Speaker 1: Up next The Truth with Lisa Mouf part of the game.
Speaker 1: We're in the fight of our lives for freedom and
Speaker 1: liberty in America. Our government's response has been illuminating. The
Speaker 1: COVID democrats have shown themselves to be authoritarians who are
Speaker 1: willing to abuse your power to try to control you,
Speaker 1: to try to control me. They have censored very similar
Speaker 1: to what we see in communist countries like China, because
Speaker 1: what China understands is if you control the flow of information,
Speaker 1: if you control what people read, see and hear, you
Speaker 1: control the population. And they've tried to silence anyone who
Speaker 1: dares to ask questions in America, people like me. They've
Speaker 1: smeared us as anti vaxers just because we have questions
Speaker 1: about a vaccine that was produced in record time. Think
Speaker 1: about that. These are people who have denied Americans early treatment.
Speaker 1: Say things like I ever met in even mono cloni antibodies.
Speaker 1: The FDAY recently pulled emergency youth authorization for some monoclono
Speaker 1: antibodies in the country. Their policies have caused devastation, which
Speaker 1: they don't seem to care about. People have lost their jobs,
Speaker 1: they've lost their livelihoods, and and and a lot of
Speaker 1: instances they've lost their lives through overdoses, delayed care, and suicide.
Speaker 1: This man, who I'm going to have on the show
Speaker 1: this week, he has been a fighter this entire time,
Speaker 1: a fighter for truth and liberty in America. He has
Speaker 1: stood up to the group think. He has stood up
Speaker 1: to this s mere merchants on the left. And what
Speaker 1: he's done is he's advocated for early treatment. He's been
Speaker 1: doing it from the beginning. He's highlighted vaccine injuries, which
Speaker 1: you know, you know, no one wants to talk about that.
Speaker 1: And he's given a voice to world renowned doctors and
Speaker 1: medical experts who dare question the group think. This man
Speaker 1: is Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and he joins me
Speaker 1: this week on The Truth with Lisa Booth. I promised you, guys,
Speaker 1: you don't want to miss this, stay tuned. So the
Speaker 1: last time I had this guest on, he was trying
Speaker 1: to decide if he was going to run for re election.
Speaker 1: Fortunately he is and we are all lucky for it.
Speaker 1: Senator Ron Johnson, thank you so much for for taking
Speaker 1: time for the show. I really appreciate the opportunity. You know, so, sir,
Speaker 1: as I mentioned, you know last time you were on
Speaker 1: you're sort of trying to figure out, you know, what
Speaker 1: does the future look like? Am I gonna run for
Speaker 1: re election? You have decided to which we are all
Speaker 1: thankful for and grateful for. You know what what went
Speaker 1: into that decision, Well, many factors. I think most people recognized.
Speaker 1: I really would have preferred, you know, serving out the
Speaker 1: second term and and going home. But when you take
Speaker 1: a look at the current landscape, you know, we're not
Speaker 1: around and I told people I intended to serve a
Speaker 1: second term and go home. America. I didn't feel like this.
Speaker 1: We weren't anywhere near this divided, and it really does
Speaker 1: seem like this nation's coming apart. And you know, I
Speaker 1: realized I'm in a position to help improve things. I've
Speaker 1: never walked away from problems in the past, and in
Speaker 1: the end, when you when you saw the Democrats, for example,
Speaker 1: just the week before we went on recess, pushing to
Speaker 1: change the Senate um, I don't think people realize how
Speaker 1: significant that was what they were attempting to do. This.
Speaker 1: The Senate was uniquely designed by our founders. Two require
Speaker 1: if you're going to make big changes, you know, if
Speaker 1: you're gonna try and transform this nation, you need the
Speaker 1: public behind you. You need it to be done on
Speaker 1: a bipartisan basis, not a partisan basis. And of course
Speaker 1: what Demick strit Crafts tried to do with with not
Speaker 1: even a real majority, I mean they got fifty, we
Speaker 1: have fifty. Did they break the tie with? Uh? The
Speaker 1: Vice President that they were trying to fundamentally transform the
Speaker 1: Senate so that they could fundamentally transform this nation, that
Speaker 1: they have no mandate to do this, and so that
Speaker 1: that was also part of is Even though thirty two
Speaker 1: Democrats five years ago, when Republicans were in total control,
Speaker 1: they were concerned about us destroying the silibusters so we
Speaker 1: could ram through our partisan bills. Okay, that they were
Speaker 1: a letter imploring us not to do that. Now we
Speaker 1: we weren't going to do that. I don't think one
Speaker 1: Republican sentator back then was favoring getting rid of the filibuster.
Speaker 1: I know President Trump tried to put pressure on us,
Speaker 1: but we understood the vital role of the Senate plays
Speaker 1: that kind of slowing things down. Okay, Uh, twenty seven
Speaker 1: of those same Democratic senators are still in the in
Speaker 1: the Senate. One is the Vice president and they completely
Speaker 1: I mean talk about gro teste hypocrisy. And now all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, them, all of them except probably Joe Manchin.
Speaker 1: I don't think Cinema signed that. I think Joe Manson
Speaker 1: probably did so the rest of them all we're happy
Speaker 1: to limitate filibuster when it was advantageous for them for
Speaker 1: their short, short term power. But of course they wanted
Speaker 1: to do it to change to nationalize our election law,
Speaker 1: hoping that they could turn America into one party state.
Speaker 1: That that was their goal. That's why this was so
Speaker 1: important to them. And again I just say, God bless
Speaker 1: Joe Manson Careson Cinema for holding strong it's it's it's
Speaker 1: it's vile the way Democrats are treating members of their
Speaker 1: own party. Well, and what's scary about it, sir? As
Speaker 1: you mentioned, like feeling like this country is coming apart,
Speaker 1: and I share that sentiment. And so you've got Democrats,
Speaker 1: as you pointed out, trying to nationalize elections to make
Speaker 1: it eat, to basically just keep Democrats in power and perpetuity.
Speaker 1: At the same time where we are seeing just like
Speaker 1: agregious abuse from the government in denying people liberty denying people.
Speaker 1: You can't even go into a restaurant in New York
Speaker 1: City if you're unvaccinated. So these two things are aligning
Speaker 1: at the exact same time, and it paints a really
Speaker 1: scary picture of the kind of vision that Democrats have
Speaker 1: for America. I'm hoping Americans recognized that we're all frauds
Speaker 1: in a pot of water, and it's nearing boiling right now.
