Speaker 1: Up next The Truth with Lisa Both part of the
Speaker 1: game which the White House recently admitted that the Biden
Speaker 1: administration is identifying quote unquote problematic posts for Facebook to
Speaker 1: censor because they contain misinformation that doesn't make you concerned,
Speaker 1: then you're not paying attention. This is The Truth with
Speaker 1: Lisa Booth. Yeah, welcome back to the Truth with Lisa Booth.
Speaker 1: I'm Lisa Booth, and I've got a great show for
Speaker 1: you guys this week because my guest is Senator Ron
Speaker 1: Johnson from the great state of Wisconsin. He was first
Speaker 1: elected in the Tea Party wave of and since then
Speaker 1: has been one of the most outspoken members of the
Speaker 1: Senate and as a result, one of the left favorite targets. Today,
Speaker 1: I asked Senator Johnson about COVID vaccines, big tech censorship
Speaker 1: January six, and some of the latest hot button issues
Speaker 1: in Congress, as well as some questions about his political career.
Speaker 1: And with that, I want to welcome Senator Ron Johnson
Speaker 1: to the show. Centator, thanks so much for joining me
Speaker 1: on The Truth with Lisa Booth. Well, I appreciate that
Speaker 1: I'm I'm just telling the truth. I have to admit
Speaker 1: I it does amaze me that anybody would consider me
Speaker 1: to be a polarizing figure. You know, I'm not of
Speaker 1: this world. I'm I'm a citizen legislator, you know, raised
Speaker 1: a family, uh ran a business for thirty years, was
Speaker 1: involved my community, serving on boards with the most liberal
Speaker 1: college professors, the most conservative business people like myself. It
Speaker 1: would never come up. We were just concerned about how
Speaker 1: can we improve education for our children, for example. So
Speaker 1: I'm not bombastic. I don't engage in personal attacks, but
Speaker 1: but I do recognize the fact that the U. S.
Speaker 1: Senate seat that I hold right now is something that
Speaker 1: the Democrats covet and their communications are the mainstream media
Speaker 1: would like me gone as well. So I mean, I
Speaker 1: understand the source of the attacks. It's still it's it's
Speaker 1: It doesn't bother me because I know who I am,
Speaker 1: but it's it is. It's depressing in its reflection on
Speaker 1: our society and their state of politics. What I find
Speaker 1: interesting is, look, you're you're a very wealthy member of Congress. Congratulations,
Speaker 1: I'm trying to get there and not in Congress, but
Speaker 1: you know, wealthy, So you didn't need to run for Congress.
Speaker 1: You didn't need to run for Senate. But you did,
Speaker 1: you know, why did you run for Senate in You've
Speaker 1: got all this money, You've got all these things you
Speaker 1: can do. Why the Senate? It really was with the
Speaker 1: passage of Obamacare on Christmas Eve, my our first child
Speaker 1: or daughter, Carey, was born with a serious congenital heart defect.
Speaker 1: So the first day of life, she had a procedure
Speaker 1: called a blue septastomy to get her down stream where
Speaker 1: she can open our surgery whether we re baffle the
Speaker 1: upper chamber heart. So at that point in time, I
Speaker 1: recognized a couple of things. Uh, there's a reason they
Speaker 1: call it medical practice because it's exactly that. It's practice.
Speaker 1: Um note to human being are the same. Uh. You
Speaker 1: advanced medicine through literally trying different techniques, different theories of
Speaker 1: the case. But I knew that every every time the
Speaker 1: government intrudes in any marketplace, they screw it up. They've
Speaker 1: already intruded way too much into our health care field.
Speaker 1: And I just didn't want to see, you know what,
Speaker 1: what technological advancements were occurring in medicine to be snuffed
Speaker 1: out by government control over over our health care system.
Speaker 1: And then secondly, at that point in time, we were
Speaker 1: on fourteen trillion dollars in debt, you know, up significantly
Speaker 1: over just the last few years combinated to two thousand
Speaker 1: and ten, and we're mortgaga our kids future. I you know,
Speaker 1: I feel really bad that I've been here now about
Speaker 1: eleven years and we've doubled the debt. So the bombcare
Speaker 1: is still in place, and we've doubled the debt. I
Speaker 1: don't feel like my time here has been particularly successful.
Speaker 1: How's your daughter doing. She's great, she's three seven years old,
Speaker 1: she has she's given us two grandchildren. Um, she's actually
Speaker 1: a nurse practitioner, herself involved in all kinds of things.
Speaker 1: So hers is a ours is a incredibly uh happy
Speaker 1: ending story here doesn't always end that happy. What's beautiful.
Speaker 1: I'm glad to hear that about your daughter, you know,
Speaker 1: and you talked about you know, you ran in the
Speaker 1: midterm elections. There was this huge Tea party wave, this
Speaker 1: very much you know, anti government sentiment. You know, we're
Speaker 1: saying government in a way that maybe we have never
Speaker 1: seen in our lifetimes or maybe not ever in the
Speaker 1: history of this country in terms of the abuse of
Speaker 1: power from government. Do you think we'll see something in
Speaker 1: the mid term elections, akin to the term elections, I
Speaker 1: hope and pray that we do. One of my messages
Speaker 1: I travel around stay Wisconsin is I am pointing out
Speaker 1: that a real blind spot from standpoint of conservatives is
Speaker 1: the fact that, you know, we were so concerned the
Speaker 1: New Deal than the great society, you know, as big
Speaker 1: government just busted out of the constraints of the Constitution
Speaker 1: and have gone way beyond the numerated powers. Conservatives pushed
Speaker 1: back on that, and we so we really concentrate all
Speaker 1: our efforts on what can we do to reign the
Speaker 1: federal government, and we completely lost focus, and I would
Speaker 1: say in many cases lost touch with the particularly local
Speaker 1: government UM. And let's face it, it's local government school boards,
Speaker 1: county boards, UM, city councils that you know still as
Speaker 1: as well as the vision of our funding father's government.
Speaker 1: Close to the government has a great deal to influence
Speaker 1: our lives. And we're certainly seeing that with things like
Speaker 1: critical race theory. I keep reminding Republicans conservatives in Wisconsin, listen,
Speaker 1: if you don't want critical race theory taught to your
Speaker 1: children here in Wisconsin, you can hand it, you know,
Speaker 1: to go to school board meetings, demand that the school
Speaker 1: board take critical race theory out of the curriculum. And
Speaker 1: then even better yet, because an awful lot of radical
Speaker 1: leftists around those school boards, replace them, run for office yourself.
Speaker 1: And so uh, I mean, I'm hoping conservatives are waking
Speaker 1: up to the fact that, you know, President Obama, we
Speaker 1: used to ridicule him as being a community organizer, right well,
Speaker 1: that community organizing, that relentlessness on the part of the left,
Speaker 1: you know, Sallyinsky, the fact that the radical left tic
Speaker 1: over our university systems during the Vietnam War protests. Uh,
Speaker 1: they control colleges education, to control colleges of journalism, they
Speaker 1: control our culture. I'm actually amazed that there devious plans
Speaker 1: haven't come to fruition sooner than they have. But they're
Speaker 1: coming together right now, and that's why this is such
Speaker 1: a perilous moment for our nation. So yeah, I hope
Speaker 1: two is a significant pushback, uh, now that more Americans
Speaker 1: are kind of recognizing that Joe Biden is no moderate.
Speaker 1: The Democrat Party, I don't think they have a moderate
Speaker 1: left in it. Um that they are. They are radical.
