Del Bigtree Exposed

Is Del Bigtree a Controlled Opposition Figure in the Anti-Vaccine Movement?

/0 Comments

First published Jun 13, 2024
Updated January 16, 2025
Del Bigtree Exposed

This 64-page document represents the culmination of my earliest investigative work, undertaken approximately 4–5 years ago. It is the product of collaborative efforts, as I worked alongside a dedicated group of individuals on this project’s discovery and investigative aspects. Together, we sought to uncover deeper truths surrounding the controversial figure of Del Bigtree and his role within the anti-vaccine movement.

The document critically examines Del Bigtree, revealing a concerning pattern of manipulation and narrative control. Our analysis highlights how Bigtree has strategically repurposed the anti-vaccine movement into a platform advocating for “safer vaccines,” effectively diluting the voices of genuine dissenters. Central to our skepticism is the observation that Bigtree and his associates exert significant influence over the conversation about vaccine safety, steering it in ways that marginalize or suppress more radical perspectives that could challenge the status quo.

Del Bigtree’s rise to prominence appears to be anything but organic. Evidence suggests his ascent was carefully orchestrated to position him as a controlled opposition figure. This strategy, known as a limited hangout operation, involves the selective disclosure of partial truths about vaccine risks to maintain credibility while diverting attention from deeper, potentially more disruptive realities. This approach maintains public trust while ensuring the broader narrative remains manageable and aligned with specific agendas.

The document also delves into Bigtree’s personal and professional background, offering insights into his transition from Hollywood producer to a leading figure in the vaccine safety debate. Analyzing his career trajectory reveals connections and affiliations that raise serious questions about his motivations. Of particular note is the significant financial support he has received from influential donors like Bernard and Lisa Selz. This funding has not only facilitated Bigtree’s rise but also suggests the possibility of a broader, coordinated effort to shape his activism and influence within the movement.
Additionally, we explore the symbolic and ideological underpinnings of Bigtree’s work, scrutinizing elements of his public persona and messaging that appear to align with Hollywood and Masonic symbolism. These findings contribute to our concerns about his authenticity and integrity as a leader. Our research suggests that his actions may be part of a larger agenda aimed at consolidating control over public discourse on vaccine safety, ensuring that the conversation remains within acceptable boundaries dictated by external influences.

This document sheds light on the complexities and contradictions surrounding Del Bigtree, encouraging readers to question the motives and authenticity of prominent figures within the vaccine safety movement. By exposing these dynamics, we hope to empower individuals to seek unfiltered truths and resist the manipulation of narratives designed to constrain genuine dissent.

Read it here.

Also learn more about Del Bigtree in my upcoming book, Monetizing Misery!

Also watch this short video with Del Bigtree talking about “terrain theory” 👇👇👇

 

Peggy Hall, The Healthy American

Dell Big Tree’s Questionable Vaccine Confidence Law Advocacy

/1 Comment

Why is Dell Big Tree promoting a vaccine confidence law as he works for RFK Jr as his national campaign director in his bid for President of the United States? If you can go to this video and politely tell her she needs to contact me for the entire truth behind the snake, that would be appreciated. If these con artists and liars get into the Whitehouse we’re sunk!

Also watch the followup by Peggy Hall, The Healthy American

Duped By an Organization

Why Do People Struggle to Acknowledge Being Duped By an Organization or Charity?

/0 Comments

Duped By an Organization

People who have been duped by an organization or charity often struggle to acknowledge it due to several psychological and social factors:

1. **Cognitive Dissonance**:

Admitting they were deceived creates a conflict between their beliefs and reality. To reduce this discomfort, they might rationalize their decision or continue supporting the organization.

2. **Sunk Cost Fallacy**:

People feel compelled to justify their past investments (time, money, effort) by continuing to support the organization rather than accepting the loss.

3. **Identity and Ego Protection**:

Acknowledging they were duped can feel like a personal failure, challenging their self-image and leading to feelings of embarrassment or shame.

4. **Social Pressure**:

If they are part of a community that supports the organization, admitting they were deceived can lead to social isolation or backlash.

5. **Hope and Optimism**:

People often cling to the hope that their trust was not misplaced and that the organization will eventually deliver on its promises.

6. **Misinformation and Denial**:

They might lack access to accurate information or be in denial about reality due to a continuous stream of misleading information from the organization.

 

 

Del Bigtree ICAN

Front Organizations and Flim-Flam Operations: Uncovering Deceptive Business Practices

/1 Comment

When someone covers up their flim-flam operations with legitimate organizations, it is often referred to as a “front organization” or “front company”. This practice involves creating or using a legitimate-looking entity to disguise illegal or unethical activities, making it harder for authorities and the public to detect the underlying fraudulent actions.

Del Bigtree ICAN

ICAN and CHD are both political organizations by the rule of the law and are skirting around the regulations. They should be a 527 organization not a 501c3. They are collecting millions and millions of dollars and no one has any idea where it goes except Dell and Bobby and people just keep opening wallets and charging their credit cards and let’s not forget the pharmaceutical corporations that back there flim-flam operations. Don’t you find it strange that they have never accomplished anything concrete?

😔 😔 😔😔😔😔😔😔😔😔😔😔

Greg Wyatt was right all along and people still have a problem digesting the truth!

A political organization typically cannot be a government non-profit. Non-profit organizations are generally classified under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code, with various sub-sections specifying different types of non-profits. For example:
– **501(c)(3)** organizations are charitable non-profits that are restricted in their political activities.
– **501(c)(4)** organizations can engage in political activities, but their primary purpose must be promoting social welfare.
– **527** organizations are political organizations primarily for the purpose of influencing the election or appointment of individuals to public office.

Government agencies themselves are not considered non-profits; they are funded by taxpayer money and operate under different rules and regulations. However, non-profits can receive government grants and contracts to carry out specific projects or services.

To summarize, while a non-profit organization can engage in political activities, especially under the 501(c)(4) and 527 designations, it remains distinct from government agencies.

What is the Probability?

/1 Comment

Let’s consider an oversimplified scenario.

The estimated number of domain name registrations across all top-level domains is approximately 367.3 million.

Assuming there are 5,939 domains associated with the same IP address, the probability that any given domain is assigned to that particular IP address is correctly calculated as 5,939 divided by 370,000,000, which equals approximately 0.000016.

If there are three individuals known to each other, and each individual has one website within that set of domains, the probability that all three websites randomly end up on the same IP address is obtained by raising the individual domain probability to the power of 3.

The resulting probability of approximately 4.096e-15, or roughly 1 in 244,140,625,000,000, indicates that the likelihood of all three websites ending up on the same IP address purely by chance is extremely low. This probability can be compared to winning the lottery multiple times to illustrate its rarity.

 

From COINTEL 2.0

Math Verified by GregWyatt.net

Greg Wyatt Interviewed by Tom Quinn on KSCO RADIO (Updated)

/3 Comments

Greg Wyatt was interviewed on the Tom Quinn show in Santa Cruz, CA that aired on KSCO-AM on Jan 21, 2022 sharing his research on Del Matthew Bigtree, his charity and RFK Jr and his charity.

UPDATE: We now have a transcript of the interview here:
https://gregwyatt.net/ksco-interview-transcript/

Copyright © 2025 by Greg Wyatt