Restoration of America

Doug talks to Dr. Peter McCullough, cardiologist and internist (Machine Generated) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast, a weekly conservative news show brought to you by Restoration PAC. I'm Doug Truax, founder, and president of Restoration PAC. Today we are blessed to have one of the most important voices in America when it comes to COVID-19. He is Dr. Peter McCullough, a deeply credentialed doctor who is telling Americans that0 most of what they are hearing in the mainstream media about COVID is wrong. He is telling a troubling tale about collusion between the medical establishment, corporate media and big tech to prevent you from hearing the truth. All right, Dr. McCollough, thanks so much for coming on the show. Dr. Peter McCullough: Well, thanks for having me. Doug Truax: All right. So we'll get to the Rogan stuff in a second, but I definitely want to hear about your journey from the beginning with COVID, how you jumped in right away. You were one of the first guys, first guys in doing a lot of things, and then kind of how it progressed, up to where we are today. Dr. Peter McCullough: Yeah, I was in March of 2020. I was in a medical practice in cardiology practice, academic medical center in Dallas, Texas still am today at the same medical center. I had previously focused on heart and kidney disease as my major research focus. And when this hit myself and my division chief, we, we felt strongly motivated that we should do something to help out from our part. We weren't infectious disease experts, but we were good medical doctors and we could apply our scholarship. And so I applied for and won that one of the first FDA new drug applications to use hydroxychloroquine in large-scale and healthcare workers. And we demonstrated that that was beneficial. And then I moved on to work with the Italians to devise treatment protocols, to treat patients in order to avoid hospitalization and death and had the two seminal publications in 2020 demonstrating what the approach would be with using combined drugs, drugs to reduce viral replication, treat inflammation, and then treat blood clotting. And those papers became the most downloaded and cited papers for all of COVID-19. As an outpatient, there's now a protocols copyrighted called the McCullough protocol. It was copyrighted by Ben marble on my behalf for myfreedoctor.com, which used it. Ben just testified in the us Senate, as I did on January 24th, he's treated with his group over 150,000 Americans, high risk for COVID-19 he's only lost four patients. So it's extraordinary how effective early treatment can be. Absolutely. Doug Truax: And you have been on, on such the front edge of this, and we all really appreciate it. I think, as we've all kind of gotten to know you over this period of time, I think there's a lot of appreciation for your courage and obviously for your intellect. And so let's go back to December here, you get on the Rogan show and millions and millions of people hear all of this. I mean, you'd been doing other shows previously, but that's the viral side of this and it, and it took off. So just tell us how have changed for you since then, Dr. Peter McCullough: You know, through the course of the pandemic, I have now had two rounds of US Senate testimony, multiple state Senate testimonies that has been a frequent contributor in the hill in the first year, second year, frequent contributor actually have my own show in America Out Loud Talk radio, frequent contributor on Fox news, OEN, Newsmax, but the Rogan interview was something completely different. And when Rogan reached out to me, it took about a month to schedule. I was busy and I had prepared. So I had a base set of scientific slides that was already continuing medical education approved for, by a major scientific meeting in October. And I added to it with the peer reviewed literature, both in the preprint server system and in the national library of medicine. And when I went to the Rogan studio, I gave the slide set to his producers ahead of time, select figures. I opened up my computer. I found Joe Rogan to be very respectful. He asked good questions. He was intelligent perceptive the entire three hour interview. There were no opinions. There was no hyperbole. It was basically a presentation of the scientific data. And now the transcript has come out on the Rogan interview and the most frequently discussed topic was monoclonal antibodies, which are fully emergency use authorized. And I use a monoclonal antibodies practice every day. Joe Rogan had received them, his friend, Aaron Rogers, a quarterback for the Green Bay Packers had received them. So we had a lot of discussion on monoclonal antibodies. We also discussed other treatments used in the Macola protocol. So I mean the transcript indicates it was a very scientific discussion. I think what people were shocked with was the fallout from this fallout originally from, from Spotify and then other celebrities through Spotify, it escalated to the White House and the press secretary. And it's interesting because Spotify is a common carrier. You know, they carry the podcast for Robert F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and the Children's Health Defense is sharply critical of vaccines. And they haven't said a word about Robert F. Kennedy yet Rogan became a target in a sense. And it's been expanded now to things far beyond Rogan's interview with myself or Pierre Cory or Bret Weinstein or Robert Malone. Doug Truax: And so why do you think as you look back on it and to your point, it's very scientific, no hyperbole. Why do you think it was went viral Like it did Dr. Peter McCullough: Well it went viral, I think because Rogan's audience, you know, Rogan's audience with my interview, with the downloads, the reverbs, it was translated into multiple languages. It was three hours long previously. I think my longest was, was Tucker Carlson. I did the long program with Tucker Carlson today in his studio, but you know, three hours is a long time to fully vet a topic. And how careful Rogan is, is a journalist and his audience. His audience, the average age, I think is 24. These are, these are young people. They don't subscribe to cable TV anymore. They don't even know what Fox news is. So reached a whole new group of people and boy did it reverberate around the world. Doug Truax: Yeah. And I think it goes to, and I'd like to get your thought on this, about the truth of the matter. And that cohort that you're talking about, that generation is very perceptive of hypocrisy. And so when they feel it might be out there and people are being hypocritical, some of these things that they're hearing in the news constantly is like, this may not be real. And so when they watch your podcast, watch you talk and do what you do. They're thinking, okay, here's the truth. And then they start eating it up and it starts going around. I mean, that, that's how I feel that that's, that's kind of the state of play. I feel like we're in right now. Dr. Peter McCullough: I think you're right. I think on December 8th they heard the truth. It was one piece of feedback I received from a lot of people. So Dr. McCullough, you said you can't get COVID a second time. Well, as December 10th, we got the communication from the CDC and it became obvious. You could get Omicron once you've already had a prior variant. And fortunately I was on Fox news with Laura Ingraham and I said, listen, you know, here's an update. Omicron broke through a natural immunity, expect it. You can get a second case now it's very mild, very transitory. So like any good doctor and scientists with humility, you know, I quickly adapted to the data. I haven't stuck with a single quote narrative. That's been pointed out to be wrong because I've been careful to cite the science and other people in my circles have as well. What, what Americans are now starting to understand is our public health officials, as well as many media doctors have not. And they realize that the truth is starting to come through. Rogan was the big breakthrough. And my Lord, the January 24th, US Senate testimony that was five hours chaired by Senator Ron Johnson, I co moderated the committee. It was called COVID-19 a second opinion. We had dozens of practicing expert doctors who know how to treat COVID-19 inpatient and outpatient. We had PhD scientists, nurses, patients, attorneys. It was five hours of truth bombs. And I can tell you that was live-streamed that five hours has been condensed to a 38 minute highlight reel that's up on YouTube. And that is basically now combined with the Joe Rogan sets of interviews. I think really starting to break through to Americans, getting now a much more clear understanding of the truth regarding COVID-19. Doug Truax: And I think you touched on it a second ago, too, with the lack of humility. And I think most Americans will look at you and the people that you associate with and say very smart, very courageous, but humble, willing to say, oh, things have changed. I didn't realize that. And I think my opinion on this, as, you know, coming into a pandemic, I've always felt like, well, we're the United States of America. We have this cool thing called the center for disease control. And there's a lot of really smart people in there. And they're gonna figure it out if we, if the pandemic hits us and they're gonna work with everybody and doctors, and that's all just completely blown up now, because there's this lack of humility. There's a lack of, Hey, we had we had that wrong. We gotta adjust. We now hydroxychloroquine. Okay. We're going to revisit that. I mean, there was just a lack of humility coming through this. And I think, you know, a lot of times it got politicized obviously, but, but speak to that side of it a little bit, if you would, in terms of the, you know, people's kind of trusting in the health establishment, even meaning the federal government has this hierarchy, obviously that you know, is here to protect the people. And it just has been falling apart for years now. Dr. Peter McCullough: It's true. It got so bad that we actually heard from our national allergy immunology, branch director, a, you know, a division head at the NIH. It's not a terribly high position. You know, that person claimed to represent science, the entire field of science. And you know, all of us use the scientific method. We're humble in our presentation, we work in groups. What Americas saw was basically I think hubris and demagoguery and what they really needed to see was doctors working in teams. We should have always had teams of doctors and there should have been contemporary review. We should have been reviewing contagion control. That's one pillar early treatment, the second pillar hospital treatment, the third pillar, and then the fourth pillar being vaccination. We should have always had a monthly review on how all four aspects of the pandemic are going. And, and there are no stakes in the ground. You know, the, the stake in the ground that the FDA put out saying don't use hydroxychloroquine well, there was hundreds of studies that came out afterwards, demonstrating hydroxychloroquine did have a modest benefit. It was clearly safe. The stake in the ground that the NIH had, where the NIH said, ivermectin is only a horse dewormer, and there is no scientific evidence. Well, you know, there's now 70 supportive studies for ivermectin. Inpatient, outpatient has a bigger, favorable impact on hydroxychloroquine. So all these stakes in the ground is if the conclusion is known and there's no further discussion, every single time, these have been a mistake. Another one has been masking. You know, initially the idea of all masks are going to stop the transmission. Well, when we realized in the study suggests that mascular ineffective, there never was a second review where we said, you know what? We tried it, it didn't work. You know, let's, you know, for general public masking, let's go ahead and drop that idea, but never was any humility to understand when something worked or didn't work and then actually change course. Doug Truax: Yeah. Yeah. Big government came in. I feel like I'm a conservative. And we, we talk this way around