Kirk Moore, MD, is a plastic surgeon who literally stands for “truth, beauty, and goodness.” He is a genuine American hero. Many of us admire Dr. Moore for protecting his patients, children, and adults, by giving them medical certificates stating he had given them the Covid jab when he had not. Following the Hippocratic Oath of “Do no harm,” Dr. Moore saved people from death and an infinite number of other harms, including heart disease, neurologic disease, sterility and miscarriages, cancers, impaired cognition and emotional control, and the passing on of newly defective genes.   Dr. Moore was not only saving the people themselves from the deadly shots, but he was also helping everyone who relied upon them or loved them. If we look at who was most affected by the mandates and hence came to him for the certificates, many would have been among the most harmed by the mandates, such as healthcare providers and emergency responders. And he was saving children who needed the protection of adults against medical abuse.   Dr. Moore was charged with enough crimes by the Biden administration to put him in prison for 35 years, beyond the average lifespan of a 59-year-old man. Then, despite public outrage among Trump supporters, the Trump Administration went along with having Dr. Moore hauled into a courtroom and put on trial. Finally, after five days of grueling trial, Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a statement that the trial was ending, and the government would not be allowed to bring any further trials.   A major question quickly entered our minds: “Was the Trump administration protecting the vaccine instead of Dr. Moore by ending the trial?”   This aligns with the agreement forced on Dr. Moore, which prohibited him from suing the government for financial or other damages. These damages were enormous, stemming from both his practice and his attorney fees, including five grueling days of trial. Did the government do this because they wanted to avoid a new trial where, unlike the current trial, Dr. Moore would be allowed to bring in his own experts on how damaging the COVID jabs were? The judge had thus far prohibited Dr. Moore from bringing in his own medical and scientific experts to confirm how dangerous the vaccines were, and Dr. Moore might have the opportunity if he brought his own case against the government.   Then we interviewed Sasha Latypova — a researcher whom we deeply respect. Both Sasha and Katherine Watt, another researcher we deeply respect, were consultants to Dr. Moore leading up to the trial, and he tells us in the interview how appreciative he is of them and their contributions. Sasha, in her interview, told us that the government had made many mistakes, potentially forcing the judge to take the restraints off Dr. Moore and his team, who wanted to question witnesses about how bad the vaccines are. But in talking with Dr. Moore, who clearly feels grateful for the Trump administration finally intervening on his side, there was more at stake than we thought in regard to protecting the vaccines.   As Dr. Moore described the events of the five days in the final part of this new interview with us, we could see a change in his own analysis. As the last few days of the trial unraveled, it began to dawn on all of us that he could have won the trial!   The government was not only trying to stop further discovery about how bad the vaccines were, but the government must also have become afraid that they could actually lose the jury trial. Not only being able to do discovery in ways that never have been done before, but also winning a jury trial for a doctor who defied the government’s attempt to control his relationship with his physician, would have reaffirmed the basic medical ethics that Covid-19 utterly wrecked.   A victory by Dr. Moore would have helped to restore the sacredness of the doctor-patient relationship, the right and necessity of doctors to give informed consent, and to do their best not to harm t