Speaker 1: And I'll leave on this note too, because I say
Speaker 1: this a lot um do you even like much less
Speaker 1: love of something you want to fundamentally transform. The analogy
Speaker 1: I use. I wake up in the morning. You look
Speaker 1: over my wife Jada, say Jane, I love you now,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna change everything about you. That one go over
Speaker 1: too well. OK, that but that is And again I
Speaker 1: get accused of saying Democrats to all this country. That's
Speaker 1: not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying they are
Speaker 1: electing leaders, the leaders of their party, the leaders of
Speaker 1: their movements. Don't like this country. It's obvious you don't
Speaker 1: like something you want to fundamentally transformed. I mean, they
Speaker 1: disdain so much that is America. Whereas conservatives, uh, we
Speaker 1: we fervently love this country. We know what made it
Speaker 1: great individual liberty, uh. And that freedom so that we
Speaker 1: can dream and aspire and build and create this this
Speaker 1: marvel we call America. We get that, we understand that
Speaker 1: we don't want not perfect, but we know that in
Speaker 1: the spanning human history, this really is this country we
Speaker 1: call America something incredibly rare, incredibly precious, and something that
Speaker 1: we want. We want to do everything in our power
Speaker 1: to preserve it, to save it, to make sure that
Speaker 1: it now we survives but thrives for future generations. I
Speaker 1: mean that's so, you know, you asked me why we
Speaker 1: ran two ten. That's why when I agree with you,
Speaker 1: But I would also say we need Republicans in Congress
Speaker 1: to step up. I mean, there aren't a lot of
Speaker 1: voices screaming about what's happening to some of the the
Speaker 1: individuals involved in January six, or raising the alarm the
Speaker 1: fact that you know there's now recommendation for two year
Speaker 1: olds to wear masks, you know, in schools. I mean,
Speaker 1: just some of the ridiculousness we're saying, the distortion of
Speaker 1: their truth. Yet there are a lot of Republicans in Congress,
Speaker 1: not you. You've been standing up, but why haven't we
Speaker 1: heard more from your colleagues, Like why won't they step
Speaker 1: up to the plate. We need them, you know, to
Speaker 1: a certain standout. Let me paint with a nice brush,
Speaker 1: I can. It's about priorities. Um. You know, when you're
Speaker 1: United States Center, you're on at least three, if not four,
Speaker 1: main committees, and then you've got subcommittees. And if you're
Speaker 1: gonna do a decent job, and you concentrate your time
Speaker 1: on those issues that are within the jurisdics of those committees,
Speaker 1: and so you can maybe lose sight some of the
Speaker 1: larger national trans the larger national stories that you know
Speaker 1: that the electorate is focusing on. I mean, they're not
Speaker 1: focusing on committee work that they're focusing on critical race theory.
Speaker 1: They're focusing on the culture wars. So you can get
Speaker 1: kind of wrapped up in this dysfunctional institution and trying
Speaker 1: to do a good job in your committee assignments. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, I suppose a less generous evaluation that would
Speaker 1: be the fact that and I think this is not
Speaker 1: any breaking news here, but I always ask crowds, so
Speaker 1: what do you think the a motivation of most members
Speaker 1: of Congresses? You know it in Unison people said, well,
Speaker 1: to get reelected. So when my colleagues see the road
Speaker 1: kill that it probably looks like I am after the
Speaker 1: media just rakes me over the coals relentlessly. I can
Speaker 1: certainly understand why somebody would not want to touch some
Speaker 1: of these issues or say some things I say, tell
Speaker 1: us on the truths that I that I tell why
Speaker 1: everyone want to touch out the ten foot pole. So
Speaker 1: I gotta ask you, are you running again? Having made
Speaker 1: that decision? What's going through your mind about it? All
Speaker 1: kinds of things. Um, I want to make sure that
Speaker 1: this U S sentence seat is retained in Republican hands. Um.
Speaker 1: I mean you see what the media is doing to me.
Speaker 1: I may not be the best candidate. Um. So I mean,
Speaker 1: i'm I'm I wouldn't run if I don't think I
Speaker 1: could win, if I don't think I was the best
Speaker 1: person to be able to win. Um. Uh. This probably
Speaker 1: is an obscure reference to you. But Bud Grant was
Speaker 1: the coach of the Minnesota Vikings and retired I think
Speaker 1: the age of fifty five. You know, the kind of
Speaker 1: the height of his success, even though he'd lost four
Speaker 1: Super Bowls. Um. But he but he held because he
Speaker 1: wanted to live a life. Um. This this is this
Speaker 1: is an incredibly frustrating place here. Um. Having come from
Speaker 1: the private sector, you know, run and run a business
Speaker 1: and successful business, being able to accomplish things when you
Speaker 1: just see the dysfunction as Washington see, I mean, it's
Speaker 1: it can be, it can be, it can be pretty frustrating.
Speaker 1: But then at the same time, as I was saying earlier,
Speaker 1: you understand how rare and precious this country is and
Speaker 1: you realize that there are certain truths that had to
Speaker 1: have to be spoken. Uh, things they had to be
Speaker 1: said that if nobody else will say them. Um, maybe
Speaker 1: that's the role somebody asked to play. So there's there's
Speaker 1: you know, we said, there's so many things running through
Speaker 1: my mind quite honestly, um. And the good news, I
Speaker 1: have plenty of time to decide. If you remember two
Speaker 1: thousand ten, Uh, I don't expect you even know this,
Speaker 1: but I did not even think about running for the
Speaker 1: United States Senate until after they passed Obamacare on on
Speaker 1: Christmas even two thousand nine. Uh. Finally made my decision
Speaker 1: to run after having talked to a few people over
Speaker 1: the months, at the very end of April, announced mid May,
Speaker 1: and ran about it, you know, five six month campaign
Speaker 1: that seemed to work out. Okay. So you know, I
Speaker 1: think these campaigns are way too long. They spend way
Speaker 1: too much money. They put way too much money in
Speaker 1: the pockets of consultants. And it's primarily consultants that are
Speaker 1: pushing people like me to make decision right away so
Speaker 1: you can get out there and start raising all kinds
Speaker 1: of you know, oodles and rules of money for their benefit,
Speaker 1: not not for the benefit of the citizens. I mean
Speaker 1: people are not in the general public, the electorate is
Speaker 1: not in campaign mode. I understand there's a ton of consideration,
Speaker 1: but I will say that we do need people like
Speaker 1: you in conquer sir. So I'll just leave it at
Speaker 1: that before moving on. But you you talked a lot
Speaker 1: about some of the mistruths that are out there, the
Speaker 1: source of the truth. Uh. We also talked about the
Speaker 1: heavy hand of government. The White House recently said that
Speaker 1: the administration is identifying problematic posts for Facebook, working in
Speaker 1: conjunction with Facebook to essentially identify who's pushing out misinformation
Speaker 1: in their eyes and who needs to be censored. Where
Speaker 1: does this lead? Well, it's an Orwellian present. I mean this,
Speaker 1: you would they are big brother than now. Uh. Combination
Speaker 1: of the marriage of big tech with big government and
Speaker 1: we've we've got big brother. It should frighten every American.
Speaker 1: You know what always what does always amaze me? And
Speaker 1: this even conservatives fall in the trap. So I was
Speaker 1: saying earlier, so many people focused on the federal government.
Speaker 1: Have you noticed the federal government is awful solving problems.
Speaker 1: They're they're great at mortgaging your children and grandchildren's future.
Speaker 1: But they're terrible solving problems. Now, if they would focus
Speaker 1: on national defense, crying our board and the federal government
Speaker 1: could could be pre effective at what it does, but
Speaker 1: it's not very effective at doing almost anything. And if
Speaker 1: you just kind of stack up the list of things
Speaker 1: that have been said about COVID and able to shutdowns
Speaker 1: and just that, you know, Fauci's talking a out of
Speaker 1: both sides of their mouths and covering up their gain
Speaker 1: function research. Why would anybody trust people like that? I mean,
Speaker 1: it's just you know, I just I don't quite get it.