here in terms of the government coming in and saying, be obedient, you know, put the mask on. And, and when the question is, will it, does this doesn't seem to work? Why are we still doing it? It's like, well, we tell, cause we told you to, and you know, this masking idea and this whole not changing course, especially with the kids, you know, and this was the ongoing place where we all are still, we have all these states now that, you know, finally I'm in Illinois and they lighten the load on the mask, but not in schools and all this stuff. And so what, talk to a little bit in terms of how early on did you see that? Okay. You know, you saw what happened in Italy, you knew who was going to be most susceptible to this. And then as a society, almost, we kind of said, you know what, we're just going to apply the same standard to everybody, no matter your age, no matter your situation. And you know, what at what point I kind of remember when I, this was dawning on me, like in the late spring of 2020, I'm like, why are we applying this to everybody when we need to really near it, narrow it down? What, what was your take on that? And how do you feel about where we are with the kids and the masking and all that craziness? Dr. Peter McCullough: In the spring of 2020, I was working with leaders from UCLA, Emory, Dallas, all around the country and the cortical network in Italy. And by June, when we submitted our paper, we already had risk stratification as part of the program for COVID 19, that everybody needed treatment, that it looked like it was going to be the high risk seniors. Those with multiple medical problems, young people had essentially a negligible risk. And so we knew that very early on, and I wanna say by summer or fall of 2020, the great Barrington declaration was proposed by leaders from Stanford, Harvard, and Oxford, and the great Barrington declaration of which many, many scientists signed on to said, listen, let's just protect the elderly. That's where it's at everybody else. Let's, you know, have them be unencumbered with mandates and restrictions. And we'll protect our seniors to this day, 40% of the deaths, American deaths that happened. COVID-19 had been nursing home residents. The average age is 83. You know, the, the hyper-focus on children is way off base COVID-19 if it still has any risk to us in this society, it's our seniors, not our children. Doug Truax: Right? Absolutely. So the question I have for you then, so if, if tomorrow I get a positive COVID-19 test. What are you telling me to take? And where do I get the medications that you say to take? Dr. Peter McCullough: Right, Well, you can go to the truth for health foundation, truthforhealth.org, download the home treatment protocol, the McCullough protocol, and you can start to follow the steps. I encourage you to do it sooner than later. One of the first steps is to start nasal washes and we use dilute povidone iodine or dilute hydrogen peroxide over the sink, squared it up with the nose, sniff it back, and then spit it out. Do that twice in each side and gargle you do that up to every four hours at home, because we know that the Omicron virus, it largely stays in the nasal cavity. So it's very amenable because of its high replication rates to actually just killing the virus of the nasal cavity. So remarkably effective, everybody should have either povidone iodine, which is called betadyne about a $5 item online or hydrogen peroxide out of $5 item as well in the house, and be ready to go with the oral nasal washes. Beyond that, we have monoclonal antibodies for high risk patients. You don't look like you're going to be one of them, but we use sotrovimab the GlaxoSmithKline product. I just got called by a young, a mother of a young woman who has systemic lupus. And she's on a lot of medicines. I think she should get one of these antibodies and mother's scrambling right now, but we, you know, everybody should be calling around, finding out who's got them. You should push your representatives to make sure they're transparent on the supply chain for monoclonal antibodies. Then beyond that, we have oral antivirals. Hydroxychloroquine ivermectin. Now we have Paxil VOI by Pfizer, Mona peer veer by Merck. We use doxycycline azithromycin. In addition, we use in healthy snide throughout oral culture, seen throughout oral aspirin and then anticoagulants a higher risk patients. We go ahead and put them on prednisone as well. So all these drugs are freely available, should be prescribed by your primary care doctor. I think every patient ought to call their primary care doctor and say, listen, are you ready to prescribe the drugs for me? Are you ready to go on this? If you're not, who can you refer me to too many patients who have scrambled because the primary care doctors have just really been flat-footed I'm responding to COVID. Yeah. Doug Truax: That's great advice. So get, get prepared ahead of time. Cause you never know where your doctor's gonna land. Now it's a really strange time. And most people haven't been used to that their entire lives. They just assume that the best thing is going to be done and we're living in an age where it's not. And so last question for you then. So we'll see what happens more and more is coming out. The it just feels like a lot of bad decisions were made. It's hard to say how many people died that didn't need to die. Do you feel like at some point there's going to be accountability built into this for the people that have just basically, you know, showing the hubris and just weren't looking out for people like they were supposed to, are they going to be held accountable one day? Dr. Peter McCullough: They will. And I think justice will be served that the record now is so incredibly clear. Senator Ron Johnson's done a wonderful job in memorializing testimony into the Senate record. My current estimates are 95% of all the deaths could have been avoided with early appropriate treatment. And we could have avoided tens of millions of hospitalizations. And I think there will be a justice and people will be held accountable for that unnecessary loss of life and they inconvenience and the misery, and really the anxiety of being hospitalized unnecessarily. Doug Truax: Wow! Wow. That's really that's. I thought, I thought you were going to say something like that, but that's just, it's heartbreaking to think about it. And I am so thankful that it's been read into to the record and I like a lot of Americans are very thankful for you for your courage, for your intellect and how you've been sharing all this, and even what you shared today and really appreciate everything you've done and really thank you for coming on today. Dr. Peter McCullough: Okay. Thanks for having me. Doug Truax: All right. That's our show for today. Thank you so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media. Don't forget that by working together and staying diligent, we conservatives can bring our country back to true greatness. And so next week let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America First Right, A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant. Every morning in your inbox, always free subscribe by texting f FIRSTRIGHT to 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGTH All caps. One word to 3, 0, 1 6 more.

Doug talks to Thomas Klingenstein, conservative scholar and board chairman of the Claremont Institute. (Machine Generated) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast, a weekly conservative news show brought to you by restoration pack. I'm Doug Truax, founder, and president of Restoration . Today. We're excited to have a first-time guest who is one of America's foremost conservative thinkers. Thomas Klingenstein is chairman of the board of the Claremont Institute. He's a writer, a public speaker and playwright. He's the architect of the idea that America is in the midst of a cold civil war and conservatives better understand the terrain they're standing on. Well, welcome to the show Thomas. So great to have you on. Tom Klingenstein: Well, it's very nice to be here. Doug Truax: So I want to dive right into this concept that I mentioned a second ago, about a you're so articulate on this, this cold civil war that you believe we're in, that, you know, a lot of Republicans may or may not realize it, but you do such a great job in your videos and your speech. So just share with our audience, that concept and, and where you think we are with it today. Tom Klingenstein: I think that there is, we recognize that there's a divide Republicans as well as anybody else. And I think most people would think about it or would assess it as a serious divide. But I think it's more fundamental than just a divide or a greater than normal divide. I think it's actually a war and what makes it a war is different differences in ends. We have two societies which have different understandings of justice and so have different ends. You know, maybe the most simple way I could illustrate this is to say, I'm in New York. If we are New York together, you want to go to Maine. I want to go to Florida. There's no basis of negotiation. Those are two different ends. If we both want to go to Florida. Well, we could agree on means when to leave and how fast and what the route is, et cetera, or to give now in a historical example, before the civil war, the south had decided that slavery was a good thing, that all men were equal, but black men in like all good things. They wanted slavery to expand in the north, the course wanted to contract. So you can't expand and contract at the same time. Those are differences in ends, which is why in the civil war, we had a choice we could fight, or we could part ways. There were no other choices. So this brings us to the present. What is the end of our enemy? And I might stop a second to point out that our enemy doesn't have a name or an agreed upon name. And it's very, very difficult to fight an enemy that doesn't have a name. Sometimes people speak of identitarian as in identity politics or multiculturalism, or, you know, anti-racism, but we don't have agreement and we need to have agreement my name, which I wish everyone would adopt, but I'm not sure they will is woke communism. Now, what is the goal of woke communism? It is what I would call outcome parody. That is all the identity groups equally represented in all aspects of American society. For example, blacks represent about 13% of, of America. Therefore, under the woke comm thinking they should have 13% of the prisoners and senators and chief executive officers and high test scores and home loans and everything else you can think of. And of course, this is not blacks, but women and other identity groups. Now, the problem with this, the fundamental problem is that this understanding of justice outcome parody cannot exist with American justice because American injustice allows individuals to pursue their own understanding of happiness. And that will inevitably lead to outcome differences between men and women, between Asians and blacks and whites, because subcultures are different. They may have different talents. They have different cultures and preferences and so forth. So those two things, outcome parody, social justice, we call it and American justice just don't fit because the only way to move from outcome inequality, American justice to outcome a quality is by force. Just one example of what it means to achieve outcome equality is defunding the police. Now that sort of was a crazy idea that seemed to come out of the blue, but it didn't because it's part of an effort to bring down the percentage of blacks in prison, decriminalizing, certain laws failing to enforce others early release of those, again are not arbitrary. They are efforts which we could have predicted and we've been focused on and they are policies designed in this case to achieve outcome parody, equal representation of blacks in prison. And one could point to examples, including taking down statues, rewriting history and all the rest of it that are all pointed in the direction of outcome quality. So your choice here is tyranny again, because that's the only way you can go from outcome equality or inequality to equality, tyranny, or