability that spans DOD and HHS. And now there's a new entity that appears to be an extension of the CIA within NIH called ARPA H [Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health]. That was funded last year. We talk about this in the book: It has a single line-item appropriation from Congress for $1 Billion for last year.
ARPA H appears to be the new entity that will be driving forward with a lot of the biometric tracking, etc. Those technologies probably will be very involved in the transhumanism technology that is in development, including within DOD. DOD has been a major spearhead for development of brain implants and other things ostensibly to repair the damaged warfighter who may have been exposed to a roadside bomb or whatever and had head trauma.
Our HHS and DOD and intelligence community are now all integrated. This also is integrated with propaganda, censorship. And the proper term really is fifth generation warfare technology. It's a suite of technologies that were developed for offshore combat, and controlling elections and other aspects of American imperial interests, let's say, and all of that is, is now integrated into this same space.
It's an initiative designed ostensibly to protect us from both emerging infectious disease consequent to environmental disruption or other things, farming intensive agriculture practices, etc. And also to protect us against the bad guys who can now — I mean, people don't appreciate, you can just type in whatever gene sequence you want right now, and send it off to a contractor, often in China. And those will be synthesized and sent back to you as DNA fragments. So you can produce pretty much whatever you want.
The technology to produce the binary weapon that we developed during the 60s for biowarfare, which is incredibly lethal, so lethal that if we deployed it — it's the only thing, neutron bombs won't do it, it's the only thing that's been developed that would stop tank commanders in the event of a Russian blitzkrieg towards the English Channel. And it was field tested. So that binary weapon and its associated technology can now be readily produced in a garage, which is why I'm not disclosing what it constitutes.
But that's where we're at. There really are viable threats — do those threats justify the threat of the research that is done to mitigate them, for instance, the logic of the dual-purpose research involving coronavirus engineering? Let's call it directed evolution or gain-of-function research that occurred in Wuhan that gave rise to the outbreak that we've had over the last three years. It's all intended to mitigate massive economic disruption, loss of life, and political turmoil, and yet their mitigation efforts resulted in massive loss of life, economic disruption, and massive political turmoil.
This is a case of was the cure worse than the disease, if you follow my logic. But one of the things about spooks is when you get an industrial complex, whether it's military, industrial, biotechnology, pharmaceutical, industrial, or whatever, it develops its own momentum, its own lobbying efforts, its own economics, its own advocacy on Wall Street, etc. Once it gets embedded, as Eisenhower warned, it is really, really hard to stop it. And we now have not only this censorship industrial complex, or propaganda industrial complex, but we also have this, quote, biodefense industrial complex that really is in many ways a renaming of our old biowarfare programs.
A fun fact to know, there's two in this space that are that are really fun for the average person to know. Maybe it's not so fun for you, the listener, but the traditional vaccine timeline to produce vaccines for DOD, for all biowarfare agents deployed up until the end of World War Two, so let's call it 1950, just for sake of argument, is anticipated to be completed by 2050. A full century after the threats manifested. Okay, that's point number one.
Point number two, for most of the 60s and 70s, the leadership in biology, and for instance, the head of the American Society of Microbiology, etc, was one of the leaders from the biowarfare complex. We spent untold more funds on biowarfare than we spent on thermonuclear warfare. A case can be made that modern biology as it exists right now, molecular biology and virology, is a consequence of massive, massive US federal and Russian spending in biowarfare.
LS: When Fauci was getting people like Bill Gates to give money to NIH and NIAID, did they understand that vaccines are an aspect of the biodefense industry? Because Gates and others say, we're distributing vaccines to help kids in India, we want to help kids in Africa. Did they know what was going on with the biodefense industry?
