saturday may 29, 2021. that's jon scott, thanks for watching. enjoy your memorial day weekend. ♪♪ l ♪ ♪ mark: hello america i'm mark levin and this is "life, liberty & levin" we have a crucially important program tonight. i guess this nicholas wade the question is the origin of covid-19. this is brought to my attention by a friend of mine one of the smartest people i've ever met

been on this program few years back said mark you have to read this article an you need to have mr. wade on your program. to talk about this -- that is the origin of the coronavirus. and mr. wade is investigative science writer he's formally "new york times" science writer, a formally writer with nature, and science so they know something about these subjects. and i want to thank you for coming on the program but first paragraph, sir of your piece which is published in something called the bulletin of atomic scientists so sounds like it is quite legitimate the first paragraph says, the covid-19 pandemic has disrupted lives world over for more than a year it is death toll will soon reach 3 million people. if the origin of pandemic remains uncertain, the political agendas of governments and scientists of generated thick clouds. which the mainstream press seems helpless to dispel so i want to

go through -- some of this so it is understandable to all of us. some of the institutions, some of the names and you can fill it in for us if you don't mind sir so let's begin with identify egg institution and actors. what exactly is the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases in washington, d.c.? >> well that's a bunch of the national institutes of health and it awards grants to scientists in the u.s. and abroad who study matters of interest to allergy and infectious diseases and in particular, it supports research into animal viruses that seem to have the potential of spilling over into humans and that includes bats viruses called coronavirussings. mark: it is a big bureaucracy is it heavily funded bureaucracy do you know? >> i don't know for sure but all

of these xoangts of the nih national institute of health have a lot of money to give out, found lots of research with hundreds of millions of dollars if not approaching a billion. mark: who is director national institute of allergy and infectious diseases? >> that is dr. anthony fauci. mark: been there a long time by my calculation what is institute? >> that is leading center in china for studying coronaviruses. and it is in wuhan, and the chief scientist there is called jang lee xi expert on bat viruses. mark: she's been called bat lady. >> actually been collecting bats from caves from southern california where bats hang out for many years and she has enormous collection of them. mark: who is ralph s. barrick?

>> ralph barrick is her counterpart in u.s. you might say a distinguished coronavirus researcher. he trained dr. xi in many of his techniques in particularly those for genetically engineering coronaviruses. and he's a leader in his field. mark: going through this and what american people to know so we understand -- the individuals that you write about we understand these institutions and then we can -- draw some more information out about them and what's been taking place here what is gain of function or gof research? >> well, this is anything you do to a virus that increases its pathogensisty so geneticking of engineering to make changes in viruses genome and to add properties to it but he didn't have before.

and that is called gain of function if you make it more pathogenic. >> is this area of research getting viruses making them more lethal? >> yes it has been controversial because if it is obvious dangerous so for period from 2014, 2017, it was under u.s. goth moratorium on funding such research. and the moratorium was lifted because it was replaced by some reporting system if you're funding research it was to report into the government that you were doing it. mark: what is the theory behind research like this making viruses more lethal particularly lethal for human beings? >> that's right it sounds crazy at first sight. but the rational is that -- many of these viruses are going eventually to jumbo for from animals to humans anyway once they acquire through mutations allows them to make that jump and so if we could define this mutation in advance, we will get

a jump on virus and jump on gains to do naturally and that would give us a leg up in trying to predict and prevent future pandemics that was the rational for game of function on these viruses. mark: so basically create in a lab more lethal viruses from the original virus. so you can try to figure out what to do it should it become more lethal and jump into human beings? is that about right? >> yes. that's right. with -- one exception is you're not always working with the original virus. you often swapping into it bits and pieces from relative viruses that may be able to do something better or spread the range of host virus to attack. mark: now, this expert, this chinese experts scientists that wiewg wuhan lab you said she set out to create coronaviruses with

highest possible infective ties on human cells. is this what she's known to do? >> she's not known just for that but known as a general expert on -- on coronaviruses. mark: i assume if you're making coronaviruses more lethal that there's some level of safety you need to have at these labs you said there are four degrees of safety. designated b sl-4 to bl most resign and designed for deadly pathogen and like ebola virus and we have a new bls and state of redness alarm state department inspectors who visited beijing much of her work aim to function coronavirus, you write, however, was not performed in the highest level of b sl-4 it wasn't at bsl3 it was bsl2. and you get the input from an