a free society. And just end where I started, I don't think Republicans understand this. They don't understand the severity of the problem and therefore they can not act accordingly. Doug Truax: Yeah. And I think that's a huge point is just, if you, if you don't even know you've got a problem, then that's a problem. And we're going to get back to that in a second. I just wanted to ask you too, you talk a lot about systemic racism and this is the way this is being, I mean, you're talking about the inequality and our, this is the way this is being foisted upon us. So how do you, how do you tell, what do you tell Republicans, conservatives? How do, how do they deal with the systemic racism accusations? They get thrown around everywhere. Now in order to push this woke communist agenda forward, Tom Klingenstein: Or let me just back up and explain the importance of systemic racism. If the woke comms can convince us that we are systemically racist, then we will agree to change the system. That's why convincing us that we're systemically racist is so important as is by the way, convincing us that we're about to be run over by white supremacist. Now, what should the Republicans do? What the most important thing they can do is just speak out and rebut without qualifications, that we're not systemically racist, that the police are not racist. Then America was not built on racism and the desire to perpetuate slavery as the 1619 account. Hasn't. So a lot of it is speaking up because it is speaking up our national leader, speaking up, allows other people to speak up. One of the important jobs of an elected official, particularly high level officials is to voice the concerns of their constituents to give their constituent voice, to say what they believe, but are intimidated from saying. And of course the problem here is most Republicans except Trump and a big exception are reluctant to rebut the charges of racism because of course they will be called racist. And that's obviously debilitating the one, there are many good things about Trump. One of them was he didn't care whether you called him a racist, it wasn't by the way, I don't think, but he didn't care. And he didn't care what the media said. And there's almost no one else in the political landscape who doesn't care. They may recognize that the media is corrupt still. They care. And that was one of the great virtues of Trump. He didn't care in the least, he didn't negotiate with the media. He didn't, you know, change what he said because of the media. He was just unequivocal and he was unequivocal in many things. And that's a great virtue in war. He didn't apologize for past racism. He didn't apologize for America generally. And in this moment when America is being attacked, when you're in a war, you don't apologize. Doug Truax: That's right. And I think that amongst the many virtues of his, I think the top one that got him to the place where he is today with conservatives, is this concept of in this war, the person at the top better, know, it's a war and better not care about any other outcome other than victory, because if you don't, you're going to lose. And I think people saw that in him. And I think that that's a, that's a really great thing for us to always remember, especially as conservatives as we go forward. And I want to talk more about the, the Republican base and where they are, where they aren't. I did, you did mention one thing though, real quick, and that was this tearing down of statues and critical race theory and all of these things. It really, I can remember a decade ago, this stuff didn't exist. And you know, here we are, it just kind of, you know, in the, in the grand sweep of history, this came on really fast. And so I I'm in no way giving anybody an out, we got to realize this is a battle of war that we're in and we got to fight it. And we got to speak up like what you just said, there's an element though. It's just, everybody's still taking it in. So how did this happen so quickly in your opinion, where did this all come from? These woke communists and their tactics, and how did it get to where we are today? Tom Klingenstein: Well, it, it, it originated as most noxious ideas do in the academy and it's been growing for a long time. What allowed it, I think to escape ivory, color cupboard walls was George Floyd and the riots, right as, as is frequently said, you know, you can't let a crisis go to waste. And so this was a tremendous opportunity to promote the woke com agenda, but by the way, it also, and this is very important. It revealed the WokeCom agenda in a way that at least the public has not seen. So BLM, for example, had in its mission before it was airbrushed away that it wanted to destruct to destroy the American family. Well, most Americans hadn't heard of that. And that by the way, is an element of achieving outcome equality defunding the police taking down statues, taking down statues is part of an effort to reformulate, basically destroy our history and make it conform with where the woke comms want to go. So I would say the answer to your question is it was grounded in the academy, but allowed to escape in a big way by George Floyd and the subsequent riots. Doug Truax: Yeah. And there's an argument too about the Wolf corporations getting on board with corporations, getting on board with the woke concept after the financial crash. And then they just been growing that attitude going forward because it lets them distract from any failures or lets the big tech guys keep censoring and things like that. And so it's, it's yeah, it's spreading, it's going everywhere. People are taking advantage of it as best they can. And I think it does go back to what you're saying too. If conservatives or Republicans are not speaking out against it, then it just keeps advancing. You know, and again, we're back to the war. You know, if the other side has declared war on you and you're not even, you know, acknowledging that, then they will just keep advancing into your position until you do finally say that's as far as you could come and no further. Tom Klingenstein: And I think you implied earlier, the greatest virtue of Trump was the, he let us know we're in a war. And as I heard you say quite correctly, you can't win a war. If you don't know you're in one. Now Trump may not have been able to explain it as, as he might, but he was, he recognized that we're in a war, he understands in a war, you gotta win that compromise reaching across the aisle is usually a fool's game. You can reach across the aisle when you win. But Trump understood the moral imperative to win so that, you know, people say about Trump, that he was very divisive. That's not true. What Trump was. He re he exposed the divide. We said it was divisive. Or our press said he was defensive, but I think that's not the way to look at it. Doug Truax: That's right. That's right. Yeah. He exposed a lot. And that is the most important thing I think he exposed. And if, yeah, if you don't know you're in a war you're going to lose. There's no doubt about that. So, so back to Republicans fighting, you know, I, I get the sense at times, conservatives will, you know, kind of flare up and fight this battle over here, you know, do a good job at this. Or, but there I there's this growing sense that there's a lot of them missing the bigger picture of this. So, you know, speak to that for a minute. I mean, what's the timeframe on this. If, if we are to get to a place where enough of the people on our side realize, wow, this is more serious than we thought, how long is this gonna take? And where are we currently? You know, I even think about the Congress, we've got 211 Republicans in the house and 50 senators, you know, what percentage of them actually get this concept? You know, that's kind of a scary thought. I mean, those are the types of things I'm looking for you to talk to in your opinion on that. Tom Klingenstein: Yeah. And you may be looking, but I'm not sure how an answer on it, but it's the number one thing I'm trying to do. Everything I'm trying to do is trying to explain to the Republican party that we are in a war. And here's how you ought to think about it. If you, if you can't think about it, right, as you say, if you don't recognize you're in a war, that's, that's the end of the game. But even beyond that, you have to understand your enemy, what it's trying to do and how it is going about what it's trying to do. I think Congress, the titillate people who were running for Congress, many of them are serious. Trumpsters I talked to a lot of congressmen. In fact, I get so many calls that I've stopped talking to them, but I talked to them enough to know that there are a lot or many who really understand the severity of the problem. They may not be able to articulate it in quite the way I do the way I think they ought to, but like Trump, they appreciate the danger we're in. I don't see many senators who do, and I would also add, and, and in fact, you know, within the conservative movement, perhaps the most fundamental divide is between those who think it's a war and those who don't, as you know, on the chair of the board of the Claremont Institute, a conservative, California think tank, and we are strongly on the side. In fact, we're leading the effort to convince people that this is a war, right? And they ought to think about it in a particular way, but there is a large portion of the conservative movement who don't agree. And by and large, those were the people that became never Trumpers. And I understand that because Trump is a wartime president, he might not have, he might not have been. I think it's quite likely he wouldn't have been an effective president in peacetime. You know, the analogy I draw sometimes is general grant, you know, a drunk or loose morals, but in war time, he was the only one that was willing to fight fighting was absolutely essential. So he was a great wartime general, what you, whether he would have been a great peace time. General is another question. And Trump too one has direct ignites that despite the limitations of Trump, his personality and his character, he's a war time president and he's got the grit and he's got the courage that's required in a war. Doug Truax: Right? Absolutely. And the virtue of exposing that is, is highest. I think you've said that a you're, you're looking to support him until you can find somebody with his virtues and less of his vices, but to your point in a wartime situation, a lot of times those vices come along with the right people. And it's just the way it's going to be. If you're going to win, you know, I think a patent and all that, you know, I went to west point, so I had all that military history stuff and yeah, that is often the case. And those guys, when the war is over, they don't, they're not appreciated as much, you know, it's the, it's the Winston Churchill thing as well. So yeah, we'll see what happens. And I think it just, we got gotta, you know, the work you're doing to call attention to this is wonderful. And, and, you know, you get the feeling when you watch your videos and hear your speech, you remain hopeful, you talk about Lincoln's quote, you know, the, the, the, the defiance and, and fighting it out. But you know, the erosion of a culture or a country or a civilization is, is a painful thing, a painful thing to watch, you know, for our country as we're going through this. So talk a little bit about why you're still so hopeful about our future as am I. And so I think our audience always wants to hear, you know, we all know the bad stuff a lot at times, but how, how, how do we stay hopeful in the face of this? And, and what's the best approach going forward here? Tom Klingenstein: First I would say if I were betting on this, I don't think I would bet on the side of we can defeat this, but that doesn't mean I don't have hope. I have a significant amount of hope part of it is, and this may not be so reassuring to your audience, but it's still, I think we're saying is there is always hope who would have guessed that we would have got a Donald Trump, a man who was I've said is particularly suited to the moment. And that was an example again, of, you know, what can happen. I