"I Think He's Dead Wrong": RFK Jr.'s Sister Kerry Kennedy Just Slammed Him On Live TV
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 's sister Kerry Kennedy slammed several baseless conspiracy theories her brother has spread during his tenure as health and human services secretary, saying he's not fit for the job.
'I love Bobby and I find him incredibly charismatic. But I have said — and my other family members have been super clear about this — that we disagree again and again and again on the things that he's said,' she told CNN's Erin Burnett on Monday's episode of OutFront.
"I think he is not an appropriate HHS secretary."
Kerry Kennedy calls out her brother, Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, jr. Hear what she tells @ErinBurnett about calls to impeach him. pic.twitter.com/jYNT9ee8mc
— Erin Burnett OutFront (@OutFrontCNN) April 29, 2025
Kerry Kennedy's response came after Burnett featured a clip from Sunday's episode of John Oliver's Last Week Tonight, where the comedian digs into Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his scandals. Oliver's commentary on the health secretary has since gone viral as he states, 'RFK in this job is dangerous.'
The comedian added, 'He's currently spreading dangerous nonsense and gutting life-saving research, all while bringing in a basement quack.'
View this video on YouTube
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vaccine skeptic who has long promoted initiatives aligned with right-winged conspiracy theories such as removing fluoride in water and consuming raw milk, has received more backlash in recent weeks for the offensive comments he made toward people with autism.
'These are kids who will never pay taxes. They'll never hold a job. They'll never play baseball. They'll never write a poem. They'll never go out on a date. Many of them will never use a toilet unassisted,' Kennedy said last week while pledging to find the cause of autism spectrum disorder by September.
Oliver raised alarm bells at the massive layoff within the Department of Health and Human Services. A top official within the National Institutes of Health has resigned under the current leadership, citing censorship.
'RFK needs to go, and by impeachment if necessary,' Oliver said. 'Too much damage has already been done. This is a man who is clearly in way over his worm-riddled head.'
Burnett asked Kerry Kennedy on Monday if she agrees with Oliver's remarks, to which she responded, 'I think he is not an appropriate HHS secretary.'
Kerry Kennedy then listed the misinformed theories her brother has promoted, including vaccine skepticism, HIV not being the cause of AIDS and that people are transgender because of water pollution.
'This is insanity. Just look at the science,' she said. 'This goes on and on and on. I love my brother. I think he's dead wrong.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
37 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump has a gift for identifying America's problems (and making them worse)
Every now and then, the torrent of news serves up a grim little reminder: Maybe Donald Trump wasn't entirely wrong in his cultural critiques. Not because he's a prophet — God forbid — but because America has gone so far off the rails that his perspective starts to make a certain amount of sense. That's the mood I've been in lately. And no, I'm not just talking about the recent spate of stories about Joe Biden's cognitive decline and what many see as a cover-up. Nor am I talking about reports that Dems are spending $20 million to try to learn how to (re)connect with alienated American men who feel ignored and see the Democratic Party as too weak. Those are just subplots. I'm talking about how President Trump — for all his bluster, baggage and baffling syntax — continues to speak to realities that polite society has decided are too ugly to discuss. Things like uncontrolled immigration, violent crime and foreign adversaries who laugh at perceived American weakness. Consider the following, if only as case studies on why Trump's dark little worldview continues to resonate. Exhibit A: Mohammed Sabry Soliman, the Egyptian national accused of lobbing Molotov cocktails during an antisemitic attack in Boulder, Colo., had overstayed his visa and filed for asylum. It's not a good look for our immigration policy — as though we're importing our own pogroms. Exhibit B: In Virginia, body-cam footage shows Jamal Wali — an Afghan who was an interpreter for U.S. forces — opening fire on police during a traffic stop and shouting that he should've joined the Taliban. Which raises the uncomfortable question: How thoroughly are we vetting the people we bring into this country? Exhibit C: Omer Shem Tov, a recently freed Israeli hostage, told CNN that his captors suddenly treated him better after Trump won the 2024 election. It wasn't because they liked Trump, but because they were scared of him. Which, oddly enough, may have been a side effect of Trump's posturing to look tough. Individually, these stories could be dismissed as one-offs. Together, they sketch a crude, uncomfortable truth: Trump's instincts — however vulgar — often land somewhere in the vicinity of prescient. For example, the recent wave of attacks on Jewish Americans comes as the Trump administration is citing campus antisemitism as justification for deportations and cuts to college funding. At the same time, Trump has blocked most refugees from entering America