On Robert Malone (Briefly)
PSA: I am not now and have never been associated with Robert Malone
I do not know Robert Malone.
I have never communicated with — or been associated with, or had much interest in— Robert Malone.
I do not consider, and never will consider, Robert Malone an ally in any way, shape, or form.
Anyone alleging anything contrary to the above has been misled or is lying.
Further:
A search result of my tweets “to” Robert Malone is here.
On 13 December 2023, I used a Johari window to express an opinion about “Operation Malone.”
On 16 January 2024, I said this:
I “violated” that pledge tonight with this thread, in response to claims that I am associated with Robert Malone, and in order to leave no doubt as to my perspective on Robert Malone.
###
UPDATE: A follower reminded me of Robert Malone’s reply to Martin Neil’s 21 January 2024 post about the UK March 2020’s volte face. Archived here for reference.
Malone’s Achilles’ heel? Take your pick.
Was it his ill-advised lawsuit against the Breggins—where he revealed himself to be surprisingly thin-skinned for someone claiming to stand for open debate?
Was it his insistence that a pandemic truly occurred—caused by a novel coronavirus—long after many of his supposed allies had moved on to asking the more fundamental question: Was there ever proof of a new virus in the first place?
Or was it something more subtle—like his chronic need to be seen as the guy who tried to save us all, even as he clung to the same flawed germ theory paradigm that underpinned the entire COVID psy-op?
That said, it’s only fair to give him his due. Malone did play a useful role in publicly calling out vaccine harms and exposing regulatory capture at the FDA and CDC. His substack brought some mainstream-ish attention to serious concerns that were otherwise being dismissed outright. For many who were still waking up in 2021, he was a kind of gateway figure—a respectable voice that cracked open the Overton window.
But when the stakes got higher and the questions deeper, Malone stayed in safe territory. He never broke with the foundational myths—virus as enemy, PCR as diagnostic, “public health” as something to be salvaged rather than scrapped.
In the end, his fatal flaw may not have been his legal blunder or his belief in the pandemic—it was his refusal to go all the way.