think that, you know, the American people are beginning to push back against CRT, against changing our history and names and all the other things. And you'll notice that even the Democrats understand that the coms got ahead of themselves, and there are certain things that they were promoting destruction of family, for example, or a revisionist history. That was a step too far for Americans and Americans at some point are willing to step up and push back. So it's, Trump's base, I think, and Trump's base enthusiasm, which is partly what gives me hope. I mean, if you watch some of Trump's rallies, you know, he's not a, not a professor. Sometimes they make you cringe, but yet they give you hope and you know, the people there are profoundly pro American. And that's another thing about Trump. There was never any doubt. He never apologized for America's past no guilt, right? America was unequivocally good. And in fact, I hope this doesn't aggress too much, but if you want to think about in the most simple terms, the debate in this country at the moment, it is between those who think America is good and want to preserve it. And those who think it's bad and want to destroy it. And Trump unequivocally thought it was good. If you listen to his press conference is, is COVID press conferences. He basically made two points over and over and over because Trump is a good marketer. He said, the news was fake and America is incredible. It's scientists, it's military it's people. And of course Trump himself, but he expressed this unreserved unmitigated support for America at a time when America's basic goodness with being attacked. So again, it's, I think the American people that's my hope, but they need leaders. What they don't have now with the exception of Trump is a leader who can help explain what's going on and giving them guidance. So that's it's leadership that we need. Doug Truax: Right. Right. And I think that, that, there's lots of reasons to be hopeful. It's still a great country. I think it's still centered. Right? The media has got ahold of a lot of people right now. I like what you've done with the woke communist piece. It feels like to me, it's patriotic Americans versus woke communists kind of at the top of the, at the apex of this, on each side. And then there's a lot that falls down below that. And to your point, you got to stay hopeful and you know, you don't know exactly how it's going to turn out obviously, but you do know the right thing to do is to fight for it. And, and that's what you're doing. That's what we're doing. And I think it's what a lot of patriotic Americans are continuing to do because it's worth the fight. And, and Thomas, I appreciate everything you're doing. I think you're dead on and, and we're gonna do everything we can to make sure people see it more like you and your group sees it because that's the way forward. And, and thanks for all you're doing. And thanks for coming on today. Tom Klingenstein: Well, thank you for all you're doing and having me on. I appreciate it. Doug Truax: All right. Well, we'll talk to you soon. Tom Klingenstein: Good. Thanks again. Doug Truax: All right. That's our show for today. Thanks so much for tuning in and for supporting and serve the media. Don't ever forget that by working together and staying diligent, we conservatives can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America First right A new kind of news summary without liberal slant. Every morning in your inbox, always free subscribe, by texting FIRST RIGHT to 30161 thats FIRST RIGHT all caps, one word Firstright to 30161.

Doug talks to Emerald Robinson, a fearless conservative journalist in America. (MACHINE GEENRATED) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast. A weekly conservative news show brought to you by Restoration PAC. I'm Doug Truax, founder, and president of Restoration PAC. Today, we were blessed to have with us a first-time guest who was beloved in conservative circles for her truth, telling she is Emerald Robinson, a former white house correspondent for one America news network and Newsmax. She now has her own show on Frank Speech TV and has a large sub stack blog following. Welcome to the show. Emerald. Great to have you on. Emerald Robinson: Thank you. I'm so happy to be here. Doug Truax: Very good. So you've got this really interesting background, born a coal mining town. Your dad was a pastor. He ended up in journalism. So I always have for all the guests, we want to hear, you know, all of our viewers want to know, how did you get to where you are? Tell us a little bit more about that story, all that stuff. Emerald Robinson: Wow. Well, it definitely wasn't the conventional path. I didn't have the plan to end up in the white house press pool though. I always did. I went to school for journalism. I, my, my family tells me that. I said since kindergarten I was going to be a journalist, but I did sort of go the long way about it. I did theater and I, I went to Hollywood and things like that, diid some soaps. So that's often used against me, you know, by the critical corporate media. But yeah, I grew up in a tiny, tiny coal mining town in the mountains of Virginia on the West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee border. That felt a little bit more like I'm from Tennessee, probably even than Virginia. Cause it was just down the road. My daddy was a pastor of a tiny church that was just across the field to the left of my house, where I grew up and had a really lovely country upbringing. And then I, I left that small town, pretty young and headed for the, the big, like the, the different cities. And I was in LA for a while and I just realized that wasn't a fit for me. And I decided to get back to my education, which was journalism. And at first I moved into science and tech, every science and technology or a popular website at the time, I think it's now defunct, but it was called a red orbit.com. It was one of the top science sites at the time. And that actually brought me to Washington DC. So I didn't come to Washington DC to cover politics. I was one of the unusual people covering science and tech there, but then it sort of progressed because I mean, when in Rome, right, you're going to end up covering Rome and that's sort of how it happened. I didn't really want to stay in DC, but I met my husband fell in love and ended up taking a job with one American news and officially moving into a covering Congress. And then the white house. Then sure realized it was actually a pretty good fit for me. I really ended up loving politics and getting a little bit, you know, obsessed with it. Doug Truax: Yeah. Well, you're a truth teller in a world where there's not a lot of that going on. And it's interesting, you know, times that we live in, if you want it to be a journalist your whole life, and then you end up in this spot and you find, Hey, there's not a lot of people like me, they're telling the truth and it all kind of comes together. So that's, that's a, that's a really a great fit for you. So, oh, go ahead. You can say something. Emerald Robinson: Well, I just going to say it, I think because I did have the goal, like everyone else in that press pool with me, that was their ultimate goal. And then the next goal was to get a show on the network with ABC, CBS or Fox. And that just was never my goal. I didn't necessarily lay a path for this career. And so I've been, I find myself in a place that I didn't necessarily intend to be, but that, you know, suited me. And I think it's, you know, because God had a purpose. So I never though, I guess I wasn't different by, by design. It's just that I didn't have the same goals. And so then I, I didn't feel like I needed to compromise because you know, ultimately my, my goal was not the Fox or CBS. It was just being, you know, an honest person. Doug Truax: Yeah. It's, it's freeing when you get to the place where you're free, you're free because you're where you want it to be. And you're like, well, I don't, I don't have some additional thing I'm trying to get done here. So I'm just going to say it like it is. And you know, the truth telling kind of juxtaposed against the timid press Corps. Now, you know, we've watched the media kind of disintegrate and the press Corps and all this and Trump really pushed that whole thing over the edge. So just give us your take on why you think they're also timid nowadays. Emerald Robinson: I don't think they were, I don't think they're so timid as different from before. Really. It's just that Trump was like a flashlight. He exposed the rod that was already there and the fake narratives, it just came to light. More people were paying attention. He, that was probably his greatest legacy, honestly, out of all the things he did, it was the mosaic of not only the media, but our institutions like the DOJ, academia, Congress, he just, he just was a flashlight. And I would say that the media had long had problems. Is it getting a bit worse? Yeah. Just because there may be more overt about it. Cause there's no reason to really hide it anymore. I would say Doug Truax: Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah. It's a, it's a new day and it's not the world we grew up in. That's for sure. And now it's, now it's a matter of, okay. Who's actually going to tell you the truth. When so many people realize that the people in the media they've got their own agenda and you know, I was thinking too about the time after the election and we'll see how much you want to share about this. But so we had right after 2020 Fox news was there, you know, kind of on the ropes, cause people are like, okay, what just happened here? And so then we get to this place of like, all right, are we going to, are we going to, are we going to have a new version of Fox out there? And so Newsmax kind of comes around and they were doing great, but they kind of lost their edge. So do you care to comment on how you see how you saw that playing out? Emerald Robinson: Yeah, so it was interesting because clearly we had soared after the election and just really took off as the audience grew exponentially because people were really starving for the truth. And there wasn't an outlet after Fox called Arizona to early in what was clearly some kind of play on the network and, you know, Arnold, Michigan, who was on the desk that night calling the election for them, he, he w he was questionable when they hired him anyway. So again, it was, you know, people guys were open and they realized, wait, bought boxes and what we thought they were. And it was a big opportunity for Newsmax. I think that it's very tough when you get that far, you get that much spotlight on you. They had not been used to having the kind of attacks that you get from the corporate media and from intelligence, the intelligence community, when you are being watched by so many people and your voice is influential. And it's tough to be that outlier, even if you are telling the truth and you have to make a decision when you get to that point, I had to make a decision when I got to that point, I get, you know, I got attacked all the time. I got called all kinds of crazy things, but you had to make a decision. What what's more important? Is it important to be accepted and to be afe? Or is it important to tell the truth and, and, and honor the truth and, and keep your integrity. Now, I will just say, cause I do have to be a little bit careful. I think that it was, they, they wanted to feel safe and look, you can get your license it's full and you can not get your, how they do. It really is that they just don't like you saw with the OAN recently one American news, they don't renew your distribution contract. And so essentially you, you're not being shown and that's, that's a big part of your business model. So I get it. But I often feel like if you're willing to and, and have courage, that there's always a way made. It's just having to trust that if you do that and the right thing, that it it'll in the end work out in the way that's supposed to, or for your good that God has for you, but that's tough for some people. And also you got to look, a Biden administration had already pulled people in already told outlets during the 2020 