expert from rutgers by the name of professor albret he said it is clear that some or all of this work used biosafety level two standard the level of standard in a dentist office. in a dentist office? >> well that raises some issues doesn't it, sir? >> yes, it does. general issues because these were the internationally agreed rules for working on coronaviruses. if you were working on the two coronaviruses that caused the two previous epidemic to size one pandemic in the mrs pandemic you have to research bsl3. but if you were working on any other corona coronavirus you could work in bsl2 so dr. xi was falling the international rules it is just the side seems as --

illogicality because to you create a dangerous coronavirus in bsl2 your safety precautions may be inadequate and it may well escape. mark: so in this lab -- the wuhan lab, they're working on viruses. i'm putting this in marks plain english viruses that could become more killer viruses more lethal viruses to human beings. the level of safety in this lab one, two, three, four being highest is a two, and i want to ask you a couple of other questions related to this, sir. who was peter dazic. >> has an important role in this story he's the president of an organization in new york called the ecohealth alliance. and it is main concern is to study animal viruses around the world that might turn into human

pathogens. now, the niaid has we've discussed gave graduate did not do so -- did not give the grant directly to dr. xi at wuhan institute but peter so he's the prime investigator on this grant and subcontracted dr. xi to do work on coronaviruses. mark: let me get this straight this is important to american people. our official federal infectious disease office director fauci runs it. they gave a grant to this intermediary organization ecohealth alliance in new york run by peter dazik. they in turn gave a grant to dr. xi in the wuhan lab to do exactly what? >> well, her task which we know because the abstract of the grant have been matter of public record. her task it was to explore what

made this spike protein part of the coronavirus that speaks out and actually attacks out its target on human cells or whatever -- however animal it may be infecting. she was to explore range of infectivity of these proteins from seemless range of coronaviruses. and she would swap them in one by one to sort of generic coronavirus backbone to see which spike proteins made virus most infected. that seems to have been her -- her program. and that's more or less what doctor describes in an interview he gave in december 2019 just before the pandemic hit. glark so we're funding part this lab in china, run by dr. xi through a part in new york run

by peter dazic and purpose of this funding is to -- is to increase lethality of coronaviruses. theoretically for purpose of trying to figure out what to do with these more lethal viruses should these more lethal viruses become manifest. correct? >> i think that's basically i think i would put the emphasis on slightly different place and with first of all, it was definitely the duty of dr. fauci and the nia to explore these viruses and see what kind of danger they presented because they have already generated two pandemics stars and mrs so subject of research for him and that was overall purpose of the grant it wasn't in itself to create the most dangerous virus. it was to explore the infective

possibilities inherent in natural viruses circulating in bats in china. mark: would it be responsibility of a government agency to make sure that a lab that is getting ultimately federal dollars for this sort of research has the security and safety measures that it ought to have apparently state department didn't think it did? >> i think that's a very interesting question and probably we can't answer it quite yet. i mean, if suppose there was a virus escaped from a lab in the u.s. a lab that was funded by ninid i don't think we would immediately say unid are responsible for thane look to direction of the lab and say was he following all applicable safety rules? or say precaution so i think the responsibility lies first and foremost with the lab director and then if you wish to go one step back, in this case, you

arrive at dr. he was a principle investigator on ground and may be i don't know exactly how regulations are written but in general terms you would think he would be first oversight person responsible for making sure that his sub grant like dr. xi were working in safe conditions. but now if i can take one step further back than that. as i've mentioned dr. xi was working in this exactly same rule as followed by virologist all around world and one of the virologist set these rules far too low to be easy on themselves they didn't like suiting up in a bubble suit for the bsl level 4 that's what you see the pictures of dr. xi in that wearing one of these -- bubbles or not the condition she was working. so it may be that responsibility is also shared to be looked at in terms of what the virology

community as a whole was recommending in terms of these safety levels. >> absolutely we're going take a break but this is a whole world that the american people are utterly unfamiliar with. and perhaps the consequences of this have killed millions of people worldwide and half a million people in the united states. so we have got to know more about this as a people which is why i'm just -- trying to figure out more and more of this. quite frankly thanks to acknowledge you've gained and when we return i want to know a little bit more about peter dazic middle man got a group that funded the wuhan lab, and what actions he took and others may have taken when the pmentd pandemic began to spread. we'll be right back. ♪ limu emu & doug ♪ hey limu! [ squawks ]

