Sept 11, 2025 3-5pm ET
Thursday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:
Hour 1
Special Guest: Jonathan Emord
For the past 37 years, Jonathan W. Emord has litigated against the federal bureaucracy, winning over and over again. Ron Paul calls Jonathan “an expert in constitutional theory and history” and “an expert litigator with a long string of legal victories over the federal bureaucracy.” George Noory calls him “a Knight in Shining Armor” and “a warrior out to save our rights.” Congressmen Dan Burton and John Doolittle describe him as “an intellectual warrior for the rights and freedoms of people in America.” Jonathan has a unique, detailed knowledge of the federal bureaucracy, the deep state. He knows how to defeat it. Jonathan graduated from the University of Illinois (BA, political science and history, 1982) and DePaul University College of Law (JD, 1985). He served as an attorney in the Federal Communications Commission during the Reagan administration. A leading constitutional law and litigation expert, he is the author of five critically acclaimed books. He has won more cases against the Food and Drug Administration in federal court than any other attorney in American history, earning him the nickname “FDA Dragon Slayer.” He is a columnist for Townhall.com, PJ Media.com, Americangreatness.com, and the U.S.A. Today Magazine. He frequently appears on national radio and television programs. He is married to Sheryl Emord, and they have two children, twins Justice and Angelica. They reside in Clifton, Virginia.
‘Legendary’ Conservative Organizer Charlie Kirk Dead at 31 in Apparent Assassination Charlie Kirk, the 31-year-old founder of Turning Point USA and one of the most influential voices in modern conservative activism, was killed in what officials are calling an apparent political assassination at Utah Valley University. Witnesses report that Kirk was addressing a packed auditorium of students when a gunman opened fire from a nearby rooftop, striking him in the neck. Despite immediate medical attention, he succumbed to his injuries. Law enforcement later recovered a bolt-action rifle believed to have been used in the shooting, and authorities are pursuing leads on a suspect described as a young male seen fleeing into the surrounding area. Utah Governor Spencer Cox condemned the killing as an attack on democracy and political speech, while President Donald Trump ordered flags lowered to half-staff and called Kirk’s death a national tragedy. Leaders across the political spectrum expressed shock, with many warning that the rise in political violence represents a dire threat to the nation’s stability. Kirk, who founded Turning Point USA at 18, built the group into a powerhouse with chapters on hundreds of campuses, frequently mobilizing young conservatives and directly shaping Republican messaging. His assassination has already sparked debates over campus security, the climate of political polarization, and the risks faced by outspoken public figures. The killing leaves a significant void in the conservative movement, where Kirk was seen as a generational leader with growing national influence.
Pollak: Charlie Kirk’s Assassination Irrevocably Alters American Politics Joel Pollak argues that the assassination of Charlie Kirk represents a watershed moment in American political life, marking not only the violent loss of a prominent conservative leader but also a chilling escalation in the use of violence to silence political voices. Pollak emphasizes that Kirk’s killing will harden partisan divides, inflame rhetoric on both sides, and potentially lead to a reevaluation of how political events are conducted in an era of rising threats. He frames Kirk’s death as the most consequential act of political violence since the attempted assassination of Representative Steve Scalise and perhaps since the 1960s, when figures like Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. were slain. Pollak contends that Kirk’s unique role in organizing conservative youth through Turning Point USA magnified the damage, as he had successfully built a movement that cultivated the next generation of Republican leaders and voters. The assassination, he argues, is not simply an attack on one man but on an entire infrastructure of conservative political activism. Looking ahead, Pollak warns of profound implications: increased security around political events, a surge of conservative unity in response to Kirk’s death, and a possible reshaping of the political landscape heading into the 2026 midterms and beyond. He concludes that Kirk’s legacy will live on, but his assassination will irrevocably alter both the Republican Party and American politics itself.
Kennedy Pays Tribute to ‘Eloquent Truth Teller’ Charlie Kirk Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. honored Charlie Kirk after news broke that Kirk had died following an apparent assassination while speaking at Utah Valley University. Kennedy described Kirk as an “eloquent truth teller” and a relentless defender of free speech, framing his death as a loss for all those who value bold, independent voices. The tribute drew attention to the broader political moment: Kirk was a prominent conservative organizer, known for galvanizing young people through Turning Point USA and for being a vocal MAHA and MAGA supporter. Kennedy’s reaction was especially resonant given his own family history with political assassination, which he referenced indirectly by noting that once again “a bullet has silenced” someone who spoke out. The tribute message emphasized not only personal admiration but also a broader concern about political violence and its threat to public discourse and democracy. It was one of many official responses and public grieving moments across the country, with leaders from across the political spectrum condemning the killing and calling for national reflection. Kennedy’s acknowledgment positioned Kirk as someone who challenged what he saw as entrenched power and conformity, fitting into ongoing themes of his public health leadership: demanding transparency, speaking out against perceived silences, and elevating voices outside the mainstream.