campaign cycle. That if you report on the hunter Biden laptop, if you report on the clear mental deterioration of the president, then handed a Biden, you're going to be frozen out of a white house. And a lot of these news networks want access. Ultimately it's about access Doug Truax: That's right. And then to go back to what you said a second ago, you have to ask yourself, are you looking for approval? Are you looking for the truth and to your credit, you've been sticking to the truth and it's been going well. I mean, every, every career right, has it's a here and there and ups and downs and stuff. But I think that, you know, that's, you know, that's why we're having you on because you tell the truth. And, and that's really important nowadays, especially as the next question I was to ask you in this whole woke world we're living in, and, you know, you've been taking the, taking the Republicans to task for a while on it. Even when, you know, there was a window of time where, well, we all kind of knew stuff was happening, but we weren't really awake to the woke stuff. And, and, and you were, so what do you think is going to happen though? Let's assume that, you know, don't, we don't want to get over confident like we do, but we assume we take back Congress. What do you see happening with regard to taking on the woke left from the Republicans? Emerald Robinson: Oh man, you know, I wish I could be more optimistic, but there is nothing that I've seen so far in covering Congress and DC. That makes me hopeful that even if Republicans takeover over both houses, that they will truly push for accountability and different issues, whether it be a Hunter Biden's laptop, corruption, Fauci I mean, maybe Fauci, because he is now such a safe figure to hit. Cause most Americans are tired of him. They do realize that there's clear corruption there and you would have Senator Rand, Paul, likely as this, that it helped chairing the Senate health committee. So there's possibility maybe on FAuci, but I, I, I tell you even some of these insurgent candidates and they were really great during their campaigns and they're really grassroots. They get to DC and they see just how hard it is to operate because they still had to play nice with Kevin McCarthy. They, they kind of, and then they ended up, you know, they want to get reelected and that ends up being the death of a true grassroots movement, right? When you care about getting reelected, instead of just doing what you got to do while you're there and given the time there. So I've seen too much of that. I'm not super, super hopeful. I tend to think there would be more strongly worded letters, you know, really, really good soundbites from Lindsay Graham on Hannity. So I'm not super hopeful. I just wish we had more Ron DeSantis' and you could just clone him and put him in different districts in different states. But unfortunately most of the GOP just doesn't have that spine. And honestly, a lot of them, it's not even that they don't have the spine. It's that they're just ideologically. They're not really far from the establishment. There really is just one party there. And they sort of play at being opposed to one another and maybe on certain issues, they're really opposed. It really comes down to taxation. Right. I mean, for Republicans, that's the hill they're always willing to die on its taxes. Doug Truax: Sure, sure. Yeah. That's a great point. The unit party thing, and I, you know, I'd be interested to get your take on how it was to, with the group that was legitimately conservative and they wanted to do great things. And then they saw Trump and Trump, you know, helped them stiffen their spine for awhile. But then we got into the whole, well, maybe he's a Russian agent and all that. And they, you know, then they started to cave on that. But I mean, there was a window of time. Once you agree though, that Trump was like, given all those folks like, Hey, this may be our time to stand up and actually do the right thing here. And then it, then it faded Emerald Robinson: Some of them. Yes. Some of them, but then a lot of them were still pretty obstructive to his agenda. And look, Mitch McConnell didn't do any favor to the Trump agenda or the Trump white house. He was one of the biggest obstacles in pushing for a lot of what Trump wanted to do. And I it's, you know, it's funny because honestly, one of the members of Congress who was most behind what Trump wanted to do and really generally liked what he was doing. And I think there's a pretty honest actor, and then, you know, I say out of all of them, he's, he's more solid than any Congressman I know there. And that's Thomas Massie for Kentucky. And remember that was the one Trump blasted so hard on the day that they were voting for the cares act and they were all, you know, COVID locked down at their homes and they didn't want to come back to DC and Massey like forced a quorum on it because he's like, this is a massive amount of money. This is going to affect our children for decades. You have to come vote on this. And Trump called him that he was grand standing show voting. Doug Truax: Right, right. Yeah. It kind of flipped on it, then it, yeah, no, that's a great point. I forgot about that. Yeah. Well that gets to, you know, back to what you're saying, you know, the unit party and the money and never let a crisis go to waste. And so it's just print a lot of money and shove it out the door and, and the, you know, the guys, somewhere down the road, after I'm done running for office, we'll take care of it. And speaking from somebody who's been living in Illinois for 20 years, it's, you know, we're on the, we're on the down slope of that now. So yeah. Yeah. It's tough, tough environment. So, so back to, to something you mentioned at the beginning, you know, your, your upbringing, your dad being a pastor and stuff. And so, so you clearly have a biblical worldview and, you know, that's that, you know, impacts everything as it should. So, but talk to that a little bit, how that makes you feel sometimes relative to some of the other journalists and you know, you're saying one thing that's super truthful and they're just looking at you, like, what are you talking about? You know? Right. So, Emerald Robinson: You know, it's funny. I mean, they they'll send out to gather the media and pretend like I'm crazy. But then when we were all in the room, I mean, they, it was funny because I would get a sense for them that there were sort of like, it was just a shock to them to have someone not care and just, you know, tell it like it is or be that truthful. And it was just sort of look at me sometimes like, wow, you know, cause they're, they were really trying to tell the line on what they said or what they reported and that they wouldn't get in trouble with the DNC. And so that they could get promoted, they could go to CBS or, you know, some of them were just pure activist. And I knew that sometimes they weren't reporting the truth, but they had an ultimate agenda that lined up with the DNC and the far left of the DNC. And so they did it, but I always felt like it was important to be very clear about the world view that I came from. And I, I wish more journalists would be whether even if they're not Christian, because at least, you know where they're coming from, right. What lens they're giving you the news through. And then I think Americans are smart enough to gauge for themselves, you know, to say, okay, well this is, you know, their, their, their point of view, but then gauge the information. And I think, you know, it's interesting because becoming a journalist in DC moving to cover politics actually really strengthened my faith. It made me feel bolder in my faith and more assured in it, even it grew me so much grew me so much in, in, in strength and, and, and boldness and having, and having to really have faith. But sometimes it was a little scary going up that when you knew you weren't like everyone else and knowing that you were going to get so criticized and it potentially, and you know, which ultimately happened to me, your contract would not be renewed, but I would initially feel that I would pray. There's a lot of times I would I'll call back home and I'd have my mom and my aunt gather and in prayer for me. And it always came through. Doug Truax: Yeah, absolutely. Well, wouldn't you say though, too, that that added strength that you got, I mean, it's directly from God because at some point, right, everybody around you, you know, even a lot of people out in fly over country or praying for people to tell the truth and you know, you're right in the middle of a, of a, of a city that, you know, shifting morality, if there was such a thing back and back to your point about, well, just say what your worldview is, if it's not biblical. Okay. But then you're back to, you know, do you believe there is truth with a capital T you know, or are you just making this up every day? And then you're just looking for the approval of the people around you, so you can advance your career, which is what I see them. Like what you said, everybody's just acting, you know, sometimes a lot of these, a lot of these quote unquote journalists, they're just acting. So the unit party can keep doing what they're doing. Emerald Robinson: Yeah. There was actually one really good example of this. I thought one day in the briefing room and it was not too long after Biden taken office. And there was a reporter from, I believe it's called, has served a new service DNS. They were relatively new in the briefing room. And then there was one from the Washington blade. It was a blade or blaze. Yeah. It's one of those and it's, it's an LGBT outlet. And so two totally dimed, diametrically opposed, worldviews. Right. And these two outlets, they were trying to nail Joe Biden down on his stance on abortion. And so the conservative outlet had asked first, you know, when does he think life begins and try to really get, you know, nailed them down. It was the press secretary jen psaki she wouldn't answer. And then, so she went to the blade or blaze, whichever one it was, but that reporter, and he said, you don't know. Yeah. What is it? Because we're not sure either. So she got grilled from both. And there's a moment where everyone knows which side they're coming from, but they both want to get to the same truth. Like what, what does he believe? And we still didn't get the answer. Doug Truax: Exactly. Just move on. Right? Yeah. No, that's usually what happens. But, but that, yeah, to your point on that, I mean, everybody does want to know the truth, whether you admit it or not, you just, there there's truth out there and people want to want to find it. Yeah, for sure. So, well, Hey, you're telling the truth. We appreciate it a lot. I love all your stuff and just hang in there, you know, it's, it's the ups and downs of the career, but you know, people like you, it's going to go, okay. Right. Emerald Robinson: It's turned out to be a huge blessing working for Lindell TV. And it has been a joy. And I have, I feel like you have an even bigger platform. I have, I have even more freedom to cover what I want to cover. And you know, I do my sub stack it, it it's been really well received. And I feel like, actually I feel like actually my microphone was grown And it's must me. It's in a different arena. But I think this is where the landscape is heading. So I feel like God is just, could be a little bit ahead of the curve and I get to see my kids more. Doug Truax: There you go. It's a win all the way around. Right. Yeah. Perfect. Perfect. Well, Hey, thanks for coming on. I'd love to have you back on some other time. Emerald Robinson: Absolutely. Doug Truax: All right. Thanks, Emerald. All right. That's our show for today. Thank you so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media. Don't forget that by working together and staying diligent, we can serve as can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America First.Right, A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant Every morning in your inbox. Always free subscribed by texting first right to 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGHT All caps. One word to, 3 0 1 6 1.