how great is it that we get to tell everybody how liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need? i mean it... oh, sorry... [ laughter ] woops! [ laughter ] good evening! meow! nope. oh... what? i'm an emu! ah ha ha. no, buddy! buddy, it's a filter! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪

there are never enough hours in the day. so we made classes you can take at any hour. take online classes any time day or night, at university of phoenix. [sfx: psst psst]

allergies don't have to be scary. spraying flonase daily stops your body from overreacting to allergens all season long. psst! psst! all good announcer: xfinity wants to send you to universal orlando resorts' three incredible theme parks. where you could feel the rush of the hunt on jurassic world velocicoaster, opening june 10th! plus, you'll stay steps away from the action at universal's cabana bay beach resort. to enter just say "universal parks" into your xfinity voice remote, or go to xfinityadventures.com

for your chance to win! ♪ ♪ mark: welcome back i'm here with nicholas wade who is a well known writer about science and worked for "the new york times" nature science magazines all of these expert sort of areas, and wrote a piece that is really

drawn my attention, attention of a lot of people in something called bulletin of atomic science so sounds pretty important so i if took a look at this and i want to get into this again further. peter daszak you said the president of the echo health alliance of new york he got a grant from infectious disease federal department. he used a grant to fund some of the research at the wuhan lab. well let me ask you this, mr. wade, dan ac there's a publication called what did they wind up doing in turn when the pandemic first broke out? >> when it first broke out, there were two very reasonable scenarios for the origin of ours one jump naturally from animals other it could have escaped from lab after in middle of wuhan is through virology as we've said.

but right from the beginning, public perception favored natural emergence over lab escape and that perception was very much shaped by a letter that appeared in the lansit and conspiracy theory and the way this emerged we should all stand shoulder to shoulder with our chinese colleagues on the forefront of the disease. now, this letter it later turned out had been drafted and organized by dr. daszak who, of course, if the virus have indeed escaped from wuhan lab he might personal will perceived as -- as being at fault for not overseeing it better so he had a clear conflict of interest which unfortunately was not declared to the readers of the lansit and letter ends we declare no conflict of interest. mark: this by a lot of media as

i recall and people who said well maybe we ought to look at the lab and so forth as you point out they were dismissed some of them were dismissed as cooks perhaps they have influence and who is kristin anderson? >> he's a virologist he was the author of a second letter which also was widely influential in shaping public perceptions and this second letter also said that the virus could clearly not have been manipulated. and therefore natural emergence was the best solution. but, in fact, there was no -- there was no good scientific basis for his statement. he was assuring the public of something that he could not know for sure and in general scientists should not do. mark: these scientific journals we have these scientists, we have sort of these groups of scientists?

case of daszak 35 signatures we have second one from anderson five signatures. the media basically used these letters as an argument that it had to be from animal jump to human beings why do you think the media was so incurious? preem getting ill. this is a pandemic. in you remember back at new york times and so forth wouldn't you say to your editor i want to know how the hell this happened? >> it is puzzling why media and staff of most mainstream newspapers and networks didn't run after this story which by any standard was one of the biggest stories of the decade. and i -- i'm perplexed to know where they

didn't see through large holes of the anderson and those letters that so much shaped public opinion. but with the journalist going along with the natural emergence theory editor who is i guess depending on their advice went along too. and in additionally, the whole issue became horribly politicized essentially by president trump saying that virus escaped from wuhan lab. and not providing any evidence, now i'm pretty sure my guess is that what his intelligence service said to him was exactly the same as they've been saying under the biden administration then we cannot rule out the possibility of lab escape and mr. trump i fear dropped all of those caveats and announced as if it were outright fact. so -- therefore, everyone who was with president trump sort of favored lab escape and everyone against

trump refused to consider it. it seems -- to me to be reflection of how politicized our whole public discussions become. that political attitudes prevailed over what should be founded at curiosity. >> if i'm mr. xi in communist china, and if president of the united states has say it is came out of a lab then why wouldn't i provide the data that you indicate in your article that the chinese had but won't release to prove otherwise? and i suspect president trump may have been trying to communist chinese in providing that data he said it came out of the lab. all of the communist chinese had to do is say wait a minute here's our data have access to our lab, isn't it interesting that the chinese will not as you say in your article release any of the data related to this research? >> yes. i think it is.