Speaker 1: Uh now. Fortunately, I think more and more Americans are
Speaker 1: realizing that water is almost coming up to the boil
Speaker 1: and they're they're starting to hop out of the pot um.
Speaker 1: But our freemes are being relentlessly taken away from us.
Speaker 1: That's what democratic governance does. I mean, when you grow
Speaker 1: the federal government, you naturally start taking away freedoms. It's
Speaker 1: it's a direct proportion. The more government grows, the more
Speaker 1: demands of your hard earned labors, you know, the higher
Speaker 1: taxes are. Taxes are absolutely direct correlation with freedom. But
Speaker 1: when when the government can take your money, they take
Speaker 1: your freedom. And so hopefully Americans are recognizing how during
Speaker 1: the pandemic, one of the one of the results, in
Speaker 1: addition the tragedy of all the deaths, um has been
Speaker 1: a loss of for example, free speech, a loss of
Speaker 1: many other freedoms. And but again just like that, you
Speaker 1: know frog and in the in the pot of water. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, we we we were concerned about COVID so
Speaker 1: early on we knew no nothing about it. It was
Speaker 1: very scary. But as we learned, uh, we should have adapted.
Speaker 1: But people in power utilize the pandemic to entrench their power.
Speaker 1: I I guess they enjoyed controlling people's lives and they
Speaker 1: don't want to let go of it, so they created
Speaker 1: the state of fear to maintain that control over our lives.
Speaker 1: And I think a lot of people just didn't really
Speaker 1: recognize that they were looking for any court in a storm.
Speaker 1: They were afraid of COVID, and they would listen to
Speaker 1: the siren song of for example, the faucis the world
Speaker 1: thing I hear, I've got the miracle vaccine. It'll, it'll,
Speaker 1: it'll relieve us of all this fear. You can all
Speaker 1: rest easy. Well, that didn't happen, did it? Well? And
Speaker 1: I think too, I mean Americans. I don't know if
Speaker 1: the differences between the two parties have ever been clear.
Speaker 1: Because you can just look at the states, right, you
Speaker 1: can look at for instance, everyone's looking at the same
Speaker 1: data during COVID, right that all the governors are seeing
Speaker 1: the same thing. They're they're all looking at the same data.
Speaker 1: And yet you had states like Florida with Governor Ronda
Speaker 1: Santa's reopen, open for business, not masking kids, allowing kids
Speaker 1: to go back to school, you know, so not not
Speaker 1: abusing children like we're seeing in states like New York.
Speaker 1: And then you have New York and what in New
Speaker 1: York do to continue to crush businesses, continue to control
Speaker 1: people's lives, continue to abuse emergency orders. And so I
Speaker 1: don't know if there's ever been a time, at least
Speaker 1: in my lifetime where the difference between the two parties
Speaker 1: has just been so stark and so on display. Yeah.
Speaker 1: What's interesting about that too, is you know the fallocies
Speaker 1: the world claimed, you know, Folly claims he's science and
Speaker 1: the Democrats and well, we're following science. These other heretics
Speaker 1: are spreading this information. I think probably the most egregious,
Speaker 1: the most unforgivable piece of information that that the Democrats
Speaker 1: that I call them the COVID gods, the fuscis of
Speaker 1: the world, the legacy media, the big tech giants has
Speaker 1: suppressed all this information. The biggest piece of information that
Speaker 1: they refused to acknowledge is the AIGE stratification of the
Speaker 1: risk from of of severe consequences from COVID plus core morbidities.
Speaker 1: But the CDC his own data in terms of infection
Speaker 1: cartality rates shows that if you were under seventeen, twenty
Speaker 1: out of a million, of you, of of the population
Speaker 1: would die from COVID twenty out of a million. Uh,
Speaker 1: if you're over I think sixty five is how they
Speaker 1: break it down, ninety thousand out of a million would
Speaker 1: die from COVID. So you know, to me, that's pretty
Speaker 1: obvious that there's a real difference between the ages, and
Speaker 1: so our approach should have changed. Remember how Sweden was vilified.
Speaker 1: That's not caring enough. All their school children went to school,
Speaker 1: they didn't wear masks. One million school children, not one
Speaker 1: of them died from COVID. The teachers who were deemed
Speaker 1: essential they had to work. They actually experienced a lower
Speaker 1: infectivity rate than the rest of the Sweden society. And
Speaker 1: the children just weren't a vector for spreading this disease.
Speaker 1: We knew that very early on. We knew this age
Speaker 1: stratification very early on from reports on Italy and the
Speaker 1: Princess Cruz. Yet we didn't factor and and it was
Speaker 1: a one size fits all destructive response to COVID. And
Speaker 1: I guess my final point here is you can't take
Speaker 1: a look at eight hundred thousand American deaths, the human told,
Speaker 1: the economic devastation, the harm to our children, the loss
Speaker 1: of a year at least of learning that, the social
Speaker 1: implications of having to wear a masks that you know,
Speaker 1: you can't look at our response and call it successful.
Speaker 1: You have to say it was a miserable failure. Well,
Speaker 1: and it's monstrous what's happening to children? I mean, I
Speaker 1: saw a picture the other day on Twitter of Governor
Speaker 1: hokel in New York and she's not wearing a mask,
Speaker 1: and children in front of her are wearing a mask.
Speaker 1: And it's to your point. You know, children are at
Speaker 1: extremely little risk from COVID, right, like the flu is
Speaker 1: a bigger risk to them than COVID. Yet in places
Speaker 1: like l A there, you know, in California they're trying
Speaker 1: to dictate where kids have to be vaccinated from COVID
Speaker 1: to be able to go to schools, they're still being
Speaker 1: forced to wear masks and parts of the country. It's
Speaker 1: we've seen I think it's among girls, increase in attempted
Speaker 1: suicide rates. I mean, like what we are doing to children.
Speaker 1: I don't know how to describe it any other way.
Speaker 1: Besides saying it's abuse, I would call it monstrous. Um,
Speaker 1: it's it's indefensible. Uh. It's again denying reality, it's denying
Speaker 1: the science. It's forcing a one size fits all response
Speaker 1: to COVID on everybody. And you have to ask, there's
Speaker 1: so much that it doesn't make sense about a response
Speaker 1: to COVID. Almost all of it makes no sense. You
Speaker 1: have to ask, you your yourself, why why is this here? Why?
