An independent researcher. We encourage readers to verify information.
Kennedy Debunked | Vol. 1
Kennedy Debunked
Explore Debunks
Explore Debunks
Written by Larry Ramer
Reality: Robert F. Kennedy Jr is absolutely correct when he says that Israel is not committing genocide. According to Oxford Languages, genocide is defined as “the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group. “
Far from aiming to “destroy” all Gazans, the Israeli military is taking multiple steps to kill as few noncombatants as possible in the course of its war against Hamas. In fact, according to a statement made on May 3, 2024 by a top U.S. expert on urban war, John Spencer, “Israel has done more to prevent civilian casualties in war than any military in history.” Spencer, who has extensively studied the Israel-Hamas War, is the Chair of Urban Warfare studies at West Point’s Modern War Institute.
What RFK Jr. Has to Say:
In an interview with Piers Morgan, Kennedy said:
“Today Hamas, which is you know authoritarian control, hasn’t won an election in 16 years of Gaza, is a corporate kleptocracy and it’s absolutely intent on one issue one issue only, to annihilate Israel and to kill all the Jews.
In their charter Hamas has a provision that says it is against Islamic law to even negotiate with Israel except as a ruse. So I don’t see how people who are saying, ‘well you should have a ceasefire.’ Then what? Then you’ve rewarded Hamas for taking hostages and they’re going to keep taking hostages to get more and more advantage. This is, by the way, the fifth ceasefire. On October 7th, they broke a cease fire.”
Steps That Israel Has Taken to Minimize Civilian Casualties
In his X feed, Spencer detailed the many steps that Israel has taken during the war in order to kill as few Gaza civilians as possible.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have told Gazan civilians to evacuate areas where it is going to attack next, and the IDF has actively helped civilians leave places that will be targeted. Moreover, the IDF has used multiple methods to tell civilians to leave dangerous areas. In addition to flyers, as of May, it had made more than 79,000 direct phone calls and sent more than 13.7 million text messages in order to tell civilians to evacuate parts of Gaza that the military planned to target.
Other steps that the IDF has taken to facilitate evacuations include conducting “multi-hour pauses” of their operations and handing out maps that detail which areas will be targeted in the future.
Israel Has Been More Careful to Avoid Civilian Casualties Than Any Military in History
As I noted in the introduction, Spencer said that Israel had actually done more to prevent civilian casualties
during a war than any other country .
Israel has done everything to protect civilians that the U.S. has done in its wars, he reported. And the Jewish State has taken some actions to protect civilians that America has never utilized, Spencer added. Indeed, I never remember the U.S. actively evacuating civilians from areas that it was going to attack during its wars.
So Why Have So Many Gazans–Including Women and Children — Been Killed in Gaza by Israel?
Based on Hamas’ estimate of total deaths and Israel’s estimate of the number of Hamas fighters that it has killed, the ratio of civilian deaths to combatant deaths is about 1.5 to 1, Spencer reported about a month ago. But Hamas itself has said that it is not sure whether 11,000 of the deaths that it had previously reported actually occurred.
Leaving out those 11,000 questionable deaths, the ratio of combatants to civilians killed in Gaza is about 1 to 1. By comparison, during the U.S.-led battle against Isis in the Iraqi city of Mosul in 2016-2017, 10,000 civilians and 4,000 Isis fighters were killed.
So Israel has much more effectively protected civilians than the U.S.-led coalition which fought Isis in Mosul. did And nobody has accused the U.S.-led coalition of committing genocide in Mosul.
Further, as Spencer noted, “war is hell,” and international law does not prohibit the killing of civilians in wars. Indeed, during World War 2, the Allies firebombed mass swaths of multiple, large cities, including Tokyo and Dresden, Germany, without taking any significant steps to prevent civilians from being killed. And of course, President Harry Truman dropped nuclear weapons on two Japanese cities, killing many tens of thousands of civilians in the process. And yet almost no one, whether they are Left, Right or Center politically, says that the Allies committed genocide.
Hamas’ widespread placement of weapons and fighters below and inside schools, mosques, and hospitals has also greatly raised the number of civilian deaths in Gaza.
According to Spencer, Hamas has made “every protected site (i.e hospitals, mosques, and schools) a military facility.” He reported that Hamas has used this “human shield” approach more than any other entity he’s ever seen. And Spencer also noted that when Isis fighters entered hospitals, the U.s. “bombed complete hospitals to the ground ” Israel has not done that.
Israel Is Defending Itself Against Genocidal Hamas
Hamas has promised to try to repeat the mass murder and atrocities that it committed against Israeli Jewish civilians on October 7 “again and again” until Israel is destroyed.
In other words, Hamas wants to carry out genocide against Israeli Jews. Israel is fighting to destroy the terrorist organization in order to prevent it from doing so.