Speaker 1: And so you know, from my standpoint, we are a
Speaker 1: very perilous time in terms of censorship, the combination of
Speaker 1: media and social media, uh, completely cooperating with one party
Speaker 1: and opposed to the other. Uh. I mean that's that's
Speaker 1: yep on one party totalitarian state. Quick commercial break and
Speaker 1: back with Senator Ron Johnson identifying quote unquote misinformation, I mean,
Speaker 1: what does that even mean? You know, you made the
Speaker 1: point of the fact that we've seen flip flops from
Speaker 1: health officials like Dr Fauci, We've seen uh, we've seen censorship,
Speaker 1: but the lab leak theory that is now being presumed
Speaker 1: as credible just recently with the CDC director say that
Speaker 1: vaccinated people do not carry the virus or get sick.
Speaker 1: Yet we have these House Democrats or these Democrats from
Speaker 1: Texas who claimed to be vaccinated, who have all now
Speaker 1: tested positive experiencing you know, mild symptoms or some level
Speaker 1: of symptoms allegedly. So, I mean, the fact is, what
Speaker 1: is quote unquote misinformation when we've seen this evolving story
Speaker 1: about COVID, and that lies the problem because it seems
Speaker 1: like it's more about just protecting the Biden administration from
Speaker 1: anything that could be damaging or shutting down any descent
Speaker 1: that they don't like that could be damaging to the
Speaker 1: Biden administration. That's that's what it seems like it's about.
Speaker 1: Well started out politicizing COVID to harm Trump so that
Speaker 1: they could elect whoever they wanted to elect and end
Speaker 1: up being Biden. Um. The you know, I'm I'm sixty
Speaker 1: six years old. As far back as i can remember,
Speaker 1: when you're talking about getting medical diagnosis, you've always been
Speaker 1: told we'll get a second opinion again because it's medical practice.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, doctors aren't gods. Uh, they're they're fallible,
Speaker 1: So you go and you seek different medical opinions during
Speaker 1: a pandemic in two thousand twenty one, versus we had
Speaker 1: something here there could have been a tool for phenomenal good.
Speaker 1: The Internet an open source where these doctors that are
Speaker 1: grappling with a new disease and just not understanding it,
Speaker 1: putting people on ventilators and it's not helping, and and
Speaker 1: so you know, I saw very early on doctors who
Speaker 1: would you post five tene minute posts in terms of
Speaker 1: what they're seeing and what they're trying, you know, things
Speaker 1: like cortico steroids. I put Dr Pierre Corey as a
Speaker 1: witness in in my Homeland Security Committee in May of
Speaker 1: two thousand twenty because his group was starting to look
Speaker 1: at cortical steroids the moment I heard and learned how
Speaker 1: to produce pronounce hydroxy chloric wine. Though, Man, if there's
Speaker 1: an existing drug that is in sufficient supply that we
Speaker 1: could repurpose that could be effective, whether anti inflammatory or
Speaker 1: anti viral, or you know, for whatever. If there are
Speaker 1: drugs like that exist, man, that could be the silver
Speaker 1: bullet you could. You could end this pandemic before it
Speaker 1: even took off. You could stop it in his tracks,
Speaker 1: and then you just saw the censorship, the pushback on
Speaker 1: the part of people like Fauci's, even though hydrosta cork
Speaker 1: wine was in his bag of tricks for coronaviruses. I
Speaker 1: think back as far back as two US in five,
Speaker 1: I mean, what what what was happening again? I could
Speaker 1: literally sit here for hours and tell you stories of
Speaker 1: my frustration of trying to push early treatment. Again. I'm
Speaker 1: agnostic in terms of what drug was this hydrafts corkin
Speaker 1: or ever, mecton, recycle, sporing or I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: decks and episode. I mean, there's all kinds of things
Speaker 1: that's a multi drug processes what we're determining right now.
Speaker 1: But the fact that these health care agencies and the
Speaker 1: thoughts of the world completely ignored that. They did worse
Speaker 1: than ignore it. There were there were factions that were
Speaker 1: sabotaging research trials, not not allowing research to have independent
Speaker 1: review boards so they could get their results published. There
Speaker 1: was some really bad stuff that was happening in or
Speaker 1: that happened and that is still happening today. I can't
Speaker 1: explain it all, um, But anyway, you had this Internet
Speaker 1: that could have been an exchange just a flourishing and
Speaker 1: exchange of different ideas, different theories of the case, different treatments,
Speaker 1: free flow of information that we could have honed in on,
Speaker 1: you know, what was working and what wasn't working, but
Speaker 1: big government didn't allow it to happen, Big tech didn't
Speaker 1: allow it to happen. That, you know, all of a
Speaker 1: sudden you had to total line that there was only
Speaker 1: one opinion that could there was legitimate that that could
Speaker 1: be communicated. Anything else was a labeled misinformation. At least
Speaker 1: I I have to sadly report that I personally believe tens,
Speaker 1: if not hundreds of thousands of people lost their lives
Speaker 1: that didn't have to lose their lives had the agencies
Speaker 1: had had media and social media not denigrated these alternate
Speaker 1: approaches but allowed the free flow of of of information
Speaker 1: and allowed doctors and patients access to FT approved drugs.
Speaker 1: The doctors have a full right of off label prescription
Speaker 1: rights that they really weren't able to exercise because the CDC,
Speaker 1: the FDA said nope, didn't encourage it at all, and
Speaker 1: so hospital associations doctors they just wouldn't touch things like
Speaker 1: hydrox chlorice ira, mectin. There are two obvious reasons. One is,
Speaker 1: iver mectin hydrox chloric probably costs some summer on twenty
Speaker 1: dollars per treatment. Remdesseaviere, on the other hand, is over
Speaker 1: three thousand dollars. And if you look at the veyor's
Speaker 1: report thirty one years of ivermectin and hydroxy chloricine, there
Speaker 1: there's maybe a couple of hundred of theirs reported deaths. Again,
Speaker 1: it doesn't prove causation, but over thirty one years, a
Speaker 1: couple of hundred with remdesse heere in you know, some
Speaker 1: around approximately twelve months, a little bit more than twelve months,
Speaker 1: there's all over a thousand veyors reported deaths, you know,
Speaker 1: you know, associated after somebody's been adminstered uh remdesseviere. So,
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't get that, but so it could
Speaker 1: be the profit motive. But also, uh, it may be
Speaker 1: impossible or at least difficult to get an immersed use
Speaker 1: authorization of vaccine if they are effective treatments. Is that
Speaker 1: what was all about? I mean, obviously the facts of
Speaker 1: the world were completely focused on nothing other than a vaccine. Well,
Speaker 1: and you've recently you were criticized for holding a round
Speaker 1: table with folks who had adverse reactions to vaccines. What
Speaker 1: were some of the stories that you heard that you
Speaker 1: highlighted during that round table, and then what was the
Speaker 1: response to you holding that event. Well, I've been talking
Speaker 1: about the safety signals that I think there's has been
Speaker 1: screaming at us four months now, and of course I
Speaker 1: get attacked and vilified for for using sees his own
Speaker 1: early warning system on safety and just talking to the numbers.