Speaker 1: Why haven't we robustly explored and recommended early treatment every
Speaker 1: other disease we we try and deal with. It's always
Speaker 1: about early detection allows for early treatment produce a better result.
Speaker 1: Let me take over at cancer. You want to detect
Speaker 1: for early so you can cure it. You don't want
Speaker 1: to You don't want to get a cancer diagnosis when
Speaker 1: you're already stage four, and yet that that in effect
Speaker 1: is any age guideline to deal with COVID. You know,
Speaker 1: we spent tens of millions dollars on testing. And you
Speaker 1: know once once the horses out of the barn, once
Speaker 1: contact tracing was useless. Why because our guideline says, if
Speaker 1: you test pause for COVID, do nothing, go home, isolate yourself,
Speaker 1: be afraid. We added Monoculta antibodies, which you know the
Speaker 1: variants are are making less effective. Try and get Monoquona antibodies.
Speaker 1: I know some people have been saved by them, you know,
Speaker 1: recommend their use where you can find them. But that's
Speaker 1: really about that entail and all. And then certainly what
Speaker 1: we found in our panel on Monday, uh, hospital care
Speaker 1: hasn't advanced in two years. Um, it's no. This has
Speaker 1: been a travesty. What has happened to our medical establishment,
Speaker 1: medical journals, the corruption of our health care agents these
Speaker 1: I would say, the capture by them by big pharma.
Speaker 1: It's becoming glaringly obvious. COVID the pandemic has exposed so
Speaker 1: much corruption, so many problems in a healthcare system that caught. Honestly,
Speaker 1: the people in charge are ignoring well. And you had
Speaker 1: mentioned you held a roundtable discussion called the COVID nineteen
Speaker 1: a second opinion panel or a second opinion, and you
Speaker 1: had a panel with a lot of esteemed medical and uh,
Speaker 1: you know, individuals in the science community as well. I
Speaker 1: think it has over you know, almost eight hundred thousand
Speaker 1: views already. Uh, everyone can go find it on Rumble.
Speaker 1: I mean, you've really been out there and pushing for
Speaker 1: things like early treatment. And I can't, for the life
Speaker 1: of me understand why we would not be pushing early treatment.
Speaker 1: Because the thing is, even if you look at I
Speaker 1: ever met, then like it's safe, right, Like, as long
Speaker 1: as you're taking like you know, dosages that are meant
Speaker 1: for your body way and you know you as an individual,
Speaker 1: it's safe. And so it's like why why why do
Speaker 1: they care? If if people want to try iver mected
Speaker 1: and they're not going to have a negative adverse reaction,
Speaker 1: why not let them? I just I don't. I can't
Speaker 1: for the life of me. It is to your point,
Speaker 1: it really raises much deeper questions about what's actually going
Speaker 1: on here, because I cannot think of why we would
Speaker 1: be denying people potentially life saving care. But yet it's
Speaker 1: forcing everyone, Oh, but just go get the vaccine. It's
Speaker 1: it's just it really does raise the question. It really
Speaker 1: does make it seem like it's all about the money, right,
Speaker 1: like it's all about Visor, it's all about Maderna, and
Speaker 1: it's all about lighting their pockets. Yeah, they made me
Speaker 1: more cute as well. But let me just give you
Speaker 1: a listeners. The data that I get censored for when
Speaker 1: I when I put my little chart together, twenty years
Speaker 1: experience for I met on the fires, the FDA adverse events,
Speaker 1: the system for drugs on average fifteen gas reportage in
Speaker 1: association with ivermecting fifteen. I drop your clarkin about sixty nine.
Speaker 1: The season of food vaccine on average, about seventy seven
Speaker 1: deaths per year. We have already exceeded twenty two thousand
Speaker 1: deaths of the COVID vaccine. And I realized theyres does
Speaker 1: not prove causation. But thirty of those deaths occurred on
Speaker 1: day zero one or two following vaccination. It certainly should
Speaker 1: raise concerns. You know, I'm concerned about it. I raised
Speaker 1: this issue with Frances Collins. When I think death around
Speaker 1: three thousand back in uh you know, February March two thousand,
Speaker 1: twenty one. And you know what is responsible to me?
Speaker 1: That's Santor. We've we've linked about six deaths. You know,
Speaker 1: these were young women of childbearing age. You know, with
Speaker 1: clotting the Johnson Johnson vaccine, we've linked six deaths, but otherwise,
Speaker 1: you know, SANDERD people die. Yeah, I got that, Dr Collins,
Speaker 1: but you know, I'm a little concerned about this. But
Speaker 1: they've they've been collectively unconcerned because they've got the single
Speaker 1: minded approach vaccine, vaccine, vaccine. So did they deny early
Speaker 1: treatment because it is true that it's hard to get
Speaker 1: an emergenc use authorization for an experimental vaccine when you
Speaker 1: have effected there these is that what this is about.
Speaker 1: But one of one of the charts that the Dr
Speaker 1: Corey's group, a percentage shows, uh, you know all the
Speaker 1: studies by all these drugs that have been looked at,
Speaker 1: and there's there's literally a cornucopia of drugs, uh cheap
Speaker 1: generic repurpose drugs to show us that efficacy. But but
Speaker 1: they also put the the the expensive ones that are
Speaker 1: recommended in the circle. The only drugs that the helping
Speaker 1: seas are recommending are the expensive patent of drugs. And
Speaker 1: we started about five hundred bucks to pop going up
Speaker 1: to our industrious over three thousand um. Is that what's
Speaker 1: going on here? It's It's kind of hard to come
Speaker 1: up with another explanation, but but it to me, it
Speaker 1: shows corruption. It shows something that's really wrong. It shows
Speaker 1: something that has to be fixed. But as long as
Speaker 1: the people in charge um can deny the reality and
Speaker 1: get away with it, that that's part of the problem here, Lisa. Uh.
Speaker 1: The people that have been what I consider wrong, we'll
Speaker 1: never admit the wrong. They can't afford to be proven wrong.