First Right welcomes Harmeet Dhillon, Attorney and candidate for the RNC Chair. Harmeet has big plans to change the culture at the RNC and win elections by fighting for election integrity and electing leadership that puts people first. Listen to learn more about how Harmeet can set the vision for the 2024 elections and beyond. Want daily news without the liberal slant? Subscribe to First Right here: https://www.restorationofamerica.com/first-right/

First Right welcomes Amanda Milius, producer and director of The Plot Against the President.

Doug talks to Kari Lake, fearless America First candidate for Arizona Governor. (MACHINE GENERATED) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast. A weekly conservative news show brought to you by Restoration PAC. I'm Doug Truax, founder, and president of Restoration PAC. Today, We were blessed to have a first-time guest, Karu Lake, Republican candidate for governor of Arizona. Kari quit her job as a respected TV anchor in the Phoenix area because of liberal bias. And now is speaking truth to power in the grand canyon state. Well, hi Kari. Thank you for coming on the show. Kari Lake: My pleasure, Doug, how are you doing? Doug Truax: I'm doing great. I'm doing great. Not as good as you could take an Arizona by storm. It's going great. We're happy to see all that. And so much of what you're doing is speaking truth to power and calling it like it is calling out the media bias. And so before I w I want you to talk about that, but before we get there, I want to, I want to run this TV ad. You got out there. Kari Lake: Okay. Hi Arizona. I'm Kari Lake, the Trump endorsed candidate for governor. If you're watching this ad right now, it means you're in the middle of watching a fake news program. You know how to know it's fake because they won't even cover the biggest story out there. The rigged election of 2020 and rigged elections have consequences. We're all feeling it. Soaring prices, a spike in homelessness and an invasion on our border. I'm the only candidate with a plan to tackle all of those issues. And when I'm governor, we'll finish the wall and criminals who cross our border will be sent back. We'll get the homeless out of our parks and off our streets and no more masks, swabs, or shots to go to work or go to school. Our kids will get a real education, not a brainwashing to see where I stand on. All the issues, go to Karilake.com. Now let's send the corrupt news, the lesson and turn them on Doug Truax: Kari lake for governor. So I would call that I would call that not hedging, anything so good, so good for you. So, so is that a you're having some great success? Is, is that the root of it. Kari Lake: I was just having fun with that commercial. I intentionally put that out kind of trolling the mainstream media, the corrupt media. And I only put that out during newscasts just to let people know, Hey, you know, if you're watching, if you're seeing this commercial, you must be tuning in to a fake newscast. And I wanted them to know because they're not covering the most important story, but actually we just put out a new ad today and this one's going to be airing all over the state of Arizona. And I'm so honored that the new ad we're putting out today is an ad featuring my favorite guy, president Donald J. Trump. And he's in our ad talking about why he's endorsed me. And I'm really excited about that one as well Doug Truax: You should be. And that's a, that's a big deal. And, you know, he sticks with the folks who tell the truth and, and you're definitely doing it. And, you know, interesting time in politics right now. So we, I feel like we have, most of the political class is being told by their consultants. Don't talk about election, you know, potential fraud and rigged elections or anything like that. And it seems like a lot of the politicians are listening. So you had this huge disconnect between the base wants to talk about this piece about election integrity, but a lot of the politicians are not doing it. And you are so talk about your success on that front. Kari Lake: I've been doing it since the beginning. It was just a year ago yesterday that I, I threw my hat into the political arena and wow, what a year it's been. I remember somebody who was in politics telling me when I first started do not talk about the forensic audit. Don't talk about the 2020 election distanced yourself from president Trump and whatever you do, don't bring up COVID or question the vaccines or the mandates. And I looked at this guy and I basically kicked him out and I took all of his suggestions and advice, and I threw it in the trash can. And I immediately went down and I toured the forensic audit site. And I started talking about our corrupt elections. And, you know, people have finally caught up. We're seeing some more evidence every single day come out, including with the true, the vote people. So I think I, I just realized I didn't turn my life upside down, walk away from my high paying job in the media because it's so corrupt and then decide to walk into politics and start lying to people. We got to start telling the truth and we need leaders to tell the truth. And if you can't talk about the biggest story out there, the biggest story of our lifetime are stolen elections, where we don't get to pick our representatives. Somebody else is picking them for us. Then, then what good are we? What good are we as American? So I'm all about the truth. It's resonating with the voters. We're doing quite well in the polls. I've, I've earned the endorsement of president Trump general, Michael Flynn, Mike Lindell, Rick Grinnell, Kash Patel, Brandon Tatum, Larry elder, Senator Marsha Blackburn. And I could go on and on. These are America first Patriots who are about saving this country. And most importantly, I'm earning the endorsement and support of Arizona's who are tired of the swamp running this state. Doug Truax: Absolutely. And you know, you talk about that election integrity piece, all the Republicans and conservatives that I talked to, they get the concept that regardless of how you may feel about the border or whatever else, if we don't get the election piece, correct know, it doesn't matter. Nothing's going to, you know, nothing's going to happen because we won't be able to trust our elections. Who knows who's actually supposed to have one. And then when, when the confidence is out of the system, then we're, then we're in big trouble. They're so, so good for you for doing this. Kari Lake: Yeah, well, we'll dug all of the problems you just mentioned are caused by a stolen election. I mean, think about it. The stolen election has been deadly, and that may sound dramatic, but let me explain. I mean, we've got a wide open border because of that stolen election. We had a border policy and a border plan that was working under president Donald J. Trump as a journalist. I covered Arizona's border and Arizona for 27 years. Never seen it more secure than under president Donald J. Trump, Joe Biden comes in on day one. He pulls that border policy back and he exposes us to the cartels, the narco terrorists. We've got fentanyl pouring in by the tons, literally by the tons poisoning and killing our young people. I don't know a single family who doesn't know somebody, whether it be a friend or a family member who's been killed by fentanyl. So that's deadly, that's deadly. What's happening. We look at Afghanistan, this illegitimate president, Joe Biden. He pulled us out of Afghanistan in the most careless, reckless way you could ever imagine. And we lost 13 brave men and women in our military. And so the people who are covering up this stolen election, I mean, I am, I'm appalled by them. They should lose their, their status as good Americans, because they're not good Americans. If they're, if they're involved in that. And I go, that goes for the journalists out there, I call them propagandists. Now these propagandists who refuse to cover what's happening in this election are going to try to bury this Republic and bring it down. And we, the people will not allow that to happen. Doug Truax: That's right. That's right. And if they're against the transparency that we're all seeking in this, it's like, well, what do you have to hide? And so that's, that's exactly right. It's like, it's, it's not that complicated. Kari Lake: Well, no, they call it the most perfect election. You know, Ruth was perfect. You'd want to prove that rather than continuing to lie about it. Doug Truax: Absolutely. So you talked about the border. So I want to cover that. I'm actually, I was born and raised in Deming, New Mexico, which is if you take I 10 towards El Paso is 30 miles from New Mexico, the Mexican border. So I know all about the border situation. My sister still lives in Tucson. She's a big fan by the way. And just throw that out there and she'll be happy to see that. So, so your, so your governor talk us through what you're going to do for the border there in Arizona. Kari Lake: Well, I, I think my, the title kind of says it all. And my title of my border policy is called defend Arizona. And that's what we're going to do as a state. That's what our us constitution allows us to do. We're being invaded right now. And the federal government is supposed to protect us from an invasion, but they're failing. It's a dereliction of duty of the guarantee clause, article four, section four of the United States constitution. But our founders were so brilliant and almost prescient in, in when they put that together, that article one, section 10 clause three provides us a remedy. And that is when the state can step forward during an invasion and protect their own citizens. And so we will do that and we're going to on day one issue, a declaration of invasion. As soon as I take the oath of office, I'll remove my hand from the Bible and I will issue a declaration of invasion. We're going to get the ball rolling and start to rumble with the federal government. If we have to, we will finish president Trump's wall project. There's 20 miles to complete. We're going to take the materials that are sitting in the desert that we, the people paid for. We're going to take those back and finish the construction of that wall. And I will take the Arizona national guard and put them on the border and prevent people from coming across. Currently the border patrol is just accepting all of these people. They walk over one group after the next, after the next and waves of people coming across and we process them and take them in. We're going to stop them from coming across. They're not coming in and we have the right to do that as a state. Additionally, we will work to battle with the cartels. They're not going to allow, we're not going to allow the drones to across over the border, drop off drugs, do surveillance into intelligence and find out where our border patrol and our law enforcement are. We will shoot those drones down and we're going to blow up the drug tunnel so that they can't continue to use them. It's real easy. You just take it seriously. But unfortunately, we've got governors who are weak. We have weak Republican governors. We have destructive Democrat governors who refuse to protect their citizens. And that all stops in January of 23. When I take office. Doug Truax: Yeah. Good for you. Well, we, Republicans are no, conservatives are just a bending the problem. And there's so many problems. The border, you know, the election transparency, the culture, you know, you're taking that piece on the Marxist ideology and the school in the schools and CRT and everything else. Give us, give us your snapshot of where