Speaker 1: Always you with the caveat that you know, these numbers
Speaker 1: don't prove causation, but they certainly should be looked at. So,
Speaker 1: I mean, you've got things like death, You've got low playlists,
Speaker 1: you've got deep vein thrombosis, the clotting. Uh. But I
Speaker 1: was contacted by an ex Green Bay Packer Hall of
Speaker 1: Famer Ken Rutgers, and his wife suffered neurological symptoms, you know,
Speaker 1: a complete complete numbness in her face, you know, like
Speaker 1: you just got an ovcaine shot and just never never
Speaker 1: comes out of it. Uh. They couldn't get help. I mean,
Speaker 1: there were no doctors would would even consider the fact
Speaker 1: that that might have been caused by the vaccine, although
Speaker 1: she was perfectly healthy. Gets a vaccine and then all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, she's experiencing these symptoms. Well, they started
Speaker 1: searching for help on the internet, got connected to a
Speaker 1: couple of different Facebook groups totally about two thousand people
Speaker 1: like them, and some of these women. And there it
Speaker 1: was interesting because very very high percentage were women. UM
Speaker 1: but paralysis completely, loss of legs, loss of bladder control,
Speaker 1: um numbness, total numbers from the neck on down. Uh. Now,
Speaker 1: some of them have recovered. But another common symptom neurological
Speaker 1: harm that they believe it's caused by the vaccine. Severe
Speaker 1: inner vibrations I means so severe that to the women
Speaker 1: in their group have already committed suici. I. They simply
Speaker 1: can't tolerate that. They don't want to live with that
Speaker 1: condition anymore. Now they look perfectly normal. So yeah, we had.
Speaker 1: You know, little Maddie twelve years old when she participate
Speaker 1: in the Fightser trial of twelve to fifteen year olds,
Speaker 1: so obviously perfectly healthy. Uh literally thin days she was
Speaker 1: suffering symptoms. She can't eat now, she has to have
Speaker 1: a g I tube. She she is in a wheelchair. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, these are serious, serious issues here, but she
Speaker 1: literally her doctors were her parents were once seeing you're
Speaker 1: away from committing her to a mental ward before they
Speaker 1: realize exactly with what the doctors are asking them to do.
Speaker 1: So they're not being taken seriously by the vast majority
Speaker 1: of people in the health care industry because everybody wants
Speaker 1: the vaccine to succeed, So do I we want this
Speaker 1: pandemic over so not, so very few people are willing
Speaker 1: to consider there may be some issues with it. And
Speaker 1: so the CDC, N I, h f D is not
Speaker 1: taking seriously. The the drug companies aren't at all. I mean,
Speaker 1: you think you know, particularly you know Maddie who participated
Speaker 1: that trial, you know DH or bre who participating in
Speaker 1: the askedros ectica. You think those companies be standing behind him,
Speaker 1: that cast him aside. They don't. They don't want to
Speaker 1: hear from him. They don't want to hear about problems.
Speaker 1: And so when I heard their stories, uh in about
Speaker 1: an hour and a half long zoom call, filled with
Speaker 1: a lot of tears, they were just asking to be seen, heard,
Speaker 1: and believed. So I can't really do anything about the
Speaker 1: belief part, but I can stantly help them be seen
Speaker 1: and heard, And so I just put on a form
Speaker 1: in Milwaukee with Ken Rutgers. You know, he would have
Speaker 1: drawn some attraction as a former Green Bay Packers star.
Speaker 1: So we had to, you know, for the women tell
Speaker 1: their stories, and the mother and then Maddie tell their story.
Speaker 1: I mean, just they did a great job. They laid
Speaker 1: it out. I don't see how any human being could
Speaker 1: have been totally sympathetic. I opened up the questions, and
Speaker 1: the questions are right away attacking me. It's like it was.
Speaker 1: It was just an unbelievable reaction. And of course, the
Speaker 1: next day in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, and I think
Speaker 1: about a dozen other Wisconsin newspapers, you know, above the
Speaker 1: fold front page, my picture with the label fundamentally dangerous. Okay,
Speaker 1: um and and really and and let me just concluded
Speaker 1: on this one. The reason they want to be seen
Speaker 1: and heard is they're not going to get effect or
Speaker 1: treatment if the medical community isn't even willing to consider
Speaker 1: that the root cause of their symptoms just might be
Speaker 1: the vaccine. Right as well as they would like to
Speaker 1: see other people not be harmed if you can determine
Speaker 1: some prexisting conditions, you know, for example, and this is
Speaker 1: where I got engaged in this debate is you know,
Speaker 1: because I had COVID and I was asked by reporter
Speaker 1: when we didn't have enough vaccine for everybody whether or
Speaker 1: not I've been vaccinated, and said, no, I I had COVID.
Speaker 1: I probably have as good, if not better, immunity than
Speaker 1: anybody's gonna get vaccinated. And besides, we have enough vaccines,
Speaker 1: so others get vaccinated. First. Of course I was immediately
Speaker 1: labeled an anti vaxxer well, and of course all this
Speaker 1: gets concerning when you know, we have this massive push
Speaker 1: for people to get vaccinated, Biden saying they're going to
Speaker 1: go door to door. You look at countries like France,
Speaker 1: They're now mandating vaccines to go out to eat at restaurants,
Speaker 1: in movie theaters. So this all becomes concerning when it
Speaker 1: starts to become mandatory, when there's any element of risk involved,
Speaker 1: Americans should be able to have a full understanding of
Speaker 1: full assessment of what risks. And then also, not every
Speaker 1: individual in the country is at risk either. I mean,
Speaker 1: if you're not elderly, if you don't have comorbidities, you're
Speaker 1: not particularly at risk statistically, particularly teenagers and youngers. So
Speaker 1: it starts to become sort of concerning and obscene for this,
Speaker 1: there would be this increased pressure for these individuals who
Speaker 1: don't have a high risk profile of COVID to then
Speaker 1: be mandated to get any sort of vaccine. Listen, I'm
Speaker 1: pro vaccine. I've gotten every flu shot, sens to swine flue,
Speaker 1: I'm up todating all my other vaccines um, and I'm
Speaker 1: a big support of operational warp speed. And I'm glad
Speaker 1: that you know, dollars have been a mystery in the
Speaker 1: vast majority without instant Okay, but it creeps me out
Speaker 1: that the government is just you're wanting to push a
Speaker 1: vaccine in everybody's arm, even those people that don't need it.
Speaker 1: I mean, one thing we know about COVID is it
Speaker 1: is not uniformly dangerous. It's dangerous if you're elderly, it's
Speaker 1: dangerous if you have certain co morbidities. But if you're
Speaker 1: extremely young, if you're a very young child, it's been
Speaker 1: pretty well established that you ought to be more concerned
Speaker 1: about the flu than you are about COVID. So it
Speaker 1: is just creeping me out. I'll tell you when when
Speaker 1: Joe Biden made his first address the nation, and he
Speaker 1: just he looked in the camera and he just, you know,
Speaker 1: so fervently trust Dr Fauci, you trust the federal government. Sorry,
Speaker 1: uncle Joe, I'm not signing up for that program. I
Speaker 1: don't trust him. Um So, No, it's it's creeping. It's
Speaker 1: creeping me out because it's it's not rash. You know,
Speaker 1: this pushed to mass mass vaccinate everybody, even those that
Speaker 1: have had COVID, or even those that really have very
Speaker 1: little risk of any kind of serious impact from if
Speaker 1: they get COVID. It just doesn't make sense, particularly with
Speaker 1: a vaccine that is not fully approved. It's under immerse
Speaker 1: use observation. And Alsie also have to understand. I'm that
Speaker 1: I am the champion right to try. I'm the guy
Speaker 1: that said that the empty is too slow in too
Speaker 1: many cases that it ought to be an individual's right.
Speaker 1: Once you have a drug that's already been approved, it
Speaker 1: has gone through the safety phase, but it doesn't hasn't
Speaker 1: made gone from through phase to or phase three, yet
Speaker 1: that still should be the patient's right to try that
Speaker 1: and not have government you now you can't even try it.
Speaker 1: Now we just flip that on his head and I
Speaker 1: we're saying we've got a vaccine that's only gone through
Speaker 1: phase one. But we're gonna make sure that everybody gets
Speaker 1: in their arm and and we're gonna encourage employers to
Speaker 1: mandated in colleges to mandate it. Throw a crossing the
Speaker 1: winds in case somebody gets injured. Don't worry about the
Speaker 1: lawsuits that we're gonna necessarily support the trial lawyers from
Speaker 1: filing against you. This is insane what is happening right now.