bear in mind that knee jerk reactor of authoritarian regime to suppress basically chinese did the sars epidemic a causation and what we see here is systemic and relentless coverup in all of the records of those concealed and databases and information and bat viruses have been closed down, and i think the trickle of information that chinese have let out has been mostly by the false or design to mislead and misdirect. mark: all right. we'll be right back. welcome to allstate. ♪ ♪ you already pay for car insurance, why not take your home along for the ride?

allstate. here, better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands. click or call to bundle today. people everywhere living with type 2 diabetes you're in good hands. are waking up to what's possible with rybelsus®. ♪ you are my sunshine ♪ ♪ my only sunshine... ♪ rybelsus® works differently than any other diabetes pill to lower blood sugar in all 3 of these ways... increases insulin... decreases sugar... and slows food. the majority of people taking rybelsus® lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than 7. people taking rybelsus® lost up to 8 pounds.

rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration which may worsen kidney problems. wake up to what's possible with rybelsus®. ♪ please don't take my sunshine away ♪ you may pay as little as $10 per prescription. ask your healthcare provider about rybelsus® today.

discomfort back there? instead of using aloe,

or baby wipes, or powders, try the cooling, soothing relief or preparation h. because your derriere deserves expert care. preparation h. get comfortable with it. welcome to fox news live. after spending the majority in the past year on lockdown, americans seem eager to get out and travel. nationally, numbers are growing, airlines could see a six 100% increase in volume compared to this time last year, that's about two and a half million people traveling by plane. more americans hitting the road despite higher gas price numbers. at the pump prices average more than $3 a gallon. in san antonio, 20 riders on a roller coaster are happy to be back on the ground, their ride on the poltergeist didn't turn out the way they expected. they stopped about half way,

fire department raced to the scene and help everyone get down, no injuries, just a few white dots. i'm jon scott. back to life, liberty and living. ♪♪ ♪ ♪ mark: nicholas wade let me ask you a question you're watching what's going on and you see your former profession what caused you to write this article it is a very substantial article. what caused you to do this? >> i first got interested in this about a year ago and i read an article posted by a man called euri dagen and wrote on article sharing in detail how this virus could have been manipulated he didn't say it was. he said it could have been. and that started me reading everything i could find about this situation, and gradually

accumulating evidence until i've found i had enough to write a very, very long 11,000 word article. mark: and why do you think you're one of the few people who was curious enough and motivated enough to do this? i mean, there are people still "the new york times" and washington post were there are people cbs nbc, abc a virus that's killed a enormous amount of people that shut down our economy that changed the way we govern ourselves and media will pick up stories on things that are no consequence whatsoever and yet here you are, i guess you're semiretired and here you are you're looking at this saying you know what i'm going to get to the bottom of this. i mean, what accounts for that do you think? you were in this industry a long time. >> i think we -- we see a sustained chinese propaganda effort at work. but you know, more than that, it was just the --

blindness if i can put it that way of our media too polarized to see scientific issues for their own sake and without putting a political glass on them. and everyone was sort of blindsighted right from the start by these two letters we've just discussed into thinking that natural emergence was a possible solution, in fact, two possible scenarios we have no direct evidence for either of them. so we must keep our minds open. we don't know for sure the origin of the virus. it is just we've got these two possible scenarios. but if you look at all of the evidence, and ask yourself well which scenario explains all of these pangts facts better on present evidence it seems to me at least that lab escape hypothesis explains it better. so -- that's where we are. but it is sort of complicateed conclusion to arrive at and

assume that media was blindsighted they did what was necessary and fail to take off their political glasses and look at just news that was so old fashion nowadays and that failed to at least present two possibilities in the way i try to do in the article. mark: don't you think even though there's not a direct connection as you appointed don't you think national institute of these infectious diseases or the national institutes of health these entity it is that the american people have had a lot of faith in. they've put a lot of reliance on, and i know i have over the decades. but they have a responsibility to try to figure out how this happened. i hear nothing from those institutions about where they think this virus came from. other than they dismissed people who have fought comments and so forth, it just seems to me if you're in the business of grant giving i don't care if it is three levels below or whatever it is. at this point you know something