and recently pushed to end protections for Afghan interpreters and other wartime allies. While many of us decry the lack of compassion and inhumanity inherent in these policies, Trump's message is caveman-simple: Fear works. Even terrorists understand it. That's the whole point of 'peace through strength.' The bad guys get it. And, increasingly, so do voters. To the taste-making class, these concerns might not matter much. But out in the real world — you know, where people lock their doors and pay their taxes — they're not theoretical. They're Tuesday. Now, does this mean Trump's solutions are good? Legal? Morally defensible? No. He governs like a guy with a hammer who thinks everything is a nail. But, in the eyes of many Americans, at least he's swinging the damn thing. Meanwhile, Democrats look like they're waiting for permission to open their own toolbox. This is the terrain Trump thrives on. He projects dominance — or at least the illusion of it — while his opponents are giving HR-executive vibes. And here's the crazy part: Underneath the layers of narcissism, the carnival barking and the conspiracy-peddling, there are hints of greatness — a blueprint for serious leadership that addresses lingering, overlooked problems. Sadly, it's one that Trump himself will never follow. Imagine a version of him — stripped of the spite, grift and performative rage — who actually cared about governing. He'd fix the asylum system. Fund immigration judges to do proper vetting. Appoint competent people instead of family members and sycophants to run our intel and defense departments. Stop trying to undermine the rule of law. Speak in full sentences. He could weed out truly dangerous elements, scare the hell out of our global enemies and still earn the respect of our friends and allies. I could go on. But that's fantasy talk. Like trying to teach a bear ballet — you'll waste your time and probably get mauled. Because Trump doesn't want to govern. He wants to dominate. He wants spectacle. He wants the feud. The man's not interested in building — only demolishing. It's the difference between being a strongman, a showman and a statesman. Trump knows how to be the first two. He has no use for the latter. And that's the tragic comedy of it all. While liberals pretend the smoke isn't there, Trump sees the fire — and instead of reaching for a hose, he grabs a gas can. Meanwhile, voters who are exhausted, scared and angry keep thinking, 'Well, at least he noticed the fire.' Matt K. Lewis is the author of 'Filthy Rich Politicians' and 'Too Dumb to Fail.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. has promoted 'freedom of choice' while limiting vaccines, food
Prior to becoming Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had espoused the idea of "medical freedom," the ability of people to make personal health decisions for themselves and their families without corporate or government coercion. It's an idea supported under Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement to reduce the prevalence of chronic disease in the U.S. by making healthier lifestyle choices. On topics, such as vaccines, Kennedy has said he wouldn't prevent children from being able to receive vaccines but would leave the choice up to parents. MORE: CDC official who oversaw COVID vaccine recommendations resigns "I'm a freedom-of-choice person," Kennedy told Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview in March. "We should have transparency. We should have informed choice, and if people don't want it, the government shouldn't force them to do it." Some public health experts told ABC News, however, that the HHS has been limiting choices on some products for many Americans despite Kennedy's talk about "freedom of choice." Just last week, Kennedy announced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for certain groups. Additionally, Kennedy has called on states to ban recipients of food stamps from being able to use them to purchase soda. He has also praised states for banning fluoride from public drinking water and indicated he will change federal guidance on recommending adding fluoride. The public health experts said Kennedy's actions are setting up a dichotomy on public health. "I think that RFK Jr. has done a really good job of identifying some of the problems [in public health], but it's the solutions that are problematic," Dr. Craig Spencer, an associate professor of the practice of health services, policy and practice at Brown University School of Public Health, told ABC News. "What you're seeing with RFK Jr. and his approach to health is an individualization of public health. It's this idea that you can make decisions for your health, and that's always been true." He went on, "We need to be able to follow their guidance, not just have them tell us, 'Follow your own science.' As the focus shifts from community to individuals, we're losing a lot of that underpinning, which has led to a lot of the gains in public health." Kennedy has repeatedly stated that he is not anti-vaccine and that he supports vaccination. Shortly after Trump's election, Kennedy said in an interview with NBC News that "if vaccines are working for somebody, I'm not going to take them away. People ought to have choice, and that choice ought to be informed by the best information." MORE: CDC official who oversaw COVID vaccine recommendations resigns During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy said he