Speaker 1: And when things don't make sense to me, I started
Speaker 1: asking a lot of questions, but I get attacked for
Speaker 1: being inquisitive. We're We're not supposed to ask questions anymore.
Speaker 1: We're just supposed to listen to Faucci. Trust big government,
Speaker 1: trust big media. Don't get a second opinion. There's only
Speaker 1: one opinion accounts, and is that of the federal government.
Speaker 1: You've come to the right place, because that's the whole
Speaker 1: point of my podcast is asking questions that people aren't
Speaker 1: asking and trying to get to the bottom of some
Speaker 1: of these critical issues. Do you think we will have
Speaker 1: vaccine passports in the country? Do you think we're heading
Speaker 1: in that direction? Or is that even plausible? Can the
Speaker 1: government mandate that? It's very plausible I mean, I'm I
Speaker 1: hate saying it's probably likely. Um, you know what you know, Mike,
Speaker 1: Mike current short term goal is to just persuade the
Speaker 1: FDA and the CDC not too short circuit approval process,
Speaker 1: you know, the phase two, phase three, those called the
Speaker 1: observational phases. You have to observe you know what what
Speaker 1: what is it? What's happening with the drug once it's
Speaker 1: been a ministry Okay, I mean, you have short term impacts,
Speaker 1: but you also can have long term impacts. You can
Speaker 1: substitute for time in the observational trials. If you want
Speaker 1: to know what the long term impact is of a
Speaker 1: Drugger vaccine, you need the time to study it. And
Speaker 1: there's this big push now to get these vaccines approved,
Speaker 1: you know, by the end of August or wherever. People
Speaker 1: are saying, you know why, you've got an emergency use outhormization.
Speaker 1: Anybody that wants a vaccine can get it, So why
Speaker 1: this rush? I mean the only conclusion is they want
Speaker 1: they want to make it easier, for example, for the
Speaker 1: military to mandate it too to the finest among us.
Speaker 1: They want to make it easier to to vaccinate children,
Speaker 1: I mean little children. Then there's there's there's really no
Speaker 1: benefit for them because there's really no risk of COVID
Speaker 1: or you know, such an infantensible risk of COVID. But
Speaker 1: but there is there is risk the vaccine, by the way,
Speaker 1: but that's what I just got four pinocchios with Washington
Speaker 1: Posts for saying that you know that there's risk to
Speaker 1: the vaccine. There's risk to every vaccine. Well, give it
Speaker 1: six months. That's typically the lag time when people start
Speaker 1: wakening up and realizing the truth, so that it seems
Speaker 1: to be the case. Whether it's the Russia collusion, you
Speaker 1: give it a few months, truth comes out, Russia bounties
Speaker 1: a few months comes out, COVID came from the lab,
Speaker 1: a few months starts you know, so this this that
Speaker 1: tends to happen. So I think a few months down
Speaker 1: the road, people will start waking up and realizing that
Speaker 1: they weren't told the full truth. Again, you know, my
Speaker 1: parents vaccinate to make sense for them their higher risk,
Speaker 1: but we're talking about not everyone has the same risk
Speaker 1: profile and their fortunld be dated to get a vaccine
Speaker 1: they don't need. Uh that again potentially could end up
Speaker 1: in side effects. And then secondly it's not fully approved
Speaker 1: or potentially rushed to improve. But I also want to
Speaker 1: talk about January six or uh so the Capitol Police
Speaker 1: and the dj have refused to release something like four
Speaker 1: thousand hours of footage. There's a select group of lawmakers
Speaker 1: that have access to the footage. You and your staff
Speaker 1: have flagged some interesting parts of the footage happening around
Speaker 1: the two thirty three pm Eastern time mark at the
Speaker 1: upper West terrorist doors. What did you guys flag and
Speaker 1: why is that important? Well? I am highly concerned about
Speaker 1: the unequal administration of justice. UM. We've also sent to
Speaker 1: some of my colleges, and I sent a letter to
Speaker 1: Merrick Garland, uh, just asking questions, how are you treating
Speaker 1: people who breached the capital, that committed acts of violence
Speaker 1: on January six versus you know the summer rioters, you
Speaker 1: know where we had two billion dollars with property damage. Well,
Speaker 1: in access to five riots, eight thousand protests, but five
Speaker 1: hundred plus riots. Uh, I've seen the figures highest two
Speaker 1: thousand law enforcement officers injured during those riots. A couple
Speaker 1: of dozen people uh in some way shape form losing
Speaker 1: their lives during those things. But we're supposed to forget
Speaker 1: all that. So I'm highly concerned about the unequal administration justice.
Speaker 1: So what I've asked my staff to do is go
Speaker 1: review the videotape because I think it's importantly we have
Speaker 1: a complete reconstruction of what happened outside and inside the capitol.
Speaker 1: You know, I was the guy that entered J. Michael
Speaker 1: Waller's very detailed I witness account of what he witnessed
Speaker 1: out on the west side of the Capitol. And J.
Speaker 1: Michael Waller is a professor of political uh not terrorism,
Speaker 1: political whatever, but he's he's a very knowledgeable observer political
Speaker 1: warfare um, and he's a very knowledgeab observer went to
Speaker 1: j anywhere six just to observe and he wrote his
Speaker 1: fourteen page account before he listened to any news account.
Speaker 1: So it's just just a totally unvarnished it's just like,
Speaker 1: this is what I saw. I entered in the record,
Speaker 1: and you know, the chairwoman Culbture gets out, you know,
Speaker 1: comes out of hearing and says, oh, here's Senator Johnson
Speaker 1: entering conspiracy theories in our our hearing record. Right away. J.
Speaker 1: Michael Rawler's account is standing the test of time. Here,
Speaker 1: I pushed back, there weren't there were not thousands of
Speaker 1: armed insurrectionists there weren't that. That's not what an armed
Speaker 1: instruction would look like. Okay, So I wanted my my
Speaker 1: staff to go take a look at that. And there's
Speaker 1: no doubt about it. You know, I've seen the repugnant,
Speaker 1: the repulsive acts of violence, the racial slurs. I mean,
Speaker 1: I condemned it that day, I condemn it repeatedly. But
Speaker 1: you know, there there are a bunch of people that
Speaker 1: walked into that capital, no violence whatsoever. Um. Again, wasn't
Speaker 1: smart for them to do that, but they did. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, my own state capital in Madison, it was
Speaker 1: overrun by liberals. But that's okay. You can you can
Speaker 1: go inside a state capital if you're a liberal and
Speaker 1: you occupy it for days or weeks, and this is
Speaker 1: not a problem. But boy, you don't come into the
Speaker 1: America to the you know, America's people's house. Uh, or
Speaker 1: you're a domestic terrorist. But anyway, so, uh, I don't
Speaker 1: long answer to your question, but I have my staff
Speaker 1: review this footage and they noticed in that that West
Speaker 1: Terrace door that uh, somebody first tried to get out
Speaker 1: that door and couldn't. It was locked. A couple minutes later, uh,
Speaker 1: capitol police directed somebody to leave the capital through that door.
Speaker 1: They opened up the door and more than three people
Speaker 1: streamed in. Then no violence, no confrontation, just like the
Speaker 1: door is open, come on in, which is a Again
Speaker 1: that's a different aspect of the story, a different perspective.
Speaker 1: It's it's part of the story that ought to be told.