who are risk horrific happened shouldn't they have some responsibility to try to get to the bottom of it including saying look we're trying to get the data that communist regime in china won't give it to us? >> mark i think that's an excellent point. the national institute of health even more so and media -- surely had a duty to investigate the origin of the virus as carefully as it could to lay out role many it and explain why it continued funding research even during a u.s. government moratorium on funding. and there are lots of questions that i wish the nih had addressed a year ago, and been up front about and invited public comment and scrutiny and just laid out everything they knew and tried to see what had happened and explain it to us and they haven't done that. and i share complexity at why not? mark: even though there are arguments as you point out for

this gain of function, making more lethal these viruses in order to try to fair thousand address them should they turn out to be lethal as they are seems to me -- if we don't have something in place to watch these labs, and if we don't hold people accountable for what they're doing at least on our side, then maybe this moratorium should be continued. now you said something in your article that i want to get back to after the break. you said this funding curred even though there was a moratorium in place because of loopholes. loopholes. it seems to me when it comes to this there ought to be in loophole when is we come back i want to ask you about it. we'll be right back. (naj) at fisher investments, our clients know we have their backs. (other money manager) how do your clients know that? (naj) because as a fiduciary, it's our responsibility to always put clients first. (other money manager) so you do it because you have to?

(naj) no, we do it because it's the right thing to do. we help clients enjoy a comfortable retirement. (other money manager) sounds like a big responsibility. (naj) one that we don't take lightly. it's why our fees are structured so we do better when our clients do better. fisher investments is clearly different.

mark: welcome back nicholas wade this loophole you write about in your piece there's a loophole

when it comes to research and a moratorium for a reason do you know why there was a moratorium? >> there was a moratorium because of the danger of the research. mark: yet there's a loophole? >> they wrote a loophole into the regulation about the moratorium saying that the head of the government funding agency now not sure if that meant dr. collins head of the nih or archie head of the nia id. head of the government funding agency could invoke loophole to continue funding the research funding any research and the reasons for exempting could be national security or -- or extreme fair to public health. now we don't actually know if dr. collins ordered and did invoke this loophole this seem at first to research to have continued. but now it seem it is might have been a question of definition of high and define gain of poppings

because dr. fauci told senate recently they have not gain function of research even though the description of what dr. shi was doing is to begin a function so it seems he may be working certainly ecohealth alliance is working on a different definition and therefore, it is a matter of definition not of loophole. mark: this is fascinating. now dr. fauci is more than throw a brick at talking about lack of curiosity by media all they have to do is read your article. not that it points at fauci but it points to fact there's a moratorium and loophole and then you point out that it would take the head of these agencies. either the head of overarching umbrella agency or fauci agency to permit research or grant to go towards this kind of a gain of function activity.

and -- i likes to consider myself relatively intelligent don't we need to get an answer to this, i mean, who was it was it, fauci was it collins? you have a moratorium that is set and moratorium is, obviously, if it is a is issue s is a grave matter perhaps this shouldn't have been given under moratorium and yet it was. >> yes i think all of the questions to which we need to get answers -- as i said before i'm sorry that the nih hasn't addressed them sort of many months ago. so we could all see what was on the table. but we do need to know whether research continued simply because the nih considered this did not involve gain of function and research. and which actually seems to be

their present position and if that is their position then we need to see if this how this squares with everyone else's understanding of gain of function, and in particular, how it squares with the language in moratorium. that doesn't -- define this way it defines broadly as anything that makes a virus more pathogenic. mark: you know mr. wade it is not hard to find out the trajectory of this grant who signed off on it on bureaucracy typically a level of signoffs, and ultimately if it went ultimately went to the-- top and then same with the third party immediately how they conduct themselves, it wouldn't take a lot to figure this out. we are not china, we are the united states, this is where there are paper trails, there seems to be still no interest, instead when you have somebody like doctor rand paul

questioning doctor fauci, it's fighting with each other rather than figure out what's taking place here and doctor fauci made the statement unequivocal that we did not and do not fund gain of function and yet the wuhan lab, this is in a significant way, what they do. if there's third parties the federal government gives money to and then gives money to these entities, that do in fact gain of function research, they would know more about that than you and i, we are the outsiders. even though you've written a fantastic piece on this, there giving money to gain of function activity and if they don't, isn't that an incredible admission? >> they certainly lay out there thinking, they all begin with

other virologists who will review that side whether it should be, they also look into these safety issues so in a way, it's a system that's producednd this proposal not primarily head of nih but nonetheless they sit on this decision-making apparatus and they or others give answers to all, very good questions you are r raising. >> all right, we'll be right back. ♪♪ centrum multigummies aren't just great tasting...