The Bottom Line
Israel has taken unprecedented steps to prevent civilians in Gaza from being killed. And based on the assessment of a U.S. expert on urban warfare, the Israeli army has been very successful in limiting civilian deaths, despite Hamas’ widespread placement of fighters and weapons in areas filled with civilians.
Given these points, Robert F. Kennedy Jr is completely on target when he says that Israel is not committing genocide.
Reality: Kennedy has repeatedly emphasized that he does not plan to confiscate firearms or restrict Second Amendment rights. The data shows gun ownership levels have remained the same while mental health issues have drastically increased. He stresses the need for a comprehensive approach that includes better mental health care and understanding the underlying factors contributing to violence, rather than simply imposing gun restrictions.
RFK Jr.’s Position on Gun Ownership
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been profoundly impacted by gun violence with the tragic assassinations of his father, Robert F. Kennedy, in 1968, and his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, in 1963. However, in various interviews Kennedy has reiterated his commitment to protecting Second Amendment rights while seeking to address the complex factors contributing to gun violence. In response to a question about banning assault weapons, RFK Jr. stated:
“I am not going to take people’s guns away. If there was consensus where Republicans and Democrats voted a majority to do that, I would sign the bill.”
He acknowledges that significant changes to gun laws would require bipartisan support, which is currently very unlikely given the strong opposition to gun restrictions among Republicans. However, the data shows that guns are not causing the increase in mass shootings.
Gun Ownership and Violence Data
Contrary to the notion that reducing gun ownership would decrease violence, data shows a different trend. According to the Violence Policy Center, gun ownership rates have remained relatively stable since the early 2000s, with only slight fluctuations.
Active Shooting Incidents
Data from the Pew Research Center indicates a rise in active shooting incidents over the years, despite stable gun ownership rates. This suggests that other factors are contributing to the increase in violence.
The Role of Mental Health
Rising violence, particularly among younger individuals, correlates more closely with increasing mental health issues than gun ownership. Research by the American Psychological Association highlights a significant increase in mental health disorders among young Americans over the past decade:
- Major depression in adolescents increased by 52% from 2005 to 2017.
- Serious psychological distress in young adults increased by 71% from 2008 to 2017.
- Suicidal thoughts and attempts among young adults increased by 47% from 2008 to 2017.
Kennedy continually emphasizes that studies should be done to find out why this is happening.
RFK Jr.’s Policy on Addressing Gun Violence
In a NewsNation Townhall, Kennedy elaborated on his approach to addressing gun violence:
Audience Question: I want to know how are you going to use federal resources to slow and or end the epidemic of gun violence in America.
RFK Jr.: Thank you for that question. For me, it’s a very tough question. You know, I lost my father to gun violence. I lost my uncle to gun violence, and many friends. So, I’m aware and sensitive to the injuries that that can cause to generations.
We have a gun problem in this country. We have a Supreme Court now that has given a very expansive view of the Second Amendment. I believe in the Constitution, including the Second Amendment. Practically, I do not believe that there is, within that Second Amendment, that there is anything we can meaningfully do to reduce the trade and ownership of guns and I’m not going to take people’s guns away.
Because telling the people that I’m gonna take their guns away is not practical. Anybody who tells you that they’re going to have a reduced gun violence through gun control at this point, I don’t think is being realistic. I think we have to figure out other ways to do that. I think we have to figure out other ways to reduce that violence.
Ultimately, my hope is that we can bring Americans together, get them to trust each other, get them to trust their government again, and then we can work out. You know, every American, whether their a Republican gun carrier a Democrat who is, you know, who believes that nobody should own guns, we all want the same thing. We want to keep our children safe and want to keep our neighborhoods safe.
I think we have to look at what the alternatives are for doing that. Some of the things I’ve talked about are that we need to look at some of the other causes of violence. One is the division among Americans, and the hatred, we need to reduce that. The distrust of government, need to reduce that. We also need to look at the contribution, you know, particularly with the school shootings of some of these psychiatric drugs. I’m not saying they’re causing it, I’m saying there is evidence they are and that evidence…
Interviewer: What’s that evidence?
RFK Jr.: Well, part of the evidence includes the fact that for SSRIs, almost all of them have on their manufacturers inserts, among the listed side effects, are homicidal and suicidal behavior.
Interviewer: That doesn’t mean antidepressants caused any of these people to commit mass shootings.
RFK Jr.: Of course it doesn’t. But we ought to be looking at it, shouldn’t we? Should we be looking at video games, and cell phones, and some of the social media stuff. We should be looking at all these things, including the SSRI’s. By the way, there are studies out there that indicate a higher percentage of the people who committed the school violence were on SSRIs.