Speaker 1: So I have no idea what the legal jeopardy those
Speaker 1: three hundred individuals were in. But but we've again we've
Speaker 1: also seen just cell phone video of the insurrectionists. I'm
Speaker 1: you know, I'm saying that with air quotes staying within
Speaker 1: the rope lines in the rotunda. Again, that's that's now
Speaker 1: what an armed insurrection would look like, as repugnant, as
Speaker 1: repugnant as the violence was, particularly why I was called
Speaker 1: the inauguration tunnel on the west side of the Capitol. Again,
Speaker 1: I condemned that. But that's not the whole story. There's
Speaker 1: actually a much bigger story of tens of thousands of
Speaker 1: protesters that that were peaceful, that they're you know, of
Speaker 1: the eight hundred plus people inside the capitol, some of
Speaker 1: them just walked in, some of some of them behaved themselves,
Speaker 1: some of them viewed it is, Hey, this is the
Speaker 1: people's house. I've every right to be here, Okay. Um.
Speaker 1: But then they were, as J. Michael described, there were
Speaker 1: some determined groups that we're the adectators of the provocateurs. Uh.
Speaker 1: But you know, here we are six months later, and
Speaker 1: like nobody's talking, we don't have access to the people
Speaker 1: that are in the jails. Um. You know they haven't
Speaker 1: gone on on trial yet. The Summer protesters, they are
Speaker 1: all let out on bail or let out without even bail. Boy,
Speaker 1: if you participate in January six, you're sitting. You're sitting
Speaker 1: in the d c J right now, twenty three hours
Speaker 1: a day, and yourself. We've got Paul Hodgins who just
Speaker 1: received an eight months sentence engaged in no violence. But
Speaker 1: he was wearing a Trump T shirt and holiday Trump flag,
Speaker 1: so apparently that was enough for them to sentence him
Speaker 1: to eight months. Did you ever get a response from
Speaker 1: Attorney General Eric Marck Garland when you and your colleagues
Speaker 1: sent him a letter, no, no, and and uh, I
Speaker 1: remember I Speed and Christopher Ray and was pretty well
Speaker 1: stiff armed by him as well. So uh, certainly I
Speaker 1: write those oversight letters hoping the agencies will respond, don't
Speaker 1: hold my breath, but I hope to create some public
Speaker 1: pressure so they at least respond to a certain extent
Speaker 1: to the public, because I think the public has right
Speaker 1: to know what's pulling off in our justice department, and
Speaker 1: and do we even have something close to the equal
Speaker 1: administration justice stab Look at Hunter Biden, you have satan, No,
Speaker 1: we don't. What also seems I that you have Congress
Speaker 1: under the guys of trying to get to the truth,
Speaker 1: the left wanting to, you know, run a January six commission,
Speaker 1: but there's no pressure on getting out those hours of footage.
Speaker 1: You think if your intent was truly to get to
Speaker 1: the bottom of the truth, wouldn't transparency be the best policy. Well, again,
Speaker 1: you're assuming that leaders and Congress want to get the
Speaker 1: truth out. One of the things I keep pointing out
Speaker 1: the thousands of armed insurrections. The reason that is pushed
Speaker 1: so hard, quite honestly, on both sides of the aisle
Speaker 1: to a certain extent, is it works well. I mean,
Speaker 1: it works well for the news media who hate Trump supporters,
Speaker 1: it works well for Democrats who hate Trump supporters, But
Speaker 1: it also works well for congressional leadership. That we're responsible
Speaker 1: for capital security. Um if if if literally the capital
Speaker 1: is overrun by thousands of armed insurrections. I mean, no
Speaker 1: security plan could have possibly contemplated that, and it could
Speaker 1: have been in place to prevent the breach. You know,
Speaker 1: J Michael Lawler and his expert testimony or his eyewitness account,
Speaker 1: he said he strolled up the west side of capital,
Speaker 1: there wasn't a police person visible. But one thing we
Speaker 1: learned in Kenosha, where because of Trump's leadership, we snuffed
Speaker 1: those riots out pretty fast once the governor finally agreed
Speaker 1: to let Trump and other people helped them. Now, you
Speaker 1: over you provide a lot of manpower to have dangerous
Speaker 1: situation and it doesn't end up being so dangerous you
Speaker 1: end up not having riot. So he didn't end up
Speaker 1: not having a breach. So I can't I can't get
Speaker 1: an answer to the question I've had. Were said, Well,
Speaker 1: I mean we're there, are there like like pre planned
Speaker 1: uh security postures, and you know, so for inauguration? Is
Speaker 1: this kind of what we always do for you know,
Speaker 1: a Supreme Court vote? I mean, is this what we
Speaker 1: do for uh, you know, calling the electoral College votes?
Speaker 1: Is this what we do you joint session. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, are there like a dozen different pre planned
Speaker 1: security postures. They won't even ask me that question much.
Speaker 1: Let's tell me what was planned, what kind of security
Speaker 1: posture they are in? All I can say it was
Speaker 1: completely inadequate based on the circumstances. Knowing that, knowing full
Speaker 1: well they're gonna be tens of thousands of people protesting
Speaker 1: and protesting outside the capital, you'd think we'd have had
Speaker 1: better and more visible security, but we didn't. So I
Speaker 1: do have to add the the line officers, I mean,
Speaker 1: the people that that fought the battles. They did an
Speaker 1: exemplary job of keeping members Congress safe uh and and responding.
Speaker 1: They were failed by their leadership, by congressional leadership, by
Speaker 1: not having a plan, not having adequate personnel there present
Speaker 1: to prevent whatever should happen. That the capital never should
Speaker 1: have been breached. Quick break more resentator Ron Johnson. Journalist
Speaker 1: Glenn Greenwald recently tweeted that the reality is liberals wanted
Speaker 1: domestic warrant terror. They want the CIA, N s A,
Speaker 1: and FBI to reveal their political adversaries, arrest them, treat
Speaker 1: them like terrorists. January six is the key to it.
Speaker 1: Do you agree with that statement? And is that where
Speaker 1: this is heading? You know? And I do, And I'll
Speaker 1: tell you why. As as chairman Holman Security, for the
Speaker 1: last couple of years, my my ranking member had been
Speaker 1: had been Garry Peters. Now he's chairman the committee. We
Speaker 1: would hold our annual threat hearings with Christopher Ray and
Speaker 1: had the National Current Terrorism Center, Um, you know, we
Speaker 1: would hold those hearings. And of course I'm concerned about cybersecurity,
Speaker 1: and I'm concerned about E m P and g m
Speaker 1: D and the unsecure boarder. I'm I'm concerned about the
Speaker 1: things that really represent a threat to this country. And
Speaker 1: Peters just want to talk about white supremacism, white supremacists.
Speaker 1: I'm going again, I don't condone white supremacist you know,
Speaker 1: I want them monitor. I want to make sure that
Speaker 1: they don't great acts of violence just like Islama Islami's terrorists.
