Introduction:

Catherine responds to recent postings by Dr. Peter and Ginger Breggin, Dr. Robert Malone, and Jon Rappoport as well as questions from subscribers regarding Dr. Malone’s lawsuit against the Breggins.

Download mp3 audio file

Related Reading:

Similar Posts

36 Comments

  1. Breggin was obsessed with Malone. Like a dog that won’t let go.

    Malone is far too thin skinned and over sensitive about his image.

    They both need to get over it and we need to move on.

    The in fighting was a serious waste of time in my opinion. There are far bigger enemies, like our own governments, to worry about. And bigger goals like waking up our fellow man, to spend time on instead 🙂

    1. Actually, the “weaponization of mass formation psychosis” was exceptionally dangerous and needed to be stopped – which it appears to be. So a fight worth having. It stopped a great danger.

  2. Who is Dr Malone say’s a lot more about Malone (and none of it really good) than it does about why he is suing someone for that much money. Sticks and stones may break his bones but if you say something not nice he’ll sue you for $25 billion dollars or whatever!

  3. Nice analysis Catherine! Thanks. I heard Malone’s slur on Breggin. If Malone seriously believes that about Breggin, then he would surely also believe that Breggin wasn’t worth bothering about. And on that same point, attacking Breggin’s sanity would seem to prove Breggin’s point (about wanting to weaponise mental health). The other lawsuits that Malone has out are also relevant…. Malone already demonstrated straight out of the box than he’s not an honest actor. Not sure what game he’s playing and for whom.

    1. Agree about Malone. Something not right here- who is he, really? In my ‘ gut’ I do not trust him.

  5. I will have to read Dr. Breggin’s book on psychopaths in positions of power. That seems to me to be one of humanities biggest problems. How to keep people like Hitler or Mao away from power? The founding fathers who wrote the US constitution made a pretty good stab at it but they could not solve the problem by themselves.

  6. Our fight with big Pharma and the Gov requires all hands on deck. However for every step forward we take a step or two back. Elon Musk released the twitter files which shows government leaning on twitter to ban and deplatform. We are then steps back with Dr Malone lawsuit against the Breggins, squabbles between Dr. Gold and Front Line Doctors, and Reiner Fuellmich and the Covid Investigative Committee. We really to stop fighting one another.

  7. Wow. I didn’t know there was a name for it.

    The last couple of years I’ve been thinking about how many millions of Americans have endured: vaccine injury and death, unexpected job loss, legal issues, natural disasters, illegal home foreclosures, illness of all kinds, divorce, spousal abuse, sexual assault, government harassment, gang stalking, DEW targeting, consumer issues ad nauseum, car accidents, unexpected deaths and suicides, the great poisoning, child abduction / death, medical malpractice, economic cratering, and on and on.

    Each one of those events can produce a situation like the refiner’s fire – and destroy the individual’s (Public’s) trust in all kinds of institutions and organizations.

    I’m wondering what global demographics will be like for those who remain, when the injected and heavily contaminated are gone. I bet most of the people who endured some of the above issues – didn’t get the C19 injection.

    Why? For example, anyone who has lived through a natural disaster knows a bunch about fraud (contractor theft, government inspector bribes, supplier kick backs, etc.) Each adversity leaves the survivor with a skill set and an understanding of reality that is inherently skeptical.

    I personally made choices and/or manifested at least 5 life changing refiner’s fires… :)))))))))))))))) Dios Mio!! LOL. And no, I don’t take any shit from anyone – nor do I take it personally. I totally agree. It can kill you or it can make you stronger… and UNSTOPPABLE!!!!!!!!!!! I think the folks who are like this will be the ones carrying the fight to the globalists all the way.

  8. I completely agree on the concept of vaccination. Many vaccines have come in at the 11th hour to falsely claim the win at “eradicating” a disease, when the victory was actually due to better hygiene, sanitation, a clean water supply, and refrigeration, or not being poisoned as was the case with DDT/polio.

    Vaccines have been fought in the past because they caused injuries, such as in England with the first vaccine- smallpox.

    The 1976 swine flu vaccine was rushed, it started to injure and kill people, and was thus pulled from the market after about 50 deaths.

    Due to subsequent laws that were passed in the US, there is no more decency left in the government-pharma partnership in vaccines. The next time Fauci’s on the stand, someone needs to ask him, “At long last, have you left no sense of decency?”, as Joseph Welch asked of Senator Joseph McCarthy in 1954.