Speaker 1: The body count is so high, and they have the
Speaker 1: power because we're talking about federal health caage agencies, we're
Speaker 1: talking about the legacy medium media. We're talking about the
Speaker 1: detect giants to social media. These are all people that
Speaker 1: is suppressed in censored early treatment. If it's proven that
Speaker 1: these drugs work and save lives, the consequences for those
Speaker 1: individuals will be severe. So they have the power that
Speaker 1: they can't be proven wrong. They have the power to
Speaker 1: make it very difficult to prove them wrong, So they
Speaker 1: will continue to censor people like me. They will continue
Speaker 1: to vilify and ridicule people like me and these eminently
Speaker 1: qualified doctors who have paid such a huge price professionally, reputationally.
Speaker 1: What one of the doctors, Dr Paul Merrick, He has
Speaker 1: the fl c c C group. The doctor is associated
Speaker 1: with no Emily Qualified. He told the story of how
Speaker 1: he his right to treat patients with off label prescription
Speaker 1: off label drugs. You know doctors had that right. Um
Speaker 1: it was taken away from him and he from him.
Speaker 1: And he describes how he still has seven COVID patients
Speaker 1: that now he couldn't treat, and all you could do
Speaker 1: is sit by and watch those seven patients die. Could
Speaker 1: could intervene, could couldn't use things that he believed worked
Speaker 1: that they were probably begging him to use, as I've
Speaker 1: heard countless times families begging hospitals just try it. What
Speaker 1: do you come on? Come on, twenty two thousand deaths
Speaker 1: of vaccines, You recommend those, but I remect him fifteen
Speaker 1: You won't at least try it. You're telling me my
Speaker 1: loved ones there's no hope they're gonna die. And Mr
Speaker 1: Last rites and you won't let me use I remect
Speaker 1: her hydroxy corkland or vitahim and senor vit him and
Speaker 1: you won't let me. Why not? Why not? It's outrageous?
Speaker 1: And I really hope your listeners will will listen to
Speaker 1: the whole five hour event. We also have a thirty
Speaker 1: eight minute edited condensed version, but you'll get a sense
Speaker 1: of the frustration of these doctors who have had the
Speaker 1: courage and compassion to treat patients. They know it works,
Speaker 1: so they sit back and they know that hundreds of
Speaker 1: thousands of people had needlessly died, and they for all
Speaker 1: their efforts, it's still happening. It's still occurring. So you'll
Speaker 1: see the frustration come out. But you'll also see how
Speaker 1: eminently qualified they are, how unbelievably reasonable they are. And
Speaker 1: for me, you know, I've always been told serious illness
Speaker 1: get a second, maybe even a third opinion. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: go and get a second opinion, not from somebody I
Speaker 1: re tower who doesn't treat patients that don't have the
Speaker 1: courage to expose themselves disease. I'm gonna go to those doctors,
Speaker 1: those nurses that have the courage and compassion to actually
Speaker 1: treat illness and ask who I put on that handle
Speaker 1: on Monday. And yeah, Americans are interested in this because
Speaker 1: you know we have what I checked this morning, almost
Speaker 1: a million people have viewed the five hour video. Almost
Speaker 1: a million people in a couple of days. Eight million
Speaker 1: people viewed Dr Corey's testimony back in December of two
Speaker 1: thousand twenty on I re met in early treatment eight
Speaker 1: million people before YouTube pulled it, censored it. They weren't
Speaker 1: allowed You're not allowed to see that. Um this, this
Speaker 1: is this is outrageous. This is a travesty. What's happened?
Speaker 1: And one thing that really disturbs me, and everyone should
Speaker 1: go watch this. I saw it on Rumble, but I
Speaker 1: think I saw this shorter version was on YouTube as well.
Speaker 1: But Rumble is probably your safest pet because you know
Speaker 1: who knows what YouTube is gonna do. But the one
Speaker 1: thing that has really disturbed me about the past couple
Speaker 1: of years is the silencing of anyone who has questions
Speaker 1: right to your point, that you're labeled misinformation, you're smeared
Speaker 1: with labels like anti vax or all these different things,
Speaker 1: and it's it's really no different than what communists in
Speaker 1: places like China do, because what China understands is if
Speaker 1: you control what people read, see and here, you control
Speaker 1: the population, right, if you control the narrative, you control
Speaker 1: the population. And that's what we've seen from our leaders
Speaker 1: on the left here in America as well as the
Speaker 1: media as well as big tech of shutting down anyone
Speaker 1: who asks questions because they don't want an informed public,
Speaker 1: they want a compliant public. And so what they do is,
Speaker 1: you know, if you if you questioned about the origins
Speaker 1: of the coronavirus, which you basically have to be an
Speaker 1: idiot to not think it came from the lab, but
Speaker 1: you know, so if you raise that question, you're smeared.
Speaker 1: If you if you have questions about a vaccine that
Speaker 1: is the fastest vaccine ever created, you're labeled as an
Speaker 1: anti vax or if you don't want to get a
Speaker 1: vaccine that you did not need your late. But point
Speaker 1: bang is that the effort to try to control the
Speaker 1: narrative is scary to me. What we have seen over
Speaker 1: the past two years concern every American just after the
Speaker 1: tragic death that didn't have to occur. I think the
Speaker 1: greatest casualty of the pandemic this freedom of speech. And
Speaker 1: you know, and I think your listeners realized that the
Speaker 1: reason our founders put freedom of speeches the first guaranteed
Speaker 1: right is every other freedom flows from that. If you
Speaker 1: can control speech, you can control people, you can take
Speaker 1: away their freedom. And so that is then a real
Speaker 1: casualty of the pandemic, and Americans need to be concerned.
Speaker 1: We need to fight back. I first ran for the
Speaker 1: United States Senate, you know, basically to fight for one thing,
Speaker 1: freedom And I've said this has been a rallying cry
Speaker 1: for eleven years and still is. No. This is a
Speaker 1: fight for freedom. It's it's not somebody else's fight, It's
Speaker 1: our fight, and it's a fight we we must win.
Speaker 1: We have to win. People have to understand the stakes.
Speaker 1: We are at a hinge point in history. People need
Speaker 1: to understand, is Mark Livian writing his book, We need
Speaker 1: to awaken to the urgency of this moment. We're in
Speaker 1: the fight of our lifetime. I really believe this with
Speaker 1: every five fiber of my body. It's why I've been
Speaker 1: so vocal throughout COVID. It's why I put myself out
Speaker 1: there by saying I wasn't going to get the vaccine,
Speaker 1: even though though I knew, I took take bullets doing it.