they're power-packed vitamins... that help unleash your energy. loaded with b vitamins... ...and other key essential nutrients... ...it's a tasty way to conquer your day. try centrum multi gummies. now with a new look. what makes new salonpas arthritis gel so good for arthritis pain? salonpas contains the most prescribed topical pain relief ingredient. it's clinically proven, reduces inflammation and comes in original prescription strength. salonpas. it's good medicine. up to one million dollars.

that's how much university of phoenix is committing to create 400 scholarships this month alone. because we believe everybody deserves a chance. see what scholarships you may qualify for at phoenix.edu

mark: welcome back. nicholas wade you do point out in your piece which is again superb say look i can't tell you exactly how this happened. what i can tell you is one scenario seems more logical and rational than another but where do we go from here mr. wade? >> what i would like to see happ more and more people to consider the evidence. follow the chain of argument i've presented and come to the conclusion that evidence is escaped from a lab. now as a lot of people start seeing that particularly that

for the first time would put pressure on the chinese to bring out their evidence and try to what fellas happened and they have a free ride because everybody happening say natural emergence and china saying nothing. they didn't have to say anything if we can tell us what really happened, then we would be a lot, we would be a lot further forward and i think -- i want to point out this is maybe far too optimistic and there's a potential face saving formula here which is believed of the chinese presumptively let the virus escape it was the u.s. that funded the research so is a little bit of blame on both sides and if both sides could agree that they could focus on trying to find out how to make sure this kind of thing never happens again. >> is there a moratorium now?

if not, shouldn't there be? >> we should discuss a lot in the people who say this is beneficial should make that case as best they can. then someone to be an independent should tell the virologists with the appropriate safety level for each kind of research is. it is cumbersome, everything takes place. after review, the safety level should be significantly raised, the kind of review i think we should have. >> do think the government is going to want to investigate you think these agencies that are supposed to be looking out for our health are going to be doing this? >> is very responsible for

funding by medical research, one of the great glories of american science and we should retain our faith to investigate themselves fully and fairly and they out what happened. they are not the villain, they seem to be what made out to be a terrible oversight escaped from the lab but then we can try toht find out what happened and make sure it didn't happen again. >> let's hope they start that relatively soon, it's been over a year end we've lost half a million people. it would be nice to get to the bottom of this. you've made an enormous contribution to the public dialogue here, you've opened my eyes and the eyes of a of other people and i want to thank you very much. >> thanks so much.

>> we'll be right back. ♪♪ ..

keeping your oysters business growing has you swamped. you need to hire. i need indeed indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from a resume data base claim your seventy-five-dollar credit when you post your first job

at indeed.com/promo

♪ with voltaren arthritis pain gel my husband would have been on the sidelines. but not anymore. ♪ an alternative to pills, voltaren is the first full prescription strength, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory gel to target pain directly at the source. for powerful arthritis pain relief. voltaren. the joy of movement.

>> the responsibility of the inspector general the department of justice and the united states congress to investigate and get to the bottom of what caused this pandemic is monumental. at the same time joe biden who has in our discussion never once brings this up. not once. that is really a disgrace. meanwhile the government gets bigger and bigger the debt gets bigger the borders are open inflation starts to go through the roof. this administration is at war with our energy production we see the price of everything going up we see the notion of

critical race theory and get more and more incompetent i to encourage you a book i ever in over many months the most important i have ever written yes i write and research my own books the longest i have ever written and again the most important book i've ever written. just went to the printer i don't even have it but i have this. american marxism. would like to encourage as many of you as possible to preorder your copy go to amazon or barnes & noble because i went to inform as many americans as possible with the tea party the reagan

revolution and the trump revolution all that is happening to the country in ways you may not know who is behind it when entities are behind it. we need to know that if we will confront and defeated. in the last chapter i provide many ideas of what we can do. it's time for patriots to push back before it's too late. i will see you next time on >> hi, i'm frank siller, chairman and ceo of the tunnel to towers foundation. tonight you will see the great work we are doing. take care of america's greatest heroes. those willing to die for you and me. success of the tunnel to tours s foundation. let's watch what you made