supported the childhood vaccination schedule and that he would not do anything as head of HHS that "makes it difficult or discourages people from taking vaccines." Separately, in an opinion piece Kennedy wrote for Fox News in March on the nationwide measles outbreak, he said the measles vaccine helps protect individuals and provides "community immunity" but also called the decision to vaccinate a "personal one." However, last week, Kennedy announced the removal of the COVID-19 vaccine from the CDC's immunization schedule for "healthy children and healthy pregnant women." The CDC's immunization schedule is not just a guide for doctors but also determines insurance coverage for most major private plans and Medicaid expansion programs. Following Kennedy's announcement, the schedule was updated noting all children would be eligible for COVID vaccines, but now under a shared-clinical decision-making model -- allowing parents to choose whether their children are vaccinated alongside advice from a doctor. "Regarding the vaccines, HHS is restoring the doctor-patient relationship," HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon told ABC News in a statement. "We are encouraging those groups to consult with their health care provider to help them make an informed decision. This is freedom of choice." "If you restrict access, you necessarily restrict choice," Dr. Matthew Ferrari, a professor of biology and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News. "Those two things are antithetical. You can't do both. You can't say you're allowing choice if you're restricting access." Ferrari said the idea of "medical freedom" is catchy, but public health recommendations are made based on how to protect the most vulnerable individuals. "If you look at the outcomes, if you look at the consequences of that movement, it has been to disproportionately restrict access to -- and restrict support and infrastructure to allow people to access -- preventive medicine," he said. "It's sort of easy to say, 'Well, take the vaccine away. But [vaccines] prevent a future outcome of illness for yourself and for others in the community." Traditionally, the CDC's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices decides if there is a benefit to a yearly vaccine and who should get it. The independent advisory committee then makes recommendations to the CDC, which has the final say. The committee was set to meet in late June to vote on potential changes to COVID vaccine recommendations. Spencer said Kennedy's bypassing of traditional avenues when it comes to changing vaccine recommendations is also taking away choice from people. "This did not go through the normal process that it should have, and he basically just made a decision for people while at the same time saying that he's going to let people make a decision," Spencer said. Kennedy has also campaigned to prevent Americans from using food stamps -- provided under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program -- to buy candy and soda. "It's nonsensical for U.S. taxpayers to spend tens of billions of dollars subsidizing junk that harms the health of low-income Americans," Kennedy wrote in an opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal last September. MORE: RFK Jr. to tell medical schools to teach nutrition or lose federal funding At a MAHA event in late May, Kennedy said the governors of 10 states have submitted waivers to the United States Department of Agriculture requesting permission to ban SNAP recipients from using benefits to buy candy and soft drinks. "The U.S. government spends over $4 trillion a year on health care," Nixon said in a statement. "That's not freedom -- it's failure. Secretary Kennedy is unapologetically taking action to reverse the chronic disease epidemic, not subsidize it with taxpayer dollars. Warning Americans about the dangers of ultra-processed food isn't an attack on choice -- it's the first step in restoring it." Nutrition experts agree that sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are unhealthy. Frequent consumption of SSBs is linked to health issues such as weight gain, obesity, type 2 diabetes, tooth decay, heart disease and kidney diseases, according to the CDC. Kristina Petersen, an associate professor in the department of nutritional sciences at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News there is a crisis of diet-related diseases in the U.S., which increase the risk of disability and reduces lifespan. However, she said there needs to be strong evidence of the benefits of restrictive policies if they are to be put in place. "In terms of limiting people's choices, it is important to consider all the different roles that food plays in someone's life, and so obviously we want people eating nutritious foods, but also we need to acknowledge that food is a source of enjoyment," Petersen said. "A lot of social situations revolve around food. So, when we're thinking about reducing people's access to given foods, we need to think about the consequences of that." One unintended consequence could be an eligible family not signing up for SNAP benefits because of the restrictions, she said. Even if a ban on buying candy and soda with SNAP benefits does occur, Petersen said she is not aware of any evidence that shows banning certain foods leads to healthier diets. She added that the nation's dietary guidelines are written to emphasize healthy foods like fruits and