Pesticide Manufacturers Must Be Stopped. Our Lives Depend On It. This article argues that pesticide manufacturers are operating with impunity, contributing to widespread public health harms that demand urgent regulatory and scientific resistance. The author claims that major manufacturers continue using chemicals—such as glyphosate and other widely used herbicides—despite mounting evidence of their negative effects on soil health, the microbiome, developmental biology, neurological health, and chronic disease incidence, especially in children and pregnant women. It asserts that regulatory agencies are complicit or insufficient in oversight, often influenced by industry lobbying, and that voluntary measures or minimal “precision agriculture” adjustments are inadequate. The piece calls for sweeping reform: stronger rules banning or tightly restricting hazardous pesticides, rigorous independent testing, cumulative risk assessments rather than single-chemical evaluations, and full transparency about exposures across food, water, and soil. The author also urges that citizen and community voices, scientists free of corporate funding, and public health advocates be central in shaping policy. It frames pesticide regulation not only as a matter of environmental or agricultural concern, but as central to preventing a chronic illness epidemic and preserving future generations’ health. The writing emphasizes that meaningful change relies on political will, legal reform, and scientific integrity—all of which are under threat if industry interests continue to dominate the conversation.
Exclusive: NIH Pledges Not to Renew 17 Grants for Research Using Aborted Human Fetal Tissue The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has committed to not renewing 17 active grants that involve research using aborted human fetal tissue, following a Breitbart-News-led watchdog investigation which identified these projects—many initiated under the Biden administration—which currently receive federal funding and are slated to continue into the next year. These 17 grants collectively accounted for nearly $22 million of NIH funding in fiscal year 2024, according to White Coat Waste, a bipartisan oversight group. NIH confirmed the decision after questioned by Breitbart, stating that the grants in question “will not be renewed” and emphasizing its commitment to ethical standards, responsibility, and transparency in research. Several of the grants involve experiments using humanized mouse models—implanting fetal liver, thymus, or CD34+ fetal cells derived from aborted fetal tissue into mice—for purposes including HIV research. Republican lawmakers are pushing broader restrictions: the House Appropriations Committee has passed its FY2026 NIH spending bill which includes a provision barring any NIH funds from supporting research using human fetal tissue obtained via abortions. Also, legislation known as the “Protecting Life and Integrity in Research Act of 2025” has been introduced, aiming to prohibit federal support for such research altogether. Proponents of ending this funding describe it as a pro-life ethical necessity; critics argue that fetal tissue research has yielded valuable insights for medical science, including disease modeling and therapeutic development. The NIH says it is also reviewing its policies more broadly to ensure alignment with ethical, legal, and public concerns.
Hour 2
Special Guest Dr. Kirk Moore
Dr. Michael Kirk Moore, M.D., is a respected board-certified plastic surgeon in Utah, known for his surgical skill, compassionate care, and dedication to the well-being of his patients. Over the course of his career, he has built a reputation for excellence in both cosmetic and reconstructive procedures, combining advanced training with a patient-first philosophy that emphasizes trust, attentiveness, and dignity.
In 2023, Dr. Moore found himself at the center of a high-profile federal case when prosecutors accused him and others of participating in a COVID-19 vaccine-related scheme. While the government sought to portray him as a criminal, Dr. Moore consistently maintained his innocence, standing firm in his convictions and defending his right to medical freedom and personal integrity. His case drew national attention, raising questions about federal overreach, patient choice, and the balance between regulation and individual liberty during a time of crisis.
After more than two years of legal battles, the Department of Justice dropped all charges against Dr. Moore in July 2025. This outcome affirmed what his supporters had long believed—that he was unjustly targeted and that the case against him did not stand. His vindication has only strengthened his resolve to continue serving patients with the same compassion, honesty, and dedication that have defined his career.
Today, Dr. Moore remains committed to his profession, his patients, and the principles of medical ethics and freedom. For many, his story is not just one of legal triumph, but of courage in the face of immense pressure, and a reminder that integrity and truth can prevail even against overwhelming odds.