Speaker 1: But we're in the fight of our lifetime for freedom
Speaker 1: and liberty, which is why it's so important to have
Speaker 1: senators like you standing up and you know, unafraid about
Speaker 1: the smearing that takes place, the you know, being called
Speaker 1: names the attacks because we do have to get this
Speaker 1: information out there. We should. It's America. We're allowed to
Speaker 1: have questions and I'm sorry. We're allowed to have questions
Speaker 1: about a vaccine that is the fastest ever created. I'm sorry. Like, yeah,
Speaker 1: if something is developed that quickly, there might be potential
Speaker 1: like issues with it. Right, and if they previously told
Speaker 1: us you're not gonna get COVID, you're not going to
Speaker 1: spread COVID if you get it, that didn't turn out
Speaker 1: to be true. So we're allowed to have questions about it.
Speaker 1: Is healthy to raise questions and ask questions about m
Speaker 1: R and A is newly available to the public, that's
Speaker 1: what's on the CDC's website and talking about it um
Speaker 1: or day. We are allowed to have questions about it.
Speaker 1: It is insane to me that we are in a
Speaker 1: place in society in America we're asking questions. Is dangerous.
Speaker 1: So insane is the right word. You know, we should
Speaker 1: all admit there's so much we still don't know about
Speaker 1: the coronavirus, about COVID disease, about code the vaccine. So
Speaker 1: with that reality, you would certainly recommend exercising cautions as
Speaker 1: you proceed, right, um, certainly when when you're looking at
Speaker 1: an experimental vaccine, and and the truth is and and
Speaker 1: by the way, nobody's challenged me on this statement, nobody,
Speaker 1: nobody can tell you about the long term safety implications
Speaker 1: of the vaccine. Nobody can because we don't know the
Speaker 1: long term We haven't let it play out. We unblinded
Speaker 1: the Cebo group, so so we really don't even have
Speaker 1: a good idea based on the actual trials because the
Speaker 1: Cebol group no longer exists. Okay, so we should have
Speaker 1: exercised caution. We should have based the administration of the vaccine.
Speaker 1: By the way, I'm the champion Right to Try, which
Speaker 1: allows people the freedom to choose whether they want to
Speaker 1: take an experimental drug before it's fully up to approved.
Speaker 1: I'm a champion of that bill, so I support this.
Speaker 1: But we should have made it available only based on
Speaker 1: medical necessity. And that's where you go to that aid stratification.
Speaker 1: Certainly the elderly not you know, I'm elderly. I'm over
Speaker 1: sixty six, but I had COVID, so I chose not
Speaker 1: to get the vaccine. My wife hasn't got COVID. She's
Speaker 1: also chosen not to get that The vaccine, that's her choice.
Speaker 1: But she's doing all the other things, zinc, vitamin C.
Speaker 1: You know, she's prepared. She's gargling. You know, I was
Speaker 1: to two hours of national ridicue for basic of telling
Speaker 1: the truth. Gargling with these you know anti You know,
Speaker 1: these these compounds that can kill the virus, that can
Speaker 1: reduce by replication before he gets into your lungs, has
Speaker 1: proven effective, It works. Why not try? What's what's the
Speaker 1: worst that can happen? You have fresher breath. But we
Speaker 1: haven't been allowed to explore these things. Um, just just
Speaker 1: thinking how many deaths might have been prevented if we
Speaker 1: would have actually been telling people, you know that there
Speaker 1: there are nasal sprays, there are gargles that can help
Speaker 1: prevent further spreads. It doesn't cure it, it's not gonna
Speaker 1: cure it, but it can it can help prevent more
Speaker 1: serious disease. Why haven't we talked about that? You know
Speaker 1: Dr Fauci to vitamin D himself. Why haven't Why haven't
Speaker 1: our health agencies promoted vitamin D? Uh? The most people
Speaker 1: of serious cases of vitamin D with COVID are vitamin
Speaker 1: D efficient, So why haven't we talked about that it
Speaker 1: hasn't been allowed because there's been one approach has been
Speaker 1: a vaccine. And again the insanity of that, uh certainly
Speaker 1: gives gives me scratching my head, going what's what's going
Speaker 1: on here? Also, fresh breath is just a public service
Speaker 1: to your neighbor, you know, sir. One thing I've I've
Speaker 1: been recently, you know, thinking about, is like, so m
Speaker 1: erna has obviously been studied. You know, we've been looking
Speaker 1: at m RNA and potentially using it in vaccines. But
Speaker 1: did big Pharma use the fog of a war and
Speaker 1: a time of crisis to get m r and A
Speaker 1: vaccines to the market on this scale? Yeah? Again, I
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't have all the answers here.
Speaker 1: I just have suspicions and you know, I just know,
Speaker 1: you know, things that we should have done that we did.
Speaker 1: And again I keep going back to early treatment because
Speaker 1: I really the reason I was so in favor of that,
Speaker 1: so promoting it again, totally agnostic in terms of the
Speaker 1: drugs can be used. That's up to doctors, um. But
Speaker 1: the reason it was I thought we I knew the
Speaker 1: vaccine was gonna take time to develop. I mean It
Speaker 1: was a big supporter of Operation Warp speed Um, and
Speaker 1: I'm a big support of people having the choice to
Speaker 1: avail themselves other vaccine. But I thought we might have
Speaker 1: if they were effect enough therapies, we could have nipped
Speaker 1: this pandemic in the bud right off the you know,
Speaker 1: before it really devastated so many people. But that wasn't allowed.
Speaker 1: I mean the censorship started almost immediately. I was listening
Speaker 1: to these doctors out of New York, you know, in
Speaker 1: the the belly of the Beast, I mean, the people
Speaker 1: that had the courage, and they were posting videos and
Speaker 1: talking about their theory the case. Now I'm not saying
Speaker 1: all those videos were right, but it was spreading information,
Speaker 1: not misinformation, not information. These are people treating patients. They
Speaker 1: were observing things that this wasn't standard, you know, problems
Speaker 1: with with lues. This was something different, and they're talking
Speaker 1: about it. But those those videos are being pulled. Remember
Speaker 1: a couple of doctors in California can't remember their names.
Speaker 1: They were talking about how they were successfully treating patients.