RM: Okay, so to get into this, and Epoch Times has done so partially in the context of the foundation for CDC, there's also a foundation for NIH. And those are channels that are congressionally approved that bypass ethics constraints for giving funds to the government. You and I can't go and give a gift to the US government. But the likes of Bill Gates, or Pfizer, or Merck can by congressional allowance through these nonprofits that are ostensibly set up to support these federal agencies, the CDC and NIH, for example, through these foundations. But what happens is you end up with, here it comes in other euphemism, a “public-private partnership,” which I argue is a euphemism for fascism in the sense that public-private partnerships are corporatism. That is what's going on here.
Did Bill Gates know about the US government's plans for coronavirus and for responding to other outbreaks and the US government's obsession and focus primarily on vaccine development? Of course he did. Because Bill Gates and the World Economic Forum were the ones that funded event 201. This was held basically at a CIA shop in Johns Hopkins. Gates and the WEF funded it. And I argue that basically what these things do by funding these war games, for governments, such as the war game that was performed in Germany for monkeypox, what it allows these entities like the World Economic Forum, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to do is to get insider information about the likely plans and policies that will be implemented by governments. And then to make strategic investments based on that insider knowledge. This is akin to insider stock trading, but it's a particularly nefarious version because they actually fund the planning of the government, which they then extract information from those planning sessions, those war games and make strategic investments, which is exactly what Bill Gates did.
And then when you'll recall when he decided that the vaccines were not up to snuff and decided that they were not fulfilling their potential and had these toxicities that we now know are the case. You'll recall that he divested himself of those investments, and then made an announcement that he had determined that these technologies were not safe and effective. I'm paraphrasing what he said. But you get the point. At the level of these very big, very big players like Gates Foundation and the WEF, they're in there actively manipulating the World Health Organization. Gates is one of the major funders if not the major funder of the WHO now, together with CCP, so they are actively manipulating public policy on a global level.
I argue that Bill Gates has functionally monopolized global public health, just as he was so successful in monopolizing browser technology with Explorer before he was sued and that monopoly was broken up. And of course, he's monopolized operating systems to a large extent, through the various Microsoft products. Bill Gates is the premier monopolist of our times. And he has monopolized world health. And then he has exploited his insider knowledge of world health and world health planning to enable strategic investments, which then have provided yet more revenue and profit back to his nonprofit activities.
So it is incredibly corrupt. It's incredibly nefarious. As is often observed, Bill Gates didn't even graduate from college, let alone from medical school. But he is the golden boy for the press, the media, social media, World Health Organization, etc. Everybody defers to Bill because of the money, of course, then this enables him to get yet more money through strategic investments. The whole thing is just corrupt as the day is long.
To be truthful, I knew that it was corrupt. I had no idea of how deeply corrupt it was, frankly. This book Lies My Gov’t Told Me was a product of my having edited Bobby Kennedy's book, The Real Anthony Fauci, on request from Tony Lyons, the publisher. And I thought I had understood. I'd lived with Tony Fauci my entire career and watched his various activities, and ability to bypass the rules that I and all my colleagues would be held to, with impunity. But when I read Bobby's book, I was dumbfounded, I realized I didn't even know half of what was going on.
And so Lyons asked me to write my own book. And basically I kind of picked up where Bobby left off. And then went on a long journey, just trying to understand what the heck had happened here, and going down all these rabbit holes of the World Economic Forum and things that we all thought were conspiracy theories back in the day, like the Great Reset. And now we can clearly see it, these things that no one expected.
So that's the genesis of the book. I hope that in documenting my journey and that of my wife and co-author, Dr. Jill Glasspool Malone, we give people information that can allow them to make their own assessments and determinations. I really object to the logic that people want to tell others what to think or tell others the way things really are or talk about the global predators or whatever.
What we've experienced over the last three years is a very complex phenomenon that involves the interaction of complex systems and emergent phenomena. Absolutely there's been nefarious scheming, and there's a whole lot of failure to think — what they call in the intelligence community blowback, from people just not thinking through the consequences of their public policies and actions such as what we've seen happen with schoolchildren in the lockdowns.
LS: Dr. Malone, we can see things more clearly now, thanks to you.