you are with that and what you would see as governor, how you would make some changes there to, Kari Lake: I am absolutely appalled. And I brought this up about a week ago. I was speaking to some of the great citizens in young Arizona. And I just read that the Joe Biden administration is going to dangle federal money. That is meant for the school lunch program. And he's going to pull that away from schools who need it. If they refuse to adopt this outrageous grooming sexual grooming of our children, these outrageous policies where they're pushing transgenderism and inappropriate sex education. And because parents are wising up and they're getting on the school boards and they're taking control of the curriculum and, and state lawmakers are now getting involved. And they're doing bands on CRT when it comes to curriculum and pushing that agenda and helping to take back parental rights. So that parents have the rights again, because that's happening at the state and local level, the Biden administration is trying to figure out a way to combat that. And the way they're doing it is by dangling our federal tax dollars and saying, we won't give you the money for your lunch program. It's despicable. It's absolutely despicable because remember that federal money that they dangled in front of us, like a carrot is our money. It's the money they take from our paychecks. They take it and bring it to Washington DC, and then they Dole it back out to us. And now they want us to accept this outrageous agenda to poison our children's mind. It's, it's a perverted agenda. They're trying to hypersexualized our children and we, mama bears and Papa bears will not accept that. We will not take it. I would rather say no to those federal dollars that allow them to dictate this kind of an agenda on our children. It's just not going to happen in Arizona. Doug Truax: Yeah. Good for you. And that's exactly right. That groomer phrase is what we need to use. I, they do not like that for good reason, because they know we're onto them and that kind of stuff, you know, from when we grew up as kids, it's like, how did we get to this place? It is so ridiculous that we just need more people like you standing up and saying, no, no more. That's enough of that. It's just ridiculous what you're doing. We're going to ruining a generation of kids. Kari Lake: Yeah. Everyone's with us, Doug. I mean, they try to make it look like we're in the minority, but we're in the majority. People don't want it. I mean, we remember when we were in school and I'm assuming we're about the same age. I can't imagine having this twist and stuff thrown at me in school. No wonder we're seeing our mental illness spiking with our children. They're going into school. They know this stuff. Doesn't make sense. It's totally inappropriate. Let our, our little ones be little ones. Let our children be children. We want, when, when they need a G rated education, we don't want an X-rated education being presented to them. And we want actually our kids to learn, learn skills that they can take into the real world. So they can grab all the opportunities they have and live a fulfilled life and a life where they're using their God-given talents. Doug Truax: That's right. And, and standing up for him, take strength. And you obviously haven't carried as it's displayed. Mostly what we like the most around here is when you take on a journalist, the so-called journalists who are actually pundants, you know, they're, they're displaying their ideological bias and you take them on, which is great. So why is it that more conservatives don't do what you do on that front? Kari Lake: Well, I, I'm not, I'm in a, not trying to criticize people because I did have 30 years experience in journalism. So I understand exactly what's going on. I know how they're trying to twist things and now it's sad. They come, you know, the corporate media, the corrupt media comes at you and you can see their agenda in the way they ask the questions, the way they word the questions. You know, if they're going to talk to me about my border policy, you would think they would ask a question like you did. Hey, tell us what it is. How's it work. Maybe they'll ask some pointed questions about financing it and how do we pay for it? And, you know, I expect hard questions. I'm not afraid of a hard question. And the funny thing is I'm a pretty measured, calm person. I don't think I lose my cool all that often. But when I do an interview with them, for example, I call the Arizona Republic, the Arizona repugnant, because that's just what it's become. You know, I I'm talking in the manner and the tone that I'm using with you right now in my interviews with them and the headline is rage politics, You know, anger, fuel candidate. And I'm thinking, wow, I, you know, they haven't yet seen me angry, wait until they see me angry because they'll, they won't know what's hitting them. That's what Doug Truax: That's right. Our headline back is thin skin journalists, right? They can't handle, you know, you're supposed to just sit there as a conservative and take whatever they dish out. Kari Lake: Yeah no but I do encourage, I do encourage all conservatives to push back, just push right back. You know, there's no need to take the abuse. There's no need to have them twist your words. And I also recommend recording. Every interview, you do invest in a microphone, invest in a camera, have a, have a staffer or somebody record that interview. I actually have started doing that. And I showed up at a television station to do an interview. They wouldn't let me in because I refuse to show a vaccine passport. So we had agreed to do the interview outside in the heat, which was fine with me. But when they saw that we had brought our cameras, they refuse to come out and do the interview. And that tells me, they're afraid of being exposed for being yellow journalists. Why wouldn't they allow me to record that interview that they are recording Doug Truax: That's right. That is such a great idea. And I've thought that so many times just record them back. There's there's no way they can do their selective editing. Cause you got the proof. So yeah, that's good. But that's what it is. They want to be able to control the whole thing and you're taking the control out of their hands and you're putting it back in a place that's supposed to be so well. That's fantastic. And last question. So you were talking earlier about the political consultant that gave you all this advice and you basically just said dominated the exact opposite, get outta here. W what's it been like for you to, to go from that great career that you had to now the political world, you know, what's been a company what's been the most surprising thing once you entered the political world about, oh, that's not exactly what I was thinking. It was going to be or something like that. Kari Lake: Yeah. Oh man. There's so many, there's so many things I've learned. I came from the corrupt news media, right? So maybe I'm prepared to go into this world. Of course I covered the politicians, but being on the inside, I've learned a lot, you know, we've got really corrupt consultants in Arizona. They are the Mo from the McCain machine in the McCain era. And I'm not using any of those people. As a matter of fact, I, I didn't have a consultant for the longest time because I said, if I can't find a consultant that is America first, then I'd rather not have one. Now I finally did find somebody who who's helping us out. But that, that first person who gave me that advice, he wasn't really hired. He was kind of volunteering his advice to me. And I'm Roman. He told me to back away from president Trump. I looked at him and I said, I will never back away from president Trump. He is the man who woke people up. He's one of the greatest presidents, if not the greatest president of all time, he's up there. And I will never back away from him. And so I just, after that one meeting with him, I never saw him again. I just said this guy's out of his mind. He doesn't know anything. Most of these consultants though, are, you know, sometimes they're 25, 30 year olds. They come in from another state and they don't know anything about your state. I've covered Arizona for 27 years. I'm a mom, I'm raising a family here. I'm not going to have some consultant. Tell me how the people of Arizona feel. I know because I am a person who lives in Arizona and I've been a part of this community for a long time. I've, I've learned how seedy and gross politics is. You know, the attack ads that are coming at me, they realized very early on that I was a threat. And two months into this, they started running attack ads, which is pretty early and unheard of in politics, especially statewide politics. I've had $6 million in attack ads directly aimed at me and my numbers keep going up. But they knew I had very high positives because I've covered Arizona fairly for 27 years. And they're intimidated by that and threatened by that. I think we're at a point in Arizona, critical juncture. We can either we're at a Y in the road. We can either go this way and follow the old McCain style, dirty politics. Or we can go this way and we can go with we, the people, America first policies that will get us out of this mess. And somebody dug recently said, well, you don't care. You don't have the political experience. And I said, yeah, that's the first line on my resume. Right? I am a political outsider. And it's the people who have political experience as they say, who got us into this mess. Doug Truax: That's right. That's right. And people like you will get us out. And you know, you know exactly what you think about everything, you know, what's in your heart and makes you brave. And I appreciate that. And I know the good people of Arizona will appreciate that too. And we'll be watching your race and, and wish you all the best. And thank you so much for coming on a day and thank you for all you're doing. Kari Lake: That's great. And thank you for having me on. And if people want to learn more about where I stand on the policies, especially if you're from Arizona, you can head over to Kari lake.com, K a R I L a K e.com. And I'm just really proud to have the America first movement behind me. I'm going to be the most conservative governor Arizona's ever seen. And that's a good thing. We are a red state. They tried to tell people that we are not by stealing our election. And when I'm governor, I vow to get in there and immediately start working with our legislature to shore up our election laws and return our elections to the people and make sure they're free and fair and honest so that when we go to bed on election night, we have a result and we know that our all legal votes were counted. And, and we know that we can live with the results of that election, but we can't live with an election that's been taken and stolen from us. And we will not live with the consequences we will fight until we get truth back in our elections. So thank you for having me, Doug Truax: But you bet simply put and very true. So thanks so much, Carrie, for coming on. Talk to you soon. All right. That's our show for today. Thank you so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media. Don't ever forget that by working together and staying diligent, we conservatives can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America First right A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant every morning in your inbox. Always free subscribe by texting first right to 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGHT All caps. One word to 3 0 1 6, 1.