Speaker 1: That video was pulled. Why, I mean, what we should
Speaker 1: have done in the midst of a pandemic where there's
Speaker 1: so much we didn't know. We should have allowed doctors
Speaker 1: who had the courage to practice medicine, let them use
Speaker 1: are awfully with prescription rights, and then share the information
Speaker 1: what's working what's not working out. I've then privileged to
Speaker 1: be part of these email groups of doctors, global doctors,
Speaker 1: and I don't chime in very often, but I'm just
Speaker 1: looking at all the studies they're sharing. I'm I'm listening
Speaker 1: to them discuss what's happening. I'm watching them reach out
Speaker 1: to each other. Here, here's a patient I have. You know,
Speaker 1: this is this is a different situation. What would you
Speaker 1: recommend in this case? That's what should have been allowed,
Speaker 1: but it wasn't allowed. I mean, classic example, the vaccine
Speaker 1: injured that I gave a for him to in June,
Speaker 1: and of course I was just attacked in you know
Speaker 1: front page bub the fold my picture, the headlines so
Speaker 1: fund really dangerous. But that group, they had Facebook groups
Speaker 1: two thousand people, but when they presented on the Monday morning,
Speaker 1: within days their group reached five thousand. When people heard
Speaker 1: I'm not the only one suffering this way, you know
Speaker 1: what Facebook did with those groups. By the way, we're
Speaker 1: used to council people that were suicidal. Some of these
Speaker 1: adverasy events, these inner vibrations and neurological problems so severe
Speaker 1: people are committing suicide. So these groups are being used
Speaker 1: to counsel and support those suicide and suicidal individuals. So
Speaker 1: what Facebook did you know? Uh, compassionless Facebook. They dismantled
Speaker 1: those Facebook groups and suicide suicidal individuals lost contact with
Speaker 1: the people that are providing them emotional support banks Facebook.
Speaker 1: And the reason I asked the m R and A
Speaker 1: question was just because now there's all these articles about oh,
Speaker 1: m R and A could solve this, could do this,
Speaker 1: and it seems to have opened additional revenue streams that
Speaker 1: they didn't have prior to COVID to be able to
Speaker 1: get the mr Anda vaccines to market and then open up,
Speaker 1: you know, all the different doors to make additional money.
Speaker 1: But to your point, they deserve a voice, right it.
Speaker 1: We know that there are adverse reactions with any vaccine,
Speaker 1: and then you have again something that was very rapidly
Speaker 1: produced that we we should be giving them a voice.
Speaker 1: This is we should be able to have conversations about
Speaker 1: all of these things. And it's just the desire to
Speaker 1: control the narrative is so disturbing to me. And then
Speaker 1: even beyond that, I didn't really understand this as clearly,
Speaker 1: but I've learned through my conversations with people about just
Speaker 1: how much control someone like Dr Fauci in the n
Speaker 1: I n I H has on the science community, right
Speaker 1: the fact that basically he controls the funding, he controls
Speaker 1: the grants, and so people are really afraid to sort
Speaker 1: of take him on and challenge him because of that,
Speaker 1: And so I find that to be disturbing as well.
Speaker 1: When it comes to the treatment of disease, doctors and
Speaker 1: trains spent years obtaining their train They should be at
Speaker 1: the top of the the decision making process. I mean
Speaker 1: they put their patients rights first, Okay, um, our federal
Speaker 1: health agencies should just operating the supportive role. You know,
Speaker 1: FDA should be concerned about drug safety, you know, the
Speaker 1: CDC should be talking about you know, they should be
Speaker 1: gathering data, which of course they haven't done, but they
Speaker 1: should be providing data, you know, looking at safety signals,
Speaker 1: looking at the outbreaks, providing advice, you know, and and
Speaker 1: age kind of uh is over much of that, UM,
Speaker 1: but their supportive role. They shouldn't be dictated doctors, but
Speaker 1: you're exactly right. You know, Fauci has gotten himself in
Speaker 1: that position. He's been their way too long. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I've heard a hundred billion dollars worth of grants. So
Speaker 1: hospitals are research institutions. They're they're not going to buck
Speaker 1: what Faucci tells them to do, and that is corrupted
Speaker 1: I think the practice of medicine. You also have fewer
Speaker 1: independent doctors are all part of hospital associations, hospitals. You know,
Speaker 1: they probably make a fair amount of money offer ram
Speaker 1: destin here versus a course of ira emectin or hydroxic
Speaker 1: Clarkland or budesinine. You know, there's probably a fair amount
Speaker 1: of profit in remdestin here. Uh, there's there. Actually, I
Speaker 1: saw a pretty interesting video of somebody's kind of researching
Speaker 1: how much doctors are getting from pastons to die off
Speaker 1: of ventilators, and it's in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know how those hospital bills can wrap
Speaker 1: up here. Um So again, there are financial incentives for
Speaker 1: treating people the way we're treating there. There's there's no
Speaker 1: financial incentive for early treatment using cheap cannered drugs that
Speaker 1: literally cost you pennies per per dose to produce, and
Speaker 1: so we've completely completely corrupted. You know that everything is
Speaker 1: in the favor of the big farming. We've killed the
Speaker 1: playing field. So you know, when Fauci demands random control trials, well,
Speaker 1: who can afford that? I mean, generic drug companies can't
Speaker 1: afford to run randomized control trials on a generic drug
Speaker 1: that they bare they just meet Kenny's a tablet on
Speaker 1: But certainly drug companies can when then they turn around
Speaker 1: and sell a molded pier are for seven hundred bucks
Speaker 1: of dolls, which by the way, moment period it's one.
Speaker 1: It's one of and I hope it works. Okay, I
Speaker 1: hope Paxtel did works. Moldent Pere though barely got by
Speaker 1: the safety advisory or the advisory paddle on to vote
Speaker 1: of thirteen to ten. There were serious concerns raised on
Speaker 1: molden peer beer, but whoop ran that one through and
Speaker 1: got that approved right away. It's a big farmer drugs
Speaker 1: seven hard bunch of dolls, whereas you know, and I
Speaker 1: just still kind of studying iver met and which by
Speaker 1: the way, I would say on the record, I do
Speaker 1: not whatever whatever n I comes up with their study
Speaker 1: I don't trust. I won't trust the results on ibra
Speaker 1: metal unless it's positive, you know that'll then I'll seriously
Speaker 1: take a look at it. But if it comes back negative,
Speaker 1: I'll be looking very carefully hopefully a lot of other
Speaker 1: researchers were very carefully how that trial was done. And
Speaker 1: we've seen what Dr fout does to people who try
Speaker 1: to push back or counter the narratives that he's driving.