    You raised a good point about Malone with the refiner’s fire. He should get out of the kitchen since he clearly can’t stand the heat.

    I read the lawsuit complaint document. It’s not even alleging defamation, but implication of defamation. That was a new one on me. I did a little research and it appears it’s only a legal term in Virginia, where Malone lives. I find that interesting.
    https://www.virginiadefamationlawyer.com/defamation-by-implication-is-an-intentional-tort/

    Before I learned the above, I figured the judge would have to throw it out as a frivolous lawsuit, but now I think not. This is lawfare. Malone is trying to finally get a payday, since he claims he didn’t get one originally from “inventing” the mRNA technology.

    I think it will all come out at the trial. Dr. Breggin has shown his character to be impeccable, while Dr. Malone, at the end of the day, is still a vaccine maker.

    One last thought- Malone can’t have it both ways. If he invented the mRNA technology, on some level he does bear some of the responsibility for the plandemic. Inventions in the past that were for good have been used for evil. He can’t have the credit without accepting some of the blame.

  9. I am disillusioned by the infighting that has arisen in the freedom movement; and, unlike you I don’t believe it strengthens our movement or helps us achieve our goals. I was an attorney for 30 years. Strident, belligerent adversaries kicked up a lot of dust but in the end their efforts were counter productive. They wasted time and money and made the process painful for everyone. They were nasty because the system allowed it. The attacks on Kennedy, over the years, have been nothing short of despicable and in a civil society would be intolerable. That we feel free to behave that way is not a credit to any process we are using to achieve an end. By the same token, an attack on an individual who is stepping forward, at grave risk to himself, in the midst of a human rights crisis, is poorly timed and takes on the characteristics of a vendetta. Does it occur to Dr. Breggin that we know how precarious our position is and that we don’t have the energy or the time to refocus on taking down a person who has done a lot to promote our cause? We are all trying to stay alive, including the vaccine injured. We are preparing for the next onslaught against our health and our rights that Bill Gates has advertised on a new table top scenario. I, too, find Matias Desmet’s theory inapplicable and I especially don’t like the title, Mass Formation. I don’t think, however, it is an attack on mentally ill people. I find his observations accurate in a number of ways. Regardless whether a person agrees with Desmet they should not be characterized as controlled opposition. Malone’s lawsuit states that on one podcast, Dr. Malone was accused of “killing unborn babies.” In another, “This man is in the middle of every horrific thing that has happened to humanity.” Now, either those things were said and can be proved or they were not. Regardless whether this constitutes a “refiners fire,” I don’t believe these comments have any constructive place in the freedom dialogue. It does not matter about the Breggin’s past record or how old they are, they should be held accountable for defamation if their statements are false. I would certainly imagine that the whole matter could be settled amicably and by apology. We are otherwise left to believe the Breggins intended to make the statements and want to drive him out of the movement. If it’s the “refiners fire” then that needs to change. The individuals involved in the freedom movement can collectively decide attacks such as these are not the way forward.

  10. Excellent analysis. Also a relatively concise explanation of the lawsuit in question given the complexity of the subject matter. Thank you.

  11. Dear @Catherine

    I don’t buy into Mattias Desmet’s mass formation theory nor his book that plays down globalist narratives. And I also agree with your statements about Robert Malone’s vaccine background. Unlike Peter Breggin, he is not a psychiatrist either.

    This said, I am of the opinion that Robert Malone is a brilliant speaker and highly effective in calmly talking to the public about the risks associated with C19 vaccines. Peter McCullough, Robert Malone, Pierre Kory and so many other passionate physicians probably helped millions of people making the right decisions for themselves and families. Are they controlled opposition? What or who is behind them? Most, I am sure, are driven by high ethical and professional standards. But what do we really know about any of those public figures. So we’re all left by judging people by their actions and impacts they made and there, Robert Malone certainly shows up in my good book.

    When it comes to Peter Breggin, I sometimes felt that there was a lot of “personality” coming through in his interviews. Not necessarily bad; maybe just a lot of passion as well. However, I hope you Catherine had the opportunity to read Robert Malone’s law suit against the Breggins and others. If not, it carries a lot of heavy information. The accusations made by Peter Breggin against Robert Malone are way beyond “leading a fiery discussion towards some outcome”. If the accusations in the law suit are really true (and there is a lot of video material referenced), then Peter Breggin gives the impression of an emotional man that is accusing people in highly inappropriate ways. In ways very much used by the main stream media. Ways the Solari community rejects.