Speaker 1: But what was this focus for like a couple of
Speaker 1: years as my ranking member, is always about white supremacist
Speaker 1: I just I never understood, you know. I signed a
Speaker 1: couple of letters with them, you know, trying to get
Speaker 1: you know, to what extent is the FBI track and
Speaker 1: I'm saying, I'm happy to, you know, keep an eye
Speaker 1: on these guys, but I just don't think this is
Speaker 1: the greatest threat to our democracy. One of the reasons,
Speaker 1: by the way, I'm pretty ticked off about at the
Speaker 1: breachers is they've just given the Democrats this ammunition. Okay,
Speaker 1: so now it's blown up into the greatest threat faces nation,
Speaker 1: which I still don't believe. By the way, Um, I
Speaker 1: know there's a certain statistics statistics based on what they
Speaker 1: consider mass murders. You know, more of those that are
Speaker 1: committed by white supremacist than by Islamis Islamist terrorists, but
Speaker 1: you're still talking, uh, a small number versus what you
Speaker 1: see murders in the inner city with drug deals and
Speaker 1: gangs and all that kind of stuff. So again, it's
Speaker 1: just so so yes, I agree with Glenn Greenwald. There
Speaker 1: is this push on the part of Democrats that's also
Speaker 1: the narrative of thousands of arms insurrections. They want to
Speaker 1: paint a broad brush the semi five million Americans that
Speaker 1: voted for Donald Trump are somehow suspected domestic terrorists that
Speaker 1: have given a chance, they also would engage in an
Speaker 1: arms insurrection to overthrow the government when it's quite honestly,
Speaker 1: the exact opposite is true. I mean, Trump supporters, conservatives,
Speaker 1: tea pot folks. We love this country. We know it's
Speaker 1: not perfect. We want to preserve it. We want to
Speaker 1: save it. Okay, it's the left. They want to fundamentally
Speaker 1: transform it. They're the ones who want to overthrow the
Speaker 1: current order and replace it with some utopian vision of
Speaker 1: a socialist system that will end in in sorrow trust me,
Speaker 1: and totalitarianism and mass murder. That's what happens with socialist
Speaker 1: totalitarian regimes. Well, and the capital. Please, so they're they're
Speaker 1: not subject to FOIA requests. Um, they won't release the
Speaker 1: name of the who've shot Ashley Babbitt. They also, along
Speaker 1: with the d J, are not releasing you have tens
Speaker 1: of thousands or four thousand hours of footage. Yet they're
Speaker 1: expanding field offices to Florida and California. Is that necessary
Speaker 1: and why are they doing that? No, they should not
Speaker 1: do it. They ought to concentrate on the mission that
Speaker 1: they failed at on January six, which is providing an
Speaker 1: adequate security, having planned security postures prior to these events. Uh,
Speaker 1: there's no need whatsoever. Now they're saying, well, there's the
Speaker 1: there's increased stress against members of Congress. Um, it's it's
Speaker 1: it's a very unfortunate fact of life. When you serve here,
Speaker 1: you get threats. Okay, but it should be the responsibility
Speaker 1: of states to provide security for their elected representatives, not
Speaker 1: some national or federal police force. You know, we have
Speaker 1: enough federal police forces that are surveilling Americans. Uh, whether
Speaker 1: it's the n s A, I mean, surveilling Tucker Carlson
Speaker 1: or whatever happened to Cheryl Atkinson. I think we have
Speaker 1: enough federal intrusion into our lives right now. I would
Speaker 1: much rather leave security of members of Congress up to
Speaker 1: the states to send them here to Washington, c to
Speaker 1: represent them. And I talked to Tucker about that last
Speaker 1: week in the podcast, and you're fascinating what they're doing
Speaker 1: to him and also very terrifying as well. Do you
Speaker 1: do you think is it Congress is supposed to rein
Speaker 1: in the n s A. Is that something that needs
Speaker 1: to happen when Republicans retain or retain power if they
Speaker 1: gain back power. Yes, I mean this is where I'll say,
Speaker 1: you know, the Mike Leaves and the Rand Falls were
Speaker 1: right and I was wrong on the fives the court
Speaker 1: when when we were renewing that, you know, we would
Speaker 1: talk to fives judges and they'd always say, no, show
Speaker 1: me an instance where we've uh undermined the constitution rights
Speaker 1: of one American and you know, we couldn't show them anything.
Speaker 1: So yeah, we kind of felt these are solid patriots
Speaker 1: and they're going to follow the law. And of course
Speaker 1: we found out in the corrupt FBI investigation that they
Speaker 1: didn't follow the law and that the you know, it's
Speaker 1: certain levels of the Just Department, the FBI is thoroughly corrupt.
Speaker 1: So yeah, they have to be reined in. I don't
Speaker 1: think there's any doubt about that. I want to get
Speaker 1: to the Reconciliation before bill before um, you know, I
Speaker 1: know you've got a busy day, but so what do
Speaker 1: you think. You know, obviously they're allegedly trying to find
Speaker 1: some bipartisan deal, which is obviously completely bogus. They want
Speaker 1: to use the Reconciliation Bill because it means they can
Speaker 1: do what they want on a party line basis. What
Speaker 1: do you think is going to end up in that
Speaker 1: Reconciliation bill? It looks like potentially amnesty climate measures and
Speaker 1: fossil fuel with which will be devastating to the economy.
Speaker 1: Also potentially, you know, one of the largest tax increases
Speaker 1: in history. What are you hearing that could be in it?
Speaker 1: And what do you what do you think? What are
Speaker 1: your expectations of it? Well, unless Chuck Schumer fires the
Speaker 1: parliamentarian and puts in somebody that does exactly as bidding,
Speaker 1: they will have a hard time, uh, passing through reconciliation
Speaker 1: some of these policy things that really aren't related to
Speaker 1: a budget reconciliation dealing with revenue and spending. But the
Speaker 1: revenue and spending things will be problematic enough. I mean,
Speaker 1: they're going to increase people's taxes. They'll they'll they'll be
Speaker 1: taxing exactly what we need more of, which is growth
Speaker 1: and success, and so we'll get less of it. And
Speaker 1: then I mean, they're gonna completely out of control spending,
Speaker 1: and they'll do it in a way that is gonna
Speaker 1: dramatically under account for how much spending their really passing. So,
Speaker 1: my guests, what they'll do is they'll start creating all
Speaker 1: kinds of new entitlements. Now they won't call them entitlements.
Speaker 1: They will sunset them after two or three years, so
Speaker 1: that it gets a very gets a much smaller score
Speaker 1: than entitlement that's going to continue on infinitum um, so
Speaker 1: that that would be the game they're they're gonna play.
Speaker 1: I think they did that to a certain stand the
Speaker 1: Cooper relief package. So that's what Democrats do. They will
Speaker 1: lay in uh programs that again, receiving government benefits is
Speaker 1: always popular and everybody loves getting free money, and so
Speaker 1: it's almost impossible to repeal one. Something like that has
Speaker 1: been set up so that would be my guest. I mean,
Speaker 1: I have no idea. I led an effort that we
Speaker 1: did a press release last Thursday. I think we had
Speaker 1: a nine eleven Republican senators joined myself from Rick Scott
Speaker 1: had led the effort kind of pushing back on the
Speaker 1: bipars and Infrastructure bill. You know, now that we know
Speaker 1: that the Democrats are absolutely dedicated to a reconciliation package
Speaker 1: about three point five trillion dollars, you know, our point,
Speaker 1: my point has always been to the set that you
Speaker 1: pull infrastructure out that three point five trillion, they'll still
Speaker 1: pass something a three point five trillion, They'll just backfill
Speaker 1: it with the entitlement programs with more welfare programs, you know,
Speaker 1: more more dependency on government. So I don't know why
Speaker 1: any Republican would support that. Uh, we're all for infrastructure,
Speaker 1: but there's a really easy way of having a fiscally
Speaker 1: sound approach to spending money infrastructure, and that would be
Speaker 1: to repurpose the seven billion dollars of the partisan one
Speaker 1: nine trillion dollar cover relief package that doesn't even get
Speaker 1: spent until obviously not COVID relief. That money I would
Speaker 1: just be resended for that purpose and repurposed for true infrastructure.
Speaker 1: It would be about seven billion dollars out would be
Speaker 1: more than enough that that should be the republic Conference position.