Interviewer: Yeah, but they’re also like ten’s and ten’s of millions of Americans on antidepressants who don’t commit mass shooting.
RFK Jr.: Of course. There are people who smoke cigarettes and don’t get cancer. Shouldn’t we be looking at those things? Something happened in this country. Something happened that we can’t really explain and that we need to explain. NIH really ought to be explaining it to us, but it doesn’t do these studies. It will not do the studies where there may be a big shot as the culprit.
You know when I was a kid, many of the schools that my friends attended had gun clubs in them. The kids brought their rifles to school every day and nobody was shooting children. In all of human history, all of the nations in the world, there’s never been a time when people randomly went into a group of children and start shooting them. Why did this suddenly start? Why is it not happening in Switzerland, which has, you a comparable number of guns per capita that we have?
Interviewer: No, we have far more guns per capita.
RFK Jr.: We have far more, but they have a lot of guns, but their last school shooting was 21 years ago. We’re having them every 21 hours.
Interviewer: We have few more questions we want to get to. But very quickly in ten…
RFK Jr.: But do you believe we shouldn’t even look at that issue?
Conclusion
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., someone affected by the gun violence himself, is committed to finding balanced, effective solutions to reduce violence. He respects the cultural significance of gun ownership for many Americans and supports democratic processes in determining gun policy. Given the current political landscape, significant gun restrictions are unlikely to gain bipartisan support, making the claim that Kennedy will take away guns both misleading and unfounded.
Kennedy’s focus is on evidence-based measures that starts with good scientific studies, not on infringing on the rights of responsible gun owners. It is crucial to understand the full context of his statements and to understand the data on gun ownership, as well as mental health throughout the years.
Reality: Kennedy’s focus is on the potential endocrine-disrupting effects of chemicals like atrazine, which the CDC themselves have issued a Public Health Statement saying, “atrazine is commonly found in the water collected from drinking water,” and “atrazine can affect your health is by altering the way that the reproductive system works.” He did not say it is causing kids to turn transgender, he simply repeated what the CDC, NIH, and others have noted in the scientific literature.
The Origin of the Claim
The assertion that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. believes water is turning children transgender stems from comments he made during an interview with Jordan Peterson. In the interview, Kennedy discussed the impact of environmental chemicals on children’s health, particularly the role of endocrine disruptors like atrazine. Watch the interview on Rumble Here or listen on Spotify Here. The frog study Kennedy refers to is an NIH published study here.
“I see these huge levels of depression and despair, loneliness in kids. I don’t think there’s a single cause to it. I think blaming it on depression about climate is probably over simplistic. In fact, I think a lot of the problems we see in kids, and particularly in boys, it is probably underappreciated how much of that is coming from chemical exposures. Including a lot of the sexual dysphoria that we’re seeing. These kids are being overwhelmed by a tsunami, I mean they’re swimming through a soup of toxic chemicals today, and many of those are endocrine disruptors. There is atrazine throughout our water supply. Atrazine, by the way, if you put atrazine in a tank full of frogs, it will chemically castrate and forcibly feminize every frog in there. 10% of the male frogs will turn into fully viable females able to produce viable eggs. If it’s doing that to frogs, there is a lot of other evidence that it is doing it to human beings as well.”
The Propaganda
This is what media outlets like CNN and The New York Times had to say:
“Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has a history of repeatedly sharing unfounded conspiracies that man-made chemicals in the environment could be making children gay or transgender and causing the feminization of boys and masculinization of girls.” – CNN
“But no evidence exists to indicate that the chemical, typically used on farms to kill weeds, causes the same effects in humans, let alone gender dysphoria.” – The New York Times
Now let’s look at what the CDC and NIH have to say.
What the CDC and NIH have to say:
Kennedy’s statements were focused on the potential health effects of environmental pollutants like atrazine, a widely used herbicide known to be an endocrine disruptor. The CDC acknowledges that atrazine can persist in water sources and has been linked to reproductive system alterations in animals. The CDC also notes:
“Any atrazine that is washed from the soil into streams and other bodies of water will stay there for a long time, because breakdown of the chemical is slow in rivers and lakes. It will also persist for a long time in groundwater. This is one reason why atrazine is commonly found in the water collected from drinking water wells in some agricultural regions.”
“One of the primary ways that atrazine can affect your health is by altering the way that the reproductive system works. Studies of couples living on farms that use atrazine for weed control found an increase in the risk of pre-term delivery. These studies are difficult to interpret because most of the farmers were men who may have been exposed to several types of pesticides. Atrazine has been shown to cause changes in blood hormone levels in animals that affected the ability to reproduce. Some of the specific effects observed in animals are not likely to occur in occur in humans because of biological differences between humans and these types of animals. However, atrazine may affect the reproductive system in humans by a different mechanism. Atrazine also caused liver, kidney, and heart damage in animals; it is possible that atrazine could cause these effects in humans, although this has not been examined.”