    Personally, I find Peter Breggin’s statements very difficult to defend.
    Should we defend free speech? Absolutely.
    Should Robert Malone defend himself against such accusations? Absolutely.
    Should Peter Breggin publicly and highly convincingly retract his (rather shameful) defamations? 110%.
    Should Robert Malone be a great human being and accept? Yes, I think so.
    Should then both sit together privately, discuss their beliefs and (maybe) even come up with a shared belief? Wow, that would be a powerful example to the world on how conflict is solved among smart yet passionate human beings.

    This is my humble opinion as a committed Solari fan.

    1. And for the more interested readers, a link to the copy of the law suit:
      https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/just-the-facts

      In there statements such as:
      “Dr. Malone is responsible for the “COVID Plandemic” and has intentionally committed crimes against humanity. Dr. Malone is “weaponizing psychiatry” against the American public. https://rumble.com/v1l4q4f-psychiatric-doctor-blasts-mrna-inventor-mass-formation-psychosis-blaming-yo.html”

      I just hope that the links I shared are genuine. If not, Mea Maxima Culpa.

      1. I recall as a grade school student, the newspapers always included the word “alleged” in their reporting of lawsuits. That really is our system of law – both sides make allegations but until they are proven, they remain just allegations. I need more information, and proof, to know if Peter Breggin made the statements Malone alleges and if so, are they actually defamatory. The bar to prove defamation of a public person is very high. The benefit to the pubic of robust and vigorous debate outweighs the harm. Also, truth is a defense. Unless or until this goes to trial and both sides have the opportunity to present evidence, none of us have enough information to determine the facts or know if the facts fit the legal definition of defamation and especially defamation of a public person.

        That said, my opinion of Dr. Malone is formed by observation and instinct; I’m uneasy about him. I will contribute to Dr. Breggin’s defense but will keep an open mind until both sides are able to present their evidence in court. The Breggins are unable now to present that evidence in the public arena because they have a $25 million lawsuit hanging over their head.

      1. So you agree with Peter Breggin’s statements and think they are measured or do you think Robert Malone examples are made up?

        In any case, from where I stand, Breggin and Malone share similar views about the world we’re living in. And we both come to the conclusion that they should find a solution outside of the court.

  12. You have a gift for statesmanship, Catherine – well done!

    Does anyone know how to make donations directly to the Breggins for their legal defense without having to go through Give Send Go?

    1. If you send a check made out to the Breggins to the Solari address in Hickory Valley, we will forward for you.

  13. Thank you. Thank you, Catherine. Dr. Peter Breggin has done more for humanity that Dr. Malone can ever hope to do. The lawsuit is totally uncalled for.

  14. When one asks for Catherine to comment, one might naught expect that her comment will not be helpful. In other words, if you don’t want to hear someone’s opinion, do not ask for it. Reminds me of a good lawyer who doesn’t ask the question of a witness unless the lawyer knows what the answer will be.

  15. When one asks for Catherine to comment, one might naught expect that her comment will not be helpful. In other words, if you don’t want to hear my opinion, do not ask for it.

  17. Excellent analysis Catherine. It’s like witnessing a family fight with knives when all that was needed was a calm discussion.

  18. Is there any way the presentation by Daniel Broudy could be clipped out to be easily shared?

  20. thank you Catherine. Breggin is a great hero and very sharp. Not slipping one bit.

  21. Well I think that the fact that he’s now suing an 86 year old man who’s apparently losing his cognitive abilities really says everything you need to know right? Such a typical reaction of narcissist – all they ever care about is their ego and reputation. If you operate with integrity, speak your truth and are working towards a common goal greater than your own personal ambition you don’t concern yourself with those who slander or criticise or even “defame” you… since your “fame” is not your primary concern to begin with. Defamation lawsuits always say more about the character of the person suing than those on the receiving end.

    2. That was my first thought as well . . . why imply someone is not all there, yet later turn around and sue him? Seems somewhat cruel to me.

    3. Even before there was any controversy about Dr. Malone, I felt uneasy about him. He came to the scene much later than all the frontline doctors, including Dr. Breggin, and all of a sudden he became omnipresent and became in his words, the “leader of medical freedom” movement. I don’t think he is a controlled opposition, but he does have narcistic traites. But, he does say the right things, and we should keep open mind about him. Regarding the “mass formation” analysis, I think the article by Whitney Webb is the best.

Comments are closed.