Speaker 1: I can't tell you how frustrated I am that it's
Speaker 1: not what are you seeing at the border? We've got
Speaker 1: I think there was something like a hundred eighty eight thousand,
Speaker 1: eight hud illegal immigrants stopped in June. We're seeing crossings,
Speaker 1: a one year high increase from last year. What do
Speaker 1: your what do you see and what are your concerns
Speaker 1: with all that? Well, Lease, it's it's what we don't
Speaker 1: see that is most concerning. So we see the numbers,
Speaker 1: they apparently because because we don't have video to go
Speaker 1: along with it, not much of it other than you
Speaker 1: know what, eighteen of us we went down there and
Speaker 1: we took pictures of the down of cility. But if
Speaker 1: you don't have a video only, you don't have a
Speaker 1: crisis here in America. So the Biden administration has gotten
Speaker 1: very efficient at processing and dispersing and keeping the press
Speaker 1: at bay. Of course the presses particularly uh inquisitive either.
Speaker 1: But what you're not seeing is the depredations of the
Speaker 1: human that the human traffickers are imposing on the migrants.
Speaker 1: You know, the rapes, the involuntary servitude, the beatings, the kidnappings,
Speaker 1: uh and calling for more ransom. So it's so it's
Speaker 1: not just the human traffickers get the you know, six
Speaker 1: to trafficking feed that they also if there's somebody with
Speaker 1: any kind of means with people upt in Central America,
Speaker 1: I mean, they'll kidnap them, they'll beat in the video,
Speaker 1: take the beatings, and extract more ransom, extortion pay out
Speaker 1: of out of the relatives are still in Central America.
Speaker 1: So we don't see that. We don't see the gotaways
Speaker 1: that are that are unknown. We don't see all the
Speaker 1: additional rugs flowing in this country. We don't. We don't
Speaker 1: see the gang members. You know, I raised this issue
Speaker 1: last week that when you hear uncompanied children, I mean,
Speaker 1: don't we all think of will two and three year
Speaker 1: olds of uncompanied children are fifteen or older and their mail.
Speaker 1: So that's exactly who the drug traffickers use to traff
Speaker 1: through their drugs. Because if a miner gets caught, they
Speaker 1: don't get prosecuted. They don't they don't spend a hard
Speaker 1: time in jail because they're they're miners. And so we
Speaker 1: don't see that. You know, we don't see the women
Speaker 1: who get put into the sex trade and they can't
Speaker 1: escape it. We don't see that. And it's exactly what
Speaker 1: Biden and Harris are are counting on the fact that
Speaker 1: we won't we can't see it, the press won't report it,
Speaker 1: and so the full standards crisis as bad as six
Speaker 1: thousand people a day, that's what we're talking about, six
Speaker 1: thousand people day being apprehended. And when they end Title
Speaker 1: forty two, those all those six thousand people, virtually all
Speaker 1: of them will be dispersed into all corners of America,
Speaker 1: and the federal government won't tell the states. They won't
Speaker 1: tell the cities, they'll just show up. And if you've
Speaker 1: got un a company of children that are gang members again, gangs,
Speaker 1: it's just all under the radar, right, But the murders
Speaker 1: happening within our inner cities uh out of control. Do
Speaker 1: you think there are enough Republicans to stand up against
Speaker 1: any sort of embassy bill? That's that's kind of a
Speaker 1: Hypothetical's hard to answer. You know, I'll tell you I'm
Speaker 1: one person that I would like to take care of
Speaker 1: the doctor children. It's not it's not your fault. When
Speaker 1: you're two years old you get brought over by your
Speaker 1: parents that that's to a certain extent, that's our fault.
Speaker 1: That we've had open borders and we've we've enticed them
Speaker 1: to come into this country. But you can't even begin
Speaker 1: to dress that and tell you secure the border. And
Speaker 1: that's what sort of pressing about what Biden did is
Speaker 1: we were so close to taking the first step and
Speaker 1: really trying to solve our immigration. The issue here is
Speaker 1: you got to first cure the border. So we had
Speaker 1: the flow of uncompied children family units pretty well stopped,
Speaker 1: and we were in the final stages of building a
Speaker 1: wall that would have been pretty darn effective, and Biden
Speaker 1: blew that all up. So here we are back to
Speaker 1: square zero. We have a completely out of control nothing
Speaker 1: ever like this before in terms of an illegal flow.
Speaker 1: It's out of control. And that's the first thing you
Speaker 1: need to do if you want to address the doctor kids,
Speaker 1: if you want to stand up a a a functioning
Speaker 1: legal immigration system. We need legal immigrants, we just do.
Speaker 1: I mean, we need an increased labor force, which we
Speaker 1: don't have. It's gonna be a real hamper to our
Speaker 1: economic growth, the fact that we don't have enough labor
Speaker 1: in this country. To see, I got to disagree with
Speaker 1: you on data because you know, as you just said,
Speaker 1: we have teenagers coming over age fifteen and older and
Speaker 1: then and how do you identify it the age someone
Speaker 1: entered into the country. I'm not saying there aren't problems,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's not an easy thing. We just do it, Okay,
Speaker 1: It's a very difficult, complex situation. Okay, but you know
Speaker 1: you also have to recognize the fact that you've got
Speaker 1: and no, no, you know, the the M. I. T.
Speaker 1: Yale study set is somewhere between I think they said
Speaker 1: between sixteen and thirty million or twenty million people in
Speaker 1: this country, so they pegged it about twenty two, which
Speaker 1: is at least double what you always hear at a rand.
Speaker 1: We have a huge problem of people uh here without
Speaker 1: documentation in this country uh illegally that I would suggest
Speaker 1: needs to be addressed. But again, you can't address it
Speaker 1: until you actually fix the assyling laws so they can't
Speaker 1: be exploited and we actually have a secure border and
Speaker 1: we are so far from that right now. Um, it's
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just a shame. Yes see. I just
Speaker 1: don't think I think any Annessey leads to increase problems
Speaker 1: that we've continued to see. So I'm against it all personally.
Speaker 1: But one last question before we go, and I shade
Speaker 1: all the time you've sent with me today. Will the
Speaker 1: filipbuster lasts until the mid terms? That totally depends on Kierson,
Speaker 1: Cinneama and Joe Mansion. Um, I pray for their health
Speaker 1: and their integrity to honor the promise they've made that
Speaker 1: they're going to honor the filibuster there. I can't remember
Speaker 1: the exact number, some thirty five Democrats senators that joined
Speaker 1: Susan Collins while we were in control guarantee, you know,
Speaker 1: pledging not to blow up the filibuster. Uh you see
Speaker 1: see that when they signed the name, the paper is
Speaker 1: really not worth anything. Um So Yeah, Personally, Kierson Cinnama
Speaker 1: and Joe Manson are the two most powerful centers right now.
Speaker 1: I don't know why they'd want to give that up,
Speaker 1: but they're gonna come under tremendous pressure. So um, I
Speaker 1: hope So, I mean if we if we lose the filibuster,
Speaker 1: it's really awful. Senator. I appreciate you joining the show,
Speaker 1: and I commend you for your fight for the truth.
Speaker 1: I know sometimes it's lonely going it alone when so
Speaker 1: many engaging group thinks. So I admire your truth telling
Speaker 1: and your fight. So thank you for that, and thank
Speaker 1: you so much for making so much time for me.
Speaker 1: I really appreciate you joined the Truth with Lisa Booth.
Speaker 1: I appreciate the aptunity every day. Yeah what did they
Speaker 1: acceptor Ron Johnson again for a fascinating interview and more
Speaker 1: importantly for being a truth teller. And I want to
Speaker 1: thank you guys at home so much for listening. If
Speaker 1: you enjoyed today's show, please leave us for review and
Speaker 1: rate us at five stars. On Apple Podcast, you can
Speaker 1: also find us on Spotify. You can find me on Twitter, Instagram,
Speaker 1: and Facebook at at Lisa Marie Booth and I want
Speaker 1: to give us special thanks to our team producer John Cassio,
Speaker 1: writer Aaron Kleigman, researcher Isabelle mcmannon, and our executive producer
Speaker 1: is Debbie Myers and speaker New Gingrich, all a part
Speaker 1: of the Ginger three sixty network and team