Transcribed excerpts from selected segments of discussion with Randy Bock and Jonathan Engler in August 2023 about the New York City mass casualty event of spring 2020. [Another section added 29 November 2025]
Hockett: [40:46] “I think if you, after three years, do not have a conspiracy theory of some kind, you’re just not paying attention. I mean it’s indisputable that people, our leaders in this mess, conspired, right? I mean, there was planning. Okay, we’re going to tell people that the vaccine is safe and effective even though we don’t really have any data. So pick your conspiracies is what I would say. I do, at this point, I think go a little further than Jonathan, in that I do think that there’s evidence from New York City in particular — and we’re not going to get into all of this today — but I think it was staged. I think we had staged sudden spread of a novel deadly coronavirus.
That does not mean that this particular coronavirus does not exist. I think that there are many coronaviruses and many agents out there around us at all times, any of which could be co-opted. That’s my term for — co-opted, picked, let’s test for this. I effectively think that’s what happened. I’m not a biologist, I’m not a medical doctor, but my bottom line is if this thing was out there, and it’s deadly, where would we see it? Where would we see it?
This idea that there was ‘silent spread’ – and actually, this was just in The Wall Street Journal yesterday. It’s maddening. Holman Jenkins, you know, venerable long-time columnist for The Wall Street Journal, the title of his op-ed is ‘Do we understand covid yet? Part two.”
And, inexplicably, he seems to be grappling a little bit, but inexplicably he says, Our early inklings proved correct. Covid’s defining feature wasn’t lethality but speed and ease of spread. Covid’s threat to the social order— hold on — Covid’s threat to the social order laid primarily in the number of cases that might hit.
Okay, so we have a bomb metaphor here: …might hit medical providers at the same time. Looking back, the explosions, he says, another bomb, so I think he’s — is he looking at the data? I hope so. The explosions in Wuhan, Northern Italy, and New York City seem best explained by a virus rampant in populations that had not yet been warned about its existence and by medical providers accidentally helping to transmit it to the most vulnerable.
So he’s — there’s so many contradictions here, I can’t even. But this is where we are right now: The Wall Street Journal, in New York City, they can’t even reconcile or grapple with the fact, or even talk about the fact that they had 27,000 extra people die in 11 weeks. 27,000. Where are the bodies? That where I’m at. You know, it’s like, ‘is there a virus?’ I don’t know. I just want to know the names of these extra people.”
Hockett [47:00]: “I question just the idea of spread period: This ‘virus from afar’ right? And that’s why I keep referring to these things lately as staged. You know, like, of course the virus isn’t from the United States, right? Of course it’s from someplace else, right? And it came over and then it leaked from a lab and it transmitted Hollywood-plotline style person to person to person and strategically created mass casualty events in Iran and Madrid and Northern Italy but not in Berlin, right? And New York but not at the same scale of Seattle or Chicago. It’s just, I think what’s happened is, especially with New York, and it’s a little bit of the New Yorker mindset, you know, with all due respect, is, you know, something doesn’t happen unless it happens in New York.”
Hockett [49:28]: “I’ve only actually come to this in the past few weeks, and have emailed New York agencies about this and I haven’t, I haven’t gotten any response, but there is data from a few different sources that suggest that New York City hospitals experienced casualty in those last two weeks of February and first two weeks of March that may have been post-dated and pushed forward. So what I wonder is whether — because you can’t actually…”
Bock: “You think there was ballot harvesting.”
Hockett: “No, that’s not what I’m saying, I don’t want –“
Bock: “I mean, I know that’s a different topic.”
Hockett: “I’m trying to tell you, listen, what I’m trying to tell you is I think that there was death that they’re not disclosing, that it actually occurred and they pushed it forward into the curve. That, that’s what I’m telling you.”
Bock: “Right, I’m making an analogy.”
Hockett: “I don’t care about the ballot stuff. What I’m saying is, in order for Donald Trump or any U.S president to make the emergency declarations that they made — activate the Stafford Act, mobilize people, they can’t do that in anticipation of an emergency. There has to be an emergency they’re responding to. So, [what] Tucker Carlson or anybody needs to ask Donald Trump is, what was the Emergency?”
Bock [to Hockett] [1:11:00]: What is the ‘Lucy Letby’ of this [New York] hospital-itis thing? What do you think it is? Is it ventilators? Is it conspiracy? Is it factitious data? Is it pumping and priming the, what I call recasting the ballots, ballot harvesting of death certificates? What do you think is the prime suspect here?
Hockett: I think it could be all of those things. I think that – I have concerns that these deaths, especially in hospitals, I have concerns that that number of deaths did not, did not actually happen in those weeks.