vegetable rather than telling people to avoid or restrict less healthy foods. "All foods can be consumed as part of a healthy dietary pattern. It's really just the amount and the frequency that determines whether that pattern is helpful overall or less helpful," Petersen said. "People can have small indulgences, but really, we're interested in what is their pattern over a period of time." Providing incentives for purchasing healthier foods may be more effective and still allow people to have choice, Petersen said. A 2018 study used a model simulation to study the effects of food incentives, disincentives or restrictions in SNAP. One of the simulations involving incentives for foods such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, fish and plant-based oils found to have the most substantial health benefits and be the most cost-effective. "Things like fruits and vegetables, they do tend to be more expensive, so if you incentivize them by providing more benefits … that's making the dollar go further, and it's kind of making the economic piece of this a bit stronger," Petersen said. "A lot of this is framed around personal choice. Rather than restricting access to, how can we give people more access to healthy foods? I think that's going to have the greatest benefit here." ABC News' Youri Benadjaoud and Cheyenne Haslett contributed to this report. RFK Jr. has promoted 'freedom of choice' while limiting vaccines, food originally appeared on
an hour ago
RFK Jr. has promoted 'freedom of choice' while limiting vaccines, food
Prior to becoming Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had espoused the idea of "medical freedom," the ability of people to make personal health decisions for themselves and their families without corporate or government coercion. It's an idea supported under Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement to reduce the prevalence of chronic disease in the U.S. by making healthier lifestyle choices. On topics, such as vaccines, Kennedy has said he wouldn't prevent children from being able to receive vaccines but would leave the choice up to parents. "I'm a freedom-of-choice person," Kennedy told Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview in March. "We should have transparency. We should have informed choice, and if people don't want it, the government shouldn't force them to do it." Some public health experts told ABC News, however, that the HHS has been limiting choices on some products for many Americans despite Kennedy's talk about "freedom of choice." Just last week, Kennedy announced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for certain groups. Additionally, Kennedy has called on states to ban recipients of food stamps from being able to use them to purchase soda. He has also praised states for banning fluoride from public drinking water and indicated he will change federal guidance on recommending adding fluoride. The public health experts said Kennedy's actions are setting up a dichotomy on public health. "I think that RFK Jr. has done a really good job of identifying some of the problems [in public health], but it's the solutions that are problematic," Dr. Craig Spencer, an associate professor of the practice of health services, policy and practice at Brown University School of Public Health, told ABC News. "What you're seeing with RFK Jr. and his approach to health is an individualization of public health. It's this idea that you can make decisions for your health, and that's always been true." He went on, "We need to be able to follow their guidance, not just have them tell us, 'Follow your own science.' As the focus shifts from community to individuals, we're losing a lot of that underpinning, which has led to a lot of the gains in public health." Limiting access to COVID-19 vaccines Kennedy has repeatedly stated that he is not anti-vaccine and that he supports vaccination. Shortly after Trump's election, Kennedy said in an interview with NBC News that "if vaccines are working for somebody, I'm not going to take them away. People ought to have choice, and that choice ought to be informed by the best information." During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy said he supported the childhood vaccination schedule and that he would not do anything as head of HHS that "makes it difficult or discourages people from taking vaccines." Separately, in an opinion piece Kennedy wrote for Fox News in March on the nationwide measles outbreak, he said the measles vaccine helps protect individuals and provides "community immunity" but also called the decision to vaccinate a "personal one." However, last week, Kennedy announced the removal of the COVID-19 vaccine from the CDC's immunization schedule for "healthy children and healthy pregnant women." The CDC's immunization schedule is not just a guide for doctors but also determines insurance coverage for most major private plans and Medicaid expansion programs. Following Kennedy's announcement, the schedule was updated noting all children would be eligible for COVID vaccines, but now under a shared-clinical decision-making model -- allowing parents to choose whether their children are vaccinated alongside advice from a doctor. "Regarding the vaccines, HHS is restoring the doctor-patient relationship," HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon told ABC News in a statement. "We are encouraging those groups to consult with their health care