Speaker 1: And when we saw Dr Fauci and doctor Francis Collins
Speaker 1: clued against people like the Great Barrington signers like Dr
Speaker 1: j Baticharia trying to smear his name because he dared
Speaker 1: to oppose the failed lockdowns that has caused so much
Speaker 1: harm in this country. What really infuriates me is now
Speaker 1: you have like the CDC, public health officials, the media
Speaker 1: or like CNN or whatever, just casually dropping these truth
Speaker 1: bombs like, oh yeah, cloth masks don't work. There's a
Speaker 1: difference between with COVID from COVID. Maybe lockdowns don't work,
Speaker 1: the vaccines don't stop to the spread all things that
Speaker 1: you got smeared for saying previously. But there's just such
Speaker 1: a callous nature to it, because all of these things,
Speaker 1: all of these policies have caused people so much harm.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, again, they'll never admit theyre wrong, so they're
Speaker 1: just gonna change their narratives. I you know, and they
Speaker 1: maybe didn't say the exact of these words, but certainly
Speaker 1: the vaccine came out effects efficacy. Everybody took that to
Speaker 1: mean that, well, if I get vaccinated, I've got a
Speaker 1: chance of not getting the disease. Well, once they found out,
Speaker 1: well that's not happening. You know, the eck of efficacy
Speaker 1: is waning. And you know, now with omicron um there's
Speaker 1: actually evidence of negative efficacy with the vaccination and boosters
Speaker 1: that type of thing. Not now, the narratives switched to
Speaker 1: or reduces the severity the disease. Um, okay, when you
Speaker 1: consider that with younger people people survived covid. Uh, I
Speaker 1: had COVID, I have the anabtes for it. I was asymptomatic,
Speaker 1: So my own natural immune system reduced the severity disease
Speaker 1: the point where I didn't even know I had the
Speaker 1: disease out then I was taking precautionary tests and found
Speaker 1: out I got COVID. Right now. Um, so again again,
Speaker 1: show me the data on that. But my point is
Speaker 1: they will just switch their narrative. And because the media
Speaker 1: is complicit in this, the big tech is complicit in it,
Speaker 1: they'll buy it. So they'll make sure that the public
Speaker 1: buys the change narrative, the corrected narrative, the bias looklient
Speaker 1: and sinker. So there's all we never really you know,
Speaker 1: like touch when I call him out for what he
Speaker 1: did with AIDS, where he did pretty much the same thing,
Speaker 1: he denied the use of back term for two years
Speaker 1: um and he also denied the fact that he literally
Speaker 1: scared that you know, a lot out of the American
Speaker 1: public saying that you might be able to catch this
Speaker 1: through close casual contact. Two months later you say, well,
Speaker 1: it's preposterous that anybody would say as could be spread
Speaker 1: with close personal contact as opposed to you know, uh,
Speaker 1: the way we know it's it's spread. He just denied
Speaker 1: reality just two months later, bold faced, and the press
Speaker 1: doesn't call him on it. And that's what's gonna happen
Speaker 1: here with the with COVID. All as wrong as these
Speaker 1: people have been in so many issues, they'll never admit
Speaker 1: it then ever get called on it, then it would
Speaker 1: be held accountable. Is there any way to hold out
Speaker 1: you accountable well with the truth. Um, you know we
Speaker 1: we you know, four thousand of his emails were provided
Speaker 1: under foy Uh, heavily redacted. Congress is not it's not
Speaker 1: such at those same redactions. So we immediately, by the way,
Speaker 1: we were asking for this information and we just couldn't
Speaker 1: get it. The courts enforced it. So we've asked for
Speaker 1: those emails now that we will exist and they were
Speaker 1: quite honestly incriminating enough even with redactions. We've asked those
Speaker 1: emails unredacted. Um, we're getting them in dribs and drafts.
Speaker 1: We can go in in camera to review these things
Speaker 1: fifty pages at a time. We're uncovering things that there's
Speaker 1: a fuller story to tell you. Before we tell that story,
Speaker 1: I want to have the full story. But yeah, well,
Speaker 1: we're gonna continue to investigate this. But these agencies are
Speaker 1: so opaque. Uh. They realized that Condress doesn't really have
Speaker 1: enforcement power, so they pretty well blow us off. So
Speaker 1: cirass oversight capability has been dramatically reduced and the only
Speaker 1: the only thing that forces disclosure nowadays is public pressure,
Speaker 1: which is why I'm very transparent in my oversight. We
Speaker 1: we make all my letters public. You know, sometimes you know,
Speaker 1: people like you and conservative news outlets will will pick
Speaker 1: up the questions we're asking, but really requires almost a
Speaker 1: public level of outrage before these agencies come clean. How
Speaker 1: much control has big Pharma and companies like fightser have
Speaker 1: had on our policies that we've made. I think my
Speaker 1: eyes are pretty well there have been wide opened wide.
Speaker 1: I think they exert enormous control. I mean, you've probably
Speaker 1: seen the video clips. You know, they run about sixty
Speaker 1: minutes or sixty seconds. You know this newscast, this newscast,
Speaker 1: this newscast, you know, this sportscast brought to you by
Speaker 1: fightser um the revolving door between the agencies and the
Speaker 1: big armor companies. You know Scott Gottliebs, he's a director
Speaker 1: at the at fightser. Now he's been very open about,
Speaker 1: you know, pushing pushing the vaccine, pushing the vaccine. You
Speaker 1: and now he's you know, pushing the a year and
Speaker 1: a half and I actually wrote a letter to the
Speaker 1: editor in response to his column in The Wall Street Journal,
Speaker 1: basically declaring, hey wouldn't be a good idea to have
Speaker 1: a pill that could reduce viral replication, reduced severity of symptoms.
Speaker 1: Would that be a great idea? You know, hey, fighter
Speaker 1: has got one. Um so hey, welcome to the party.
Speaker 1: Dr Gottlieb. I've been pushing this and I think, you know,
Speaker 1: I think there's proof that we've had these pills available
Speaker 1: since the start of the pandemic, but people like you
Speaker 1: have denied their existence, together with the rest of the
Speaker 1: big farmers. A matter of Facturk, I mean Murk is
Speaker 1: the one that patented this miracle drug called iver Mecton.