FDA Chief Says No Solid Evidence Supporting Hepatitis B Vaccine at Birth FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary stated on September 8 that he believes there is not solid evidence to support administering the hepatitis B vaccine to all newborns at birth. He acknowledged the importance of vaccines generally but emphasized that not all vaccines necessarily require immediate newborn administration and cited hepatitis B—primarily a sexually transmitted infection—as one such case. Makary suggested that some parents might prefer to delay the first dose until children reach ages when sexual transmission is more plausible, such as 10 to 12 years old, though he noted the recommendation for at-risk infants (i.e., born to mothers who are hepatitis B positive) should remain unchanged. His comments come ahead of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meeting scheduled for mid-September, where the policy on newborn hepatitis B vaccination may be reconsidered. Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, recently departed from the CDC, countered that delaying the birth dose poses risks, especially when maternal hepatitis status is unknown at delivery. He highlighted data showing that between 20,000 to 25,000 U.S. infants are born annually to infected mothers—an infection that can lead to chronic liver disease and cancer later in life. The current CDC guidance recommends that all infants receive the hepatitis B vaccine shortly after birth. Through that protocol, the vaccine has been credited with drastically reducing perinatal transmission and associated lifelong health consequences.
RFK Jr. May Link Vax Aluminum Adjuvant and Autism, Former FDA Chief Says Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb warned in a CNBC interview that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. may use a forthcoming agency report to allege a link between aluminum-based adjuvants, such as alum, and autism, a claim Gottlieb suggested could “take down the whole pediatric vaccine enterprise.” Gottlieb explained that alum is used in roughly 10 vaccines and that there is no suitable alternative currently available. He cautioned that if manufacturers were forced to reformulate or separate combination vaccines like MMR, children would need additional shots, increasing the number of clinical visits and potentially depressing vaccination rates overall. Gottlieb, who disclosed his position on Pfizer’s board, stressed that the issue extends beyond one company, as alum is widespread across the vaccine portfolio. His remarks come amid heightened scrutiny of autism’s potential environmental or pharmaceutical contributors under Kennedy’s tenure. While Kennedy has spotlighted possible links such as acetaminophen use in pregnancy, mainstream scientific consensus remains firm that vaccines are not a driver of autism. Just weeks earlier, a 24-year Danish cohort study of 1.2 million children published in Annals of Internal Medicine found no association between aluminum adjuvants in vaccines and increased risk for 50 health outcomes. Despite such findings, Kennedy’s upcoming report is expected to explore aluminum, Tylenol use, folate deficiencies, and possible therapies like leucovorin for autism symptoms. HHS has pushed back against speculation, emphasizing that conclusions will rest on “gold-standard science” once the report is finalized.
Two Vaccination Systems: ACOG vs. CDC and the Growing Divide in U.S. Public Health The article examines a deepening rift in U.S. public health policy highlighted by contrasting COVID-19 vaccination recommendations from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). ACOG recently issued strong guidance endorsing COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, citing established safety data, while the CDC maintained a more reserved, “shared clinical decision‐making” stance, reflecting caution amid evolving evidence. The divergence reflects broader tensions within public health institutions, where medical specialty organizations may prioritize direct clinical judgment and individualized care, while federal agencies must balance epidemiological trends, regulatory caution, and policy consistency. Critics argue that such discrepancies generate public confusion and erode trust, especially when expectant mothers receive mixed messaging from authoritative bodies. In response, ACOG defended its position by pointing to substantial studies demonstrating that vaccination during pregnancy reduces the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and remains safe for both mother and fetus. The CDC responded that its guidance is designed to accommodate evolving data and ensure flexibility across varied clinical contexts. Public health analysts warn that if differing recommendations become more common across specialties, the U.S. risks fragmenting vaccine policy and undermining cohesive strategies for population health. The article concludes that reconciling these differences—or at least improving communication between specialist groups and federal agencies—is essential to maintaining public trust and ensuring unified public health guidance.
Welcome back to another “Homeopathic Hits” episode on The Robert Scott Bell Show!
On The Robert Scott Bell Show today, we examine Mephitis Putorius—prepared from the secretion of the skunk.
In crude form, its strong odor and irritating effects are notorious. In potency, it becomes a remarkable homeopathic remedy for violent respiratory spasms, suffocative attacks, and coughs that threaten to choke.
Download the Information Sheet
Remember Friends, The Power to Heal is Yours!