provider to help them make an informed decision. This is freedom of choice." "If you restrict access, you necessarily restrict choice," Dr. Matthew Ferrari, a professor of biology and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News. "Those two things are antithetical. You can't do both. You can't say you're allowing choice if you're restricting access." Ferrari said the idea of "medical freedom" is catchy, but public health recommendations are made based on how to protect the most vulnerable individuals. "If you look at the outcomes, if you look at the consequences of that movement, it has been to disproportionately restrict access to -- and restrict support and infrastructure to allow people to access -- preventive medicine," he said. "It's sort of easy to say, 'Well, take the vaccine away. But [vaccines] prevent a future outcome of illness for yourself and for others in the community." Traditionally, the CDC's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices decides if there is a benefit to a yearly vaccine and who should get it. The independent advisory committee then makes recommendations to the CDC, which has the final say. The committee was set to meet in late June to vote on potential changes to COVID vaccine recommendations. Spencer said Kennedy's bypassing of traditional avenues when it comes to changing vaccine recommendations is also taking away choice from people. "This did not go through the normal process that it should have, and he basically just made a decision for people while at the same time saying that he's going to let people make a decision," Spencer said. Restricting foods under SNAP Kennedy has also campaigned to prevent Americans from using food stamps -- provided under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program -- to buy candy and soda. "It's nonsensical for U.S. taxpayers to spend tens of billions of dollars subsidizing junk that harms the health of low-income Americans," Kennedy wrote in an opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal last September. At a MAHA event in late May, Kennedy said the governors of 10 states have submitted waivers to the United States Department of Agriculture requesting permission to ban SNAP recipients from using benefits to buy candy and soft drinks. "The U.S. government spends over $4 trillion a year on health care," Nixon said in a statement. "That's not freedom -- it's failure. Secretary Kennedy is unapologetically taking action to reverse the chronic disease epidemic, not subsidize it with taxpayer dollars. Warning Americans about the dangers of ultra-processed food isn't an attack on choice -- it's the first step in restoring it." Nutrition experts agree that sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are unhealthy. Frequent consumption of SSBs is linked to health issues such as weight gain, obesity, type 2 diabetes, tooth decay, heart disease and kidney diseases, according to the CDC. Kristina Petersen, an associate professor in the department of nutritional sciences at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News there is a crisis of diet-related diseases in the U.S., which increase the risk of disability and reduces lifespan. However, she said there needs to be strong evidence of the benefits of restrictive policies if they are to be put in place. "In terms of limiting people's choices, it is important to consider all the different roles that food plays in someone's life, and so obviously we want people eating nutritious foods, but also we need to acknowledge that food is a source of enjoyment," Petersen said. "A lot of social situations revolve around food. So, when we're thinking about reducing people's access to given foods, we need to think about the consequences of that." One unintended consequence could be an eligible family not signing up for SNAP benefits because of the restrictions, she said. Even if a ban on buying candy and soda with SNAP benefits does occur, Petersen said she is not aware of any evidence that shows banning certain foods leads to healthier diets. She added that the nation's dietary guidelines are written to emphasize healthy foods like fruits and vegetable rather than telling people to avoid or restrict less healthy foods. "All foods can be consumed as part of a healthy dietary pattern. It's really just the amount and the frequency that determines whether that pattern is helpful overall or less helpful," Petersen said. "People can have small indulgences, but really, we're interested in what is their pattern over a period of time." Providing incentives for purchasing healthier foods may be more effective and still allow people to have choice, Petersen said. A 2018 study used a model simulation to study the effects of food incentives, disincentives or restrictions in SNAP. One of the simulations involving incentives for foods such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, fish and plant-based oils found to have the most substantial health benefits and be the most cost-effective. "Things like fruits and vegetables, they do tend to be more expensive, so if you incentivize them by providing more benefits … that's making the dollar go further, and it's kind of making the economic piece of this a bit stronger," Petersen said. "A lot of this is framed around personal choice. Rather than restricting access to, how can we give people more access to healthy foods? I think that's going to have the greatest benefit here."