Speaker 1: It is a miracle. Is prevented river blindness, you know,
Speaker 1: tired parasitic illnesses throughout the less developed world. It's a
Speaker 1: miracle drug, incredibly incredible safety profile. Patented that drug. You know,
Speaker 1: the people the people have velve but got Nobel prize.
Speaker 1: But then Mark trashed get for uston covid. They trashed it.
Speaker 1: They undermined it because guess what, Mark had its own
Speaker 1: version of a pill per We just talked about that,
Speaker 1: you know, barely passed the Advisory committee to ten, mainly
Speaker 1: because moment pier actually caused the virus to mutate. Gee,
Speaker 1: what could go wrong there? Now? It's it's it's all
Speaker 1: very sickening. And then when you start connecting the dots.
Speaker 1: It's just, you know, to your point about the media
Speaker 1: with visor like it sort of tells you why nobody
Speaker 1: in the media asks questions about the vaccines. It just raised.
Speaker 1: It's it's all pretty disturbing, you know, sort of looking
Speaker 1: ahead at the mid term elections. There's already been twenty
Speaker 1: nine House Democrats that have now retired or announced or
Speaker 1: have it either retired or announced that they are not
Speaker 1: going to seek office. Uh. That is the most retirements
Speaker 1: for Democrats in twenty eight year, or more than the
Speaker 1: twenty ten wave and tied for the record set in
Speaker 1: the Republican Revolution. Uh. You know, Republicans hold a double
Speaker 1: digit lead and enthusiasm. You know, they're leading in the
Speaker 1: generic ball and the real clear politics point bing is
Speaker 1: the picture looks dire for Democrats. What do you think's
Speaker 1: ahead in the mid terms. Well, first of all, take
Speaker 1: nothing for granted. What we were up against, what I'm
Speaker 1: up against, Sharon, Wisconsin is swinging state. Uh. I've been
Speaker 1: attacked relentlessly for the last year. Um. The Democrats, I've
Speaker 1: just found themself spent nine million dollars on attack ads
Speaker 1: against me before I had even decided to run and
Speaker 1: least I think talk to me. You realized my inclination
Speaker 1: was not too okay. It would have actually been fun
Speaker 1: to say, now I'm not running. He guys just wasted
Speaker 1: nine million bucks. Uh. They spent two million dollars. You
Speaker 1: know when I announced, I mean the immediately announced a
Speaker 1: million dollars I had buy and then a week later
Speaker 1: another million dollar add by. Uh. So it's not just
Speaker 1: the massive amounts of the Democrats are dedicated to spending.
Speaker 1: I mean, they'll I mean, they'll why, they'll destroy it.
Speaker 1: I mean, and they'll never get called on it. But
Speaker 1: their allies, Let's let's face it, the communication apparatus of
Speaker 1: the Democrat Party is the legacy media and big tech
Speaker 1: social media. So we're up against Democrats, but the majority
Speaker 1: in the media, we have significant challenges. They've got they are,
Speaker 1: they are a powerful voice, so we can't take anything
Speaker 1: for granted. You know, you know the way I framed
Speaker 1: this contest in Wisconsin, literally it's the truth versus lies
Speaker 1: and distortion. It's me against Democrats, legacy media, mainstream media,
Speaker 1: social media, and big tech giants. That you understand why,
Speaker 1: you know, I think the first an you say he's
Speaker 1: in it for himself. One of the radio talk show
Speaker 1: hosts here in Wisconsin said, I think Johnson kind of
Speaker 1: understands he just threw himself in front of a fast
Speaker 1: moving freight train. Yeah, I do, I understand, right him
Speaker 1: up again. So if I can, um, appeal for help,
Speaker 1: if you want to save this Senate seat, if you
Speaker 1: want to see me, you know, serve another term. If
Speaker 1: if you want the truth, I'm gonna need help, um
Speaker 1: Ron Johnson for Senate dot Com. I'm gonna need a
Speaker 1: lot of help. But one thing you can be assured of,
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna be deterred from speaking the truth, from
Speaker 1: talking about important issues that affect people's lives. Um, That's
Speaker 1: who I am. I'm I'm gonna continue to fight for
Speaker 1: freedom because that's in the end, that's what this is about.
Speaker 1: This is about freedom. We had all kinds of other issues,
Speaker 1: and you know, the issues that divide Republicans conservatives. Don't
Speaker 1: let those issues divide us. We anybody who loves liberty,
Speaker 1: anybody who loves this country understands how precious it is,
Speaker 1: understands our solemn duty to preserve it, to make sure
Speaker 1: now we've survives that thrives for future generations. Anybody who
Speaker 1: agrees with that must remain united. Don't let slight differences
Speaker 1: of opinion divide us. We must remain united against their
Speaker 1: relentless quest for power. There, relentless quest for control over
Speaker 1: our lives. They're relentless destruction of our liberty and freedom. Well,
Speaker 1: and everyone listening, we've got to help. Senator Ron Johnson, Sir.
Speaker 1: I have so much respect for you and so thankful
Speaker 1: you are a relentless fighter for both the truth and
Speaker 1: liberty and freedom in America, and we are so lucky
Speaker 1: you're seeking another term. I just want to thank you
Speaker 1: for continuing to bring the truth on COVID. You've been
Speaker 1: so brave. I know it's hard to take the hits,
Speaker 1: but I deeply admire your courage and what you're doing, sir,
Speaker 1: And I'm so thankful for you for taking the time
Speaker 1: to come on the show, Sir, So thank you so much.
Speaker 1: It's well. I appreciate the security and I appreciate any
Speaker 1: support if people can provide. Everybody, Stay healthy, God bless y'all. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I want to thank creator Ron Johnson again for such
Speaker 1: a great interview and for being a fighter for truth
Speaker 1: in liberty in America, and I want to thank you
Speaker 1: guys at home for listening. If you enjoyed today's show,
Speaker 1: leave us a review and rate us five stars, and
Speaker 1: Apple podcasts. You can find me on Twitter, Facebook and
Speaker 1: Instagram and at least and read booth. I want to
Speaker 1: thank our team, Producer John Cassio and our executive producers
Speaker 1: Debbie Myers and speaker new Kingkridge, all part of the
Speaker 1: Ginger three sixty network and team.