Bock: Okay, so now we’re talking massive, genuine conspiracies.
Hockett: Massive fraud. No, not conspiracy.
Bock: But people would have to get together, they have to consign, assign themselves to do this. They would have to join in league and essentially agree never to speak about this again. Who are the people who could perpetrate such a thing? Is this some registrar, I don’t know, at the board of health in New York City? Wouldn’t there be some kind of paper trail, an email thread or some kind of conversation? Who did this? It’s hard enough to get five people to agree on where to go for brunch. And yet you’re saying these numbers could massively have the tide turned, like the Red Sea parting of data.
Hockett: So, I would say this was actually incredibly easy to pull off, and here’s why. First of all, if I’m a doctor in a New York City hospital, do you think a doctor in any hospital anywhere, England too, could tell you how many people die in a month in a hospital? There’s no chance. They can’t tell you how many people die. They don’t know. And they certainly don’t know how many people die at Bellevue, or Montefiore, or anywhere else, right? So, I don’t think this necessarily requires conspiracy or knowledge on the part of any [individual] doctor or nurse, right? They only have their hand on one part of the elephant. They only see their little part.
Bock: But on a regular day in 2017, they also only have one hand on the elephant, and you don’t have these massive numbers. So where do the numbers come from?
Engler: Well, they do and they don’t. We’re talking about aggregating bits of information from lots of different sources. It’s essentially atomized. You put a large number of very small anomalies together, you get a large number. It’s like, for example, if the mRNA vaccines are deadly to the tune of, say, one in a thousand injections — I don’t know what the answer is – but say they were. Then the chances are that the vast majority of people, nearly everybody, would know, maximum, only one extra normal person dying.
Bock: I understand that, but still, for this to happen, you know. We watch the Super Bowl ever—
Hockett: Do you want to hear how it could happen? Do you want to hear? I have an explanation. I’m not just speculating.
Bock: Yeah, because I do want to round this out.
Hockett: Let me walk you through how this could happen. It’s very easy. Starting April 14, 2020, New York City announced these “probable” deaths. And between April 14 and June 1st, they added around 4,500 “probable COVID deaths,” right? You do that in an outbreak.
Bock: But you’re also saying the absolute number of deaths was higher.
Hockett: Let me finish. Let me finish, okay? Because I want to walk you through how this could happen. So, they announce these probable deaths, which “probable deaths” are a thing in outbreaks. I have an MD sister who worked in Ebola outbreaks, so I know how this works. I know why they do probable deaths in a localized outbreak, okay?
But they added these probable deaths. When were those probable deaths, when they added them – which they’ve since removed a lot of them, by the way, as [probable] COVID deaths – but when were they from? They could have been from even as far back as December.
Death certificates do not get processed right away. This ‘real-time death reporting’ thing is not a thing – in the real world. So what New York City was reporting at the time, what Cuomo was reporting at the time for the state, were hospital deaths, okay? He said that later. He said that. And then he got lambasted for not reporting deaths at home, although deaths at home, again, take longer to process.
So, all you would need to do – yes, it does require “errors” [makes air quotes], you know conspiracy, cover-up, but really only on the part of a core group of people. It would take state and federal. There has to be fraud at some level there —
Bock: Right. There has to be somebody –
Hockett: But the noble lie – hold on, one more point – the noble lie would have been this: Those people who died back here, they “probably died from COVID” right? So that’s what the inside vital stats people would have been told.
Bock: I understand, but the absolute number of deaths increased.
Hockett: It did.
Bock: So they needed to get some actors, you know, dead people to be those actors.
Hockett: It’s not, it’s not – right. But it’s not, so what I’m saying is, I’m not alleging that the deaths didn’t occur. What I’m saying is, a very real possibility, I mean, you were calling it “ballot harvesting,” but the previous deaths were pushed into the curve, in some way. Even if it’s only deaths from the previous week, the prior week to mid-March.
Bock: I understand, but you’re still talking about tens of thousands extra. And that’s the issue and whether they exist or not…
Hockett: I’m not saying that that accounts for all of it –
Bock: It would be interesting to know, you know, John Beaudoin of PANDA has been looking at deaths certificates on a granular level, from Massachusetts. I don’t know if you’ve coordinated with him at all. I don’t know if he can lend any expertise on this.
Engler: I speak to John quite regularly, yeah.
Bock: So, I’m going to call it a day. I think it was a very successful show. If you have any last words, Jonathan? Jessica?
Engler: No, but you can see there’s an awful lot more to say. Maybe we’ll come back.
Bock: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. I’d love to hear from our viewers and listeners.
Another excerpt from the conversation here:
Randall Bock Authentic Advice episode post, 26 October 2025
Leave a Reply