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIH) confirms that endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) like atrazine can interfere with hormonal functions, leading to a variety of health issues. According to the NIH:
“Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are natural or human-made chemicals that may mimic, block, or interfere with the body’s hormones, which are part of the endocrine system. These chemicals are associated with a wide array of health issues.”
Forever Chemicals and Their Effects
Atrazine is not the only concern. Other chemicals, such as antidepressants, are also persistent in the environment and have been found in water sources. According to the NIH, antidepressants are considered PFAS or commonly known as “forever chemicals.” This study says, “high concentration of antidepressants was detected in the raw and treated wastewater.” The NIH notes an adverse effect; “SSRIs are well-known to impair sexual function while they are being taken.”
RFK Jr. Wants to do the Science
To summarize the findings, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is correct that Atrazine is found in water and that it has potential harmful health effects. Not only that, many other forever chemicals, such as SSRI’s, are also known to cause sexual dysfunction among other side effects. These chemicals have either not been studied in humans or studied very little. They certainly have not been studied to see how they react together in the human body over time.
Kennedy consistently advocates for thorough, independent scientific studies on the effects of environmental pollutants, free from corporate influence.
Kennedy/Shanahan Policy on These Chemicals
The claim that RFK Jr. says our water is turning kids transgender is a gross misrepresentation of his actual stance. Kennedy is focused on the potential endocrine-disrupting effects of chemicals like atrazine and advocates for thorough scientific research to understand their impact on human health. His focus is on ending the chronic disease epidemic which starts with good science. This also goes hand in hand with his environmental policy since he wants to clean up these forever chemicals up from our water and food supply.
As always, it is crucial to look beyond sensational headlines and consider the full context and scientific evidence before forming conclusions.
Reality: Official records from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) show no donations from AIPAC to Kennedy’s campaign or any PAC supporting him.
Understanding the FEC Website
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent regulatory agency that oversees the financing of federal elections in the United States. The FEC provides public access to a comprehensive database of campaign contributions, including details of all donations made to political candidates and committees. This database allows anyone to search for and verify contributions by specific organizations or individuals to various campaigns.
The Evidence
A review of the FEC’s official records clearly shows that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and any PACs supporting him have not received any contributions from AIPAC. The screenshot from the FEC website displays the filtered results for campaign contributions for the 2023-2024 election cycle, specifically looking for donations from AIPAC to Kennedy-related entities. As illustrated, there is no data available, confirming that no such contributions exist.
Conclusion
The claim that RFK Jr. is funded by AIPAC is false. According to the official FEC records, neither Robert F. Kennedy Jr. nor any associated PAC has received money from AIPAC. This debunks the narrative that AIPAC is financially supporting Kennedy’s campaign. Always verify such claims against reliable sources like the FEC to avoid misinformation.
Reality: The CDC data shows that measles has never been entirely eradicated in the United States. Although there was a rise in measles cases following the easing of lockdowns and travel restrictions in 2020, this was to be expected. The majority of measles cases in the U.S. are imported, meaning they are brought in by travelers who contract the disease abroad and then bring it into the country. With the lifting of travel bans, the number of imported cases naturally increased. However, it is important to note that the overall number of measles cases has dropped significantly since 2019.
Measles Never Went Away
Contrary to popular belief, measles has never been completely eliminated from the United States. Measles cases have been recorded every year. Nearly all measles cases were imported cases, meaning a traveler was exposed abroad and brought it into the U.S.
Below is a breakdown of measles cases by year from the CDC, highlighting the fluctuation in case numbers and the presence of measles in the U.S. even before the recent debates over vaccination:
2019 Measles Outbreak
The 2019 measles outbreak in the United States saw a significant rise in cases, from 381 in 2018 to 1,274 in 2019. This increase is often cited as evidence of a resurgence linked to anti-vaccine rhetoric. However, the details of the outbreak reveal a different story. According to a New England Journal of Medicine analysis, the outbreak began when one unvaccinated child returned home from abroad with measles, triggering a localized outbreak in New York City.
This was not a widespread outbreak across the entire U.S. but rather a concentrated incident in the Williamsburg area. 72.9% of cases between September 30, 2018, and July 15, 2019 were from this area.
Understanding Vaccination and Reporting Bias
The New England Journal of Medicine study reports that “85.8% of the patients with a known vaccination history were unvaccinated.” This statistic is often used to argue that unvaccinated individuals are primarily responsible for measles outbreaks. However, it’s important to note potential biases in reporting vaccinated cases. The study highlights that:
“Because of the potential for a false positive IgM assay, patients who lacked clinical information and had only a positive IgM assay were included only if they were confirmed to be unvaccinated, since the likelihood of a true infection would increase in the absence of vaccination.”
This suggests that vaccinated cases may have been underreported due to the exclusion of cases that could not be confirmed through clinical information. The bias towards reporting unvaccinated cases can skew the perception of the role of vaccination in measles outbreaks.
Mumps Outbreak Among Vaccinated
Interestingly, Brooklyn also experienced a mumps outbreak in 2009. The analysis of the 2009 mumps outbreak provides critical insights:
“Transmission was focused within… schools for boys, where students spend many hours daily in intense, face-to-face interaction… The epidemiologic features of this outbreak suggest that intense exposures, particularly among boys in schools, facilitated transmission and overcame vaccine-induced protection in these patients.”
The mumps outbreak, which occurred among a highly vaccinated population, was driven by the high-density, close-contact environment of the schools, which facilitated the spread of the virus despite vaccination. This context is crucial for understanding the dynamics of infectious diseases. Vaccination is never 100% effective and other factors can contribute to an outbreak.
Data Insights from CDC Reports and Studies
According to a CDC analysis, “During January 1, 2020–March 28, 2024, CDC was notified of 338 confirmed measles cases; 97 (29%) of these cases occurred during the first quarter of 2024, representing a more than seventeenfold increase over the mean number of cases reported during the first quarter of 2020–2023. However, this is expected as travel restrictions and lockdowns were in place in 2020. As we learned, most cases are imported. Travel restrictions being lifted are the primary reason for the increase in cases since 2020. It is notable to point out that the U.S. still has less cases so far in 2024 (151 measles cases) than in 2019, 2018. 2015, 2014, 2013, 2011, and more.
As you can see below, the highest vaccination year was also the year of the 2019 measles outbreak. According to the CDC, the vaccination rate for kindergarteners was 95.2%. Once again, this suggests that outbreaks are more nuanced than vaccination rates.
Who’s to Blame?
The claim that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is responsible for the resurgence of measles is baseless and misleading. Data shows that measles has never been fully eradicated in the U.S., and recent outbreaks are primarily due to imported cases, not domestic anti-vaccine sentiment. The 2019 outbreak was localized in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, and caused by international travel, not a widespread anti-vaccine movement. High vaccination rates in 2019 and a similar mumps outbreak in 2009 in the same community illustrate that other factors, like close-contact environments, contribute to disease spread.
Blaming Kennedy is misleading and ignores the true causes of these outbreaks. It also ignores the fact that vaccination is never 100% effective and that while you may have a reduced risk of measles, mumps, and rubella, you can also have other side effects. “I think some of the live virus vaccines are probably averting more problems than they’re causing,” Kennedy told Lex Fridman. The CDC says, “There are risks in taking any medicine, vitamin or other supplement.” A person should have the bodily autonomy to weigh the risks and benefits for themselves to make an informed decision. Read more about his vaccine stance here. Kennedy is also running to end the chronic disease epidemic. We are paying more for healthcare than anywhere in the world but have the worst health outcomes. Read more about his policies here.
Reality: His comments on prosecuting climate deniers have been taken out of context and are false. The comments were targeted specifically to the Koch brothers who knowingly spread misinformation about climate change for profit.
The Source of the Climate Denier Claim
The video that is being taken out of context is from September 21, 2014. On this day, hundreds of thousands of people gathered to demand action on climate change, marking the largest environmental protest in history. RFK Jr. was also protesting when reporters asked him questions.
During RFK Jr.’s environmental work, he became very familiar with the Koch brothers and their schemes. Rolling Stone posted an article in 2014 about the brothers:
“According to the University of Massachusetts Amherst’s Political Economy Research Institute, only three companies rank among the top 30 polluters of America’s air, water and climate: ExxonMobil, American Electric Power and Koch Industries. Thanks in part to its 2005 purchase of paper-mill giant Georgia-Pacific, Koch Industries dumps more pollutants into the nation’s waterways than General Electric and International Paper combined. The company ranks 13th in the nation for toxic air pollution. Koch’s climate pollution, meanwhile, outpaces oil giants including Valero, Chevron and Shell. Across its businesses, Koch generates 24 million metric tons of greenhouse gases a year.
For Koch, this license to pollute amounts to a perverse, hidden subsidy. The cost is borne by communities in cities like Port Arthur, Texas, where a Koch-owned facility produces as much as 2 billion pounds of petrochemicals every year.”
Quote Taken out of Context
Reporter: “What about politicians? People who deny, who express skepticism?”
RFK Jr.: “I think they are selling out the public trust and, you know, I think those guys who are doing the Koch brothers bidding and who against all the evidence of the rational mind, are saying that global warming doesn’t exist. That they are contemptible human beings and that, you know, I wish there was a law you can punish them under.”
View the entire clip below:
Key Takeaways:
Nick Gillespie and Zach Weissmueller on ReasonTV confronted Kennedy on this. Here is a summary of what he had to say:
Kennedy’s remarks were focused on the harmful actions of specific corporate entities, not on individuals who personally doubt climate change. He expressed frustration with corporations like the Koch brothers who were knowingly contributing to pollution and spreading misinformation for profit.
He advocates for legal accountability for corporations that engage in deceptive practices harmful to the public and the environment. He draws parallels to the tobacco industry, which was prosecuted for misleading the public about the dangers of smoking.
Kennedy acknowledges that his views have evolved and that he would approach the issue differently today, recognizing the complexity of the discourse around climate change and free speech.
Conclusion
The claim that RFK Jr. wants to jail climate deniers misrepresents his actual position. His statement targeted the corporate disinformation campaigns that the Koch brothers engaged in. It is also important to note that while Kennedy is an environmental activist, his policies do not align with the Green New Deal. Read more about that here.
Kennedy has been in the public eye his entire life, making him a target for intense scrutiny. The DNC has hired individuals to sift through every statement and action from his past, aiming to spin them into a smear campaign. For readers, a piece of advice: always get the context. Imagine someone dissecting your life, picking apart old posts and taking them out of context. It’s crucial to consider the full picture before forming an opinion.
For additional context at the time, view this Tedx Talk from RFK Jr. It goes over his position at the time more in depth.
Reality: Out of the top 11 donors, four typically donate to Democrats, three donate to people across the political spectrum, one has never donated before, and three primarily donate to Republicans. The three Republican donors also donated to Kennedy when he was running as a democrat.
According to a Politico article in March of 2024, “Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s independent presidential bid is largely powered by a wave of new donors who aren’t political — or at least haven’t been in years.”
They go on to say, “Roughly 21,000 donors have given Kennedy’s campaign at least $200 since he declared his independent run in October, and a POLITICO analysis found that 74 percent of them did not make any political donations during the 2020 cycle.”
Methodology: Keep in mind campaigns can only accept $6,600 per person. political PACs can accept unlimited amounts. Campaigns and PACs cannot coordinate. In this article, we will be examining the top 11 donors of the PAC, American Values 2024.
This information came directly from the FEC.gov, the official campaign reporting website. I then took the top 11 donors and looked through their previous giving history on OpenSecrets.org. Finally, I performed searches by each person’s name to find background on the person.
Top 11 Donors
1. Timothy Mellon
Total Donation: $25,003,300
Background: Timothy Mellon, often referred to as “Trump’s biggest donor,” is also the largest donor to RFK Jr.’s PAC. While this connection might suggest a strong MAGA influence, Mellon’s donation history is more complex. Learn more about Mellon here.
Political Donations: Mellon has donated primarily to Republican candidates but has also donated to Democratic candidates, including Tulsi Gabbard and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC). He also donated to Kennedy while he was running as a Democrat.
Policy Interests: Mellon is particularly interested in border security. He has donated over $50 million to Texas and millions more to Arizona specifically to support the construction of a border wall. This priority aligns with candidates from both parties who advocate for stronger border policies, explaining his support for RFK Jr.
2. Gavin de Becker
Total Donation: $14,000,000
Background: Gavin de Becker is a security expert and author known for his work in threat assessment and personal security. He provides security protection for RFK Jr., and they work closely together. He was featured in the ‘Who is Bobby Kennedy‘ documentary.
Political Donations: De Becker has donated to various political parties in the past, but never at the volume he has for RFK Jr. His previous donations have been more modest, indicating a significant step up in his support for RFK Jr.’s campaign. Donation History.
3. Nicole Shanahan / Planeta Management LLC
Total Donation: $4,000,000
Background: Nicole Shanahan is a philanthropist and legal tech entrepreneur. She is Kennedy’s VP pick. Before being picked as VP, she gave 4 million to the PAC supporting RFK Jr. Learn more about her here.
Political Donations: Shanahan used to donate to Democrats. Before her donations to Kennedy, her last donation was in 2020 to the DNC.
4. Mark Gorton
Total Donation: $1,000,000
Background: Mark Gorton is an entrepreneur and founder of the open-source software company LimeWire.
Political Donations: Gorton has donated to primarily Democrats in the past and some independents. View his giving here.
5. Leila Centner
Total Donation: $1,000,000
Background: Leila Centner is an entrepreneur and co-founder of the Centner Academy. Centner Academy is described as “a progressive independent ‘happiness’ school.”
Political Donations: Centner has donated to mainly Republicans, but also some Democrats in the past. She donated to the PAC when Kennedy was running as a Democrat.
6. Michael Colby
Total Donation: $500,000
Background: Michael Colby is the Principal of Colby Family Office.
Political Donations: There are many donors with the same name. I believe I was able to narrow it down to the correct person. If I am correct, Michael has donated to one Democrat in addition to Kennedy. View the records here.
7. Jeff Hays
Total Donation: $410,000
Background: Jeff Hays is a filmmaker and producer.
Political Donations: Hays’ donation history shows a bipartisan pattern, supporting both Joe Biden (2019) and Ron DeSantis (2022) before contributing to Kennedy.
8. Robert Bishop
Total Donation: $335,000
Background: Bishop was a hedge fund manager of Impala Asset Manager. The firm closed in 2022.
Political Donations: Robert Bishop has mainly donated to Republicans except for one person, Joe Kennedy III, who currently works for the Biden Administration and has endorsed Biden. Interestingly, Bishop also donated to Kennedy while he was running as a Democrat. Donation History.
9. Daniel Thropp
Total Donation: $260,000
Background: In 2012, he was deemed insane by a court and sentenced to a psychiatric hospital.
Political Donations: This is his first political donation.
10. Chris Rufer
Total Donation: $250,000
Background: Rufer owns The Morning Star Company which is a tomato packing company.
Political Donations: Rufer has a long history of donating to candidates. He appears to give about evenly to Republicans and Libertarians.
11. Abby Rockefeller
Total Donation: $250,000
Background: I believe this is the daughter of John D. Rockefeller Jr. She was very involved in philanthropy her whole life. She spent her life staying out of the public eye. She is now retired.
Political Donations: Rockefeller has a long history of giving to Democrats in small increments ($6,000 or less).
Conclusion
The claim that RFK Jr. is only funded by MAGA supporters is simply not true. While Timothy Mellon, a prominent republican donor, is indeed the largest contributor to RFK Jr.’s super PAC, the overall donor base for American Values 2024 is much more diverse.
The majority of the top donors have varied political histories, with a pretty even split of donating to republicans, democrats, or both. This diversity is expected with an independent candidate whose goal is to bring people together from all sides of the aisle.
Reality: RFK Jr. is not anti-vaxx; he is pro-science and advocates for vaccine safety, transparency, and informed consent. He has said, “My vaccination policy will not take away vaccines from anybody who wants access to them.”
1. RFK Jr. is Vaccinated
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has repeatedly clarified that both he and his children are vaccinated. This fact directly contradicts the label of “anti-vaxxer.” During his testimony before Congress on July 20th, 2023, he addressed these accusations head-on:
“At one point you say I’m anti-vaxx and that’s a bad thing. The other moment you point out that all my children are vaxxed. I’m fully compliant with the vaccine schedule myself except for COVID. I took flu vaccines for 20 years straight. I have never been anti-vaxx.”
2. RFK Jr. is Pro-Science
Kennedy emphasizes the importance of rigorous testing and transparency in vaccine development. His primary concern is that vaccines should undergo the same rigorous safety and efficacy testing as other medical products. In an interview with Brian Tyler Cohen on May 26th, 2024, he stated:
“What I want is good testing, good safety testing for vaccines, good efficacy testing so that everybody knows and can make informed consent about whether they want this product or not, whether it’s good for their age group, whether it’s good for their cohort, whether it’s good for them. And let’s do the same kind of safety testing that we require for other drugs and we don’t do that for vaccines.”
Under U.S. Code § 300aa–22, the law acknowledges that vaccines have unavoidable side effects, which is why vaccine manufacturers are generally immune from liability in most cases:
“(b) Unavoidable adverse side effects; warnings (1) No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings.”
RFK Jr simply believes that vaccine manufacturers should not have blanket immunity. These companies are not immune when patients have adverse effects from their pharmaceutical drugs; vaccines should be no different.
3. RFK Jr. is Pro-Medical Freedom
RFK Jr. strongly believes that vaccination should be a personal choice and opposes mandatory vaccination policies. He argues that no medical intervention should be mandated without informed consent. In the same interview with Cohen, he emphasized:
“My vaccination policy will not take away vaccines from anybody who wants access to them. My only issue is they should not be mandated. I don’t think any medical intervention should be mandated.”
Kennedy’s stance is clear: while he supports the availability of vaccines for those who want them, he opposes mandates and insists on the necessity of informed consent based on transparent and thorough safety data. The more data that is available, the more people will feel confident to make the right choice.
Take smoking as an example. Doctors at one time said smoking was fine for people, even pregnant women. While cigarettes are not banned, their use has gone down as additional science was performed. This gives consumers informed consent.
4. RFK Jr. has Never been Called Anti-Fish
Kennedy’s work as an environmental lawyer includes significant efforts to remove mercury from waterways. Mercury is a known toxin, and the CDC warns about its dangers:
“All forms of mercury can affect the nervous system and the kidneys.”
This is a stance that CDC contradicts itself on. On one hand, it says all forms of mercury are dangerous, on the other hand, they say some forms of mercury are ok in vaccines.
“Two types of mercury to which people may be exposed — methylmercury and ethylmercury — are very different.”
Through his environmental advocacy, Kennedy discovered that mercury was also present in vaccines in the form of thimerosal, a preservative. Worried moms started to appear at all his events to tell him about their experiences with vaccines and how they believe their children were harmed by them. These moms knew RFK Jr. was serious about getting mercury out of fish, so they wanted him to be serious about it in all aspects.
He campaigned for its removal from vaccines. Today, mercury is out of some vaccines, but not all. According to the CDC, “Influenza (flu) vaccines are currently available in both thimerosal-containing (for multi-dose vaccine vials) and thimerosal-free versions.”
Many vaccines also contain aluminum. “More research attention has been given to EtHg and findings have showed a solid link with neurotoxic effects in humans; however, the potential synergic effect of both toxic agents has not been properly studied,” were the findings in this analysis.
“I fought to remove mercury from fish but nobody called me anti-fish.”
This quote encapsulates his position: advocating for the removal of a harmful substance does not equate to opposing the entire category. Similarly, advocating for vaccine safety does not make him anti-vaccine.
Conclusion
Labeling Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as “anti-vaxx” oversimplifies his position and misrepresents his advocacy efforts. RFK Jr. is pro-science and focuses on vaccine safety, transparency, and regulatory reform. He supports the use of vaccines that are thoroughly tested and proven safe and believes that enhancing public trust in vaccines requires addressing valid safety concerns and ensuring that regulatory processes are transparent and free from conflicts of interest.
This mini documentary goes through the smear campaign on RFK Jr, his environmental work, how he learned about mercury in vaccines, and what he wants to do going forward.
Reality: Although RFK Jr. is a passionate environmental advocate, he does not endorse the Green New Deal. Instead, he focuses on market-based solutions and regulatory reforms, something most Americans agree on.
What is The Green New Deal
The Green New Deal (GND), introduced by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) in 2018, aims to address climate change and economic inequality. It seeks to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, transition to 100% clean energy, and upgrade infrastructure.
The GND emphasizes economic and social justice, proposing a jobs guarantee, public investment in green technologies, and support for workers transitioning from fossil fuel industries.
Contrary to what many believe, this bill seeks to address many more issues than just the environment. It also aims to address inequality through universal healthcare, affordable housing, and education.
A significant aspect of the GND is its reliance on government subsidies and interventions, which will surely add the the national debt. In contrast, RFK Jr. is against subsidizing most corporations.
RFK Jr.’s Approach
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has a long history of environmental activism, focusing on regulatory reform, market-based solutions, and grassroots activism. He opposes government subsidies for clean energy, believing that in a true capitalist market, companies will naturally adopt clean energy because it is cheaper and meets consumer demand.
His primary focus is on eliminating toxins from food and water, a goal that resonates with people across the political spectrum.
Key Differences Between RFK Jr.’s Views and the Green New Deal
While the GND emphasizes broad economic restructuring, RFK Jr. focuses on combating pollution and protecting natural resources through market forces.
While capitalism gets a bad name these days, it is only due to the government intervening on true free-market capitalism by awarding grants and subsidies for mega corporations. Kennedy believes that in true free market, corporations will naturally go to clean energy because it is more sustainable, cost effective, and it’s what consumers demand.
RFK Jr. has never set a specific date or expressed a desire to completely eliminate carbon emissions. He aims to reduce pollution, unlike the GND, which seeks to end carbon emissions completely by 2030.
RFK Jr.’s Environmental Policies
RFK Jr.’s campaign highlights his commitment to addressing environmental issues through free-market solutions and sensible regulations. His policies include:
- Supporting an international plastics treaty.
- Implementing safety regulations to prevent chemical accidents.
- Promoting a national bottle bill.
- Coordinating a national Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) system.
- Modernizing recycling facilities.
- Ending subsidies for plastic producers.
- Holding fracking and petrochemical companies accountable for pollution.
RFK Jr. believes that climate change is a serious problem but rejects using it for profit-making schemes by big corporations and government authorities.
He has stated, “I’m not going to ask everyone to accept that or to get on board with the climate change orthodoxy,” and “in a true free market that doesn’t rely on subsidies and crony capitalism.”
Conclusion
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a committed environmental advocate who does not support the Green New Deal. His strategies focus on regulatory enforcement, market-based solutions, and grassroots activism.
RFK Jr. believes in free market capitalism, emphasizing that companies should move towards clean energy due to market demand rather than government subsidies. He prioritizes reducing pollution and ensuring a clean environment for future generations, a goal shared by many, despite differing opinions on how to achieve it.