Doug speaks with Brian Burch president and co-founder of Catholic Vote, exposing the attack on churches. (MACHINE GENERATED) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast. A weekly conservative news show brought to you by Restoration of America. I'm your host, Doug Truax, founder, and president of Restoration of America. Today we are blessed once again to have, as our guest Brian Burch, president and co-founder of Catholic vote, a strong and forceful advocacy organization that knows how to move the needle. The reason we were having Brian back so soon is Catholic Vote's important new ad campaign on church attacks in America. Welcome back to the show, Brian. Brian Burch: Great to be with you. Doug Truax: Well, let's just jump right into the ad and then we'll talk about it after that. Okay. Brian Burch: Sounds good. Voiceover: In the 1960s, when churches were burned, president Kennedy stepped up condemned it to burn churches. I consider that both cowardly as well as outrageous President Kennedy pledged justice. As soon as we are able to find out who did it we will arrest them. Now, churches are being burned again because they protect unborn babies and women in need. Our second Catholic president. Keep protesting because keep making your point. Doug Truax: So we're living through this time now where we've got Biden and the DOJ aggressively attacking conservatives through raids and other means, but there's all these things going on with pro-life Americans and nothing. So just talk us through what you're doing here with the ad. W what, what's your, what's the reasoning behind it, obviously. And then how do you anticipate it impacting the viewers? Brian Burch: Absolutely. Well, thank you again. You're absolutely right. We've seen the department of justice focus in very isolated ways on political opponents, whether it be parents who object to critical race theory or a radical gender ideology in their, in their schools, whether it be the recent raid on president Trump, or of course just in the last day or so, the department of justice announced that they are going to go after anyone criticizing a hospital that is bragging about doing pediatric gender reassignment surgeries. Meanwhile,over 200 Catholic churchest hat have been vandalized, desecrated, as well as over 65 pregnancy resource centers, just in the last three months. And we've seen absolutely nothing from the department of justice, no prosecutions, zero arrests, and frankly, Catholics are fed up and not just Catholics. Everybody's fed up. We're, we're sick of the department of justice being politicized in such a way to go after their political opponents while the rule of law is left on the sidelines. When it comes to people who believe in life, who are protecting vulnerable women and who simply want to go to church on Sunday without the threat of violence. Doug Truax: Yeah. How about it? And in this ad, you've got something that's really unique. I think here, you've got the footage of JFK, a Democrat president and what he would have done. So just talk us through the thinking on that and what you're trying to get across to the audience. Brian Burch: Yeah. Whether you're a Democrat or Republican, a lot of people still have some sort of respect and affinity for, for JFK and the way in which at least at a time in this country, it wasn't considered partisan to prosecute people that were burning churches. This clip comes from a press conference in the 1960s when there were voter registration efforts occurring and racist segregationists set fire to churches in the south and Kennedy rightly at the time said, we're going to find out who these people are. And when we find them, we're going to prosecute them. Contrast that to today. Again, I just explained we've had over 200 examples of churches being attacked, vandalized, including some burned just last week, a drive by shooter two days straight shot bullets into a Catholic church. What, what have we seen from the department of justice? Absolutely nothing. And so the ad is intended to contrast this, this, the needed leadership that JFK exhibited and president of Biden and Merrick Garland, the attorney general unfortunately, has been totally absent on. Doug Truax: Yeah. And I'm glad you're highlighting the pure number of these attacks. Cause you know, we live in an age right where they just don't, the media is not going to cover certain things. And you know, I didn't realize it was that many. I knew this. I knew it was going on, but that's a lot. And it's, it's, it's an epidemic. And you know, it's just common safety piece and it's just completely being ignored. So, you know, people watch this ad, what can Catholics do, what are other patriotic Americans that aren't Catholic? What, what can they do? How, how do we fight back on this, Brian? Brian Burch: Well, it's no coincidence ad campaign starting in the last a hundred days before the midterm election and our opinion, this issue is on the ballot. The question is whether or not both members of Congress and us senators who are up for reelection, whether they've spoken out on this, whether they have urged the justice department to equally enforce the law, or whether they've been silent in part as we, as we can surmise because their political opponents might benefit from calling out this violence. And so the most important thing is to spread the word you just said, you had no idea it was this large of number. We need to get that message out to everywhere that we have this escalating violence, an epidemic of violence, as you rightly described it with no response from our leadership's leadership in Washington. The second thing we need is we need pressure on the department of justice. We're seeing time and again, the politicization of justice from this administration. And they need to hear from every citizen in this country that we want to see the law enforced equally on everyone. The third thing is we need to pressure Republicans. If they in fact take control of the house, we want to see hearings. We wanna, we want to see what the left would do to on this. And that is let's connect the violence that we're seeing across the country to the kind of political rhetoric and the kind of example, being set by frankly, a lot of the leaders of the democratic party, who in some ways are winking and encouraging this type of, of activity on the part of, of their supporters. Doug Truax: Yeah, that's right. We got to push back. And I think that, you know, we're all hoping for the red wave and this could add to it. I know there's polling out there that says, sadly, these kinds of things, the raids and the politicization of the DOJ and the FBI, it can fall down party lines. When, you know, when your side's on the right side and your, your guys are pushing back against Trump or whoever else. And that's a sad statement, a commentary on where we're at as a country, however, the moderates and the independence, the folks in the middle are not okay with it. And so that's, you know, that's encouraging and we could see that play out, but we'll, we'll see what happens. What do you think about those folks in the middle? What's your take on them? Brian Burch: Well, you're right to point out. That's, who's going to decide this election, you know, hard left Democrats are not going to change their opinion, no matter how bad it gets, but the, the middle of the independent voters that do swing back and forth election to election, they're outraged by this. I just saw some polling in the last several days, over 70% of Democrats said that the refusal to prosecute violence against political opponents, what influenced their decision and how they vote. Now, of course, a lot of people are focused on January six. This is, you know, two three-year-old issue now. But the point being is that it actually is an issue according to polling, that Republicans and Democrats should be and are actually United on. And I think if we bring this message to the voters, that's going to help shape how people decide what they do in November. Doug Truax: Absolutely. And speaking of last question, bringing messaging to voters. So it feels a lot like Republicans, aren't where they need to be right now on abortion post Dobbs. And we're, you know, they're getting attacked, you know, because, oh, you know, this is a terrible thing that's happened. And, but they're not fighting back, at least in my opinion, the way they should. I mean, how, how are you guys seeing that with the battle being waged right now with Republicans on the abortion side? Brian Burch: Well, we're Catholic vote. And we like to say, we're Catholics first, not Republicans or Democrats in almost every case. We're fighting Democrats, but sometimes we need to push back against Republicans too. And it's no secret among those that are involved with lobbying and efforts with the Republican party that were, were they a lot of reticence out there to touch this? You have abortion since Dobbs. And again, back to the polling, the majority of the countries on our side, when it comes to protecting unborn children, whether it be at heartbeat stage or whether at 12 or 15 weeks, not to mention, you know, late term abortions when babies feel pain and taxpayer funding of abortion. And we need to go on offense. We need to be asking senators and members of the house that are up for election. Where would you draw the line? And we know where they draw the line. They don't draw a line. They would support abortion up to the moment of birth, even after birth for any reason. And we need to put them on the defensive and stop pretending as if somehow this is a difficult political issue for our side and force them and expose their extreme position. And I think if we do that, we can, we can push even further and defending life and protecting women, which is what this is all about. Doug Truax: That's right. Amen to that. And that's so true. They have got to defend their sick and disgusting physician who were the ones, just with the common sense. So I, I just, I, I think we're possibly missing an opportunity here, but you know, we'll see, there's a lot of people doing a lot of great things like you guys are moving. The needle really love the new ad, wish you the best in the campaign. We're going to do our part to get it out and appreciate all you do and keep up the good work. Brian. Brian Burch: Thanks so much. Keep at it, everyone doing their part. We're going to keep moving the ball forward. Doug Truax: That's right. That's right. Have a good one. Brian Burch: Thanks Doug. Doug Truax: All right. That's our show for today. Thank you so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media. Don't forget that by working together and staying diligent, we conservatives can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America First. Right? A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant every morning in your inbox, always free subscribe by texting first, right to, 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGHT All caps. One word to 3 0 1 6 1.

Former championship gymnast, author, and business executive Jennifer Sey spent decades growing her career at Levi Strauss, but when the company pressured her to stop tweeting about her opposition to school closings and CDC guidance, she quit and refused a million-dollar severance. Hear her story and more about how the woke mob took her job but gave her a voice. Follow Jennifer on her Substack: https://substack.com/profile/76478439-jennifer-sey and check out her latest book, Levi’s Unbuttoned https://www.levisunbuttoned.com/ Want daily news without the liberal slant? Subscribe to First Right here: https://www.restorationofamerica.com/first-right/

Doug talks to Dr. Paul Marik, world renowned doctor and chairman of Frontline Critical Care Alliance. (MACHINE GENERATED) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast, a weekly conservative news show brought to you by Restoration of America. I'm your host, Doug Truax, founder, and president of Restoration of America. Today We were blessed once again to have a courageous doctor who refused to buckle to the lies about COVID told by the medical, pharmaceutical and media establishments in America. Dr. Paul Mark is one of the top doctors in the world, particularly when it comes to ICU treatment. He figured out early on that the way we were treating COVID patients was all wrong and he hasn't stopped telling the true since. Well, welcome to the show, Dr. Marik. Dr. Paul Marik: Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here. Doug Truax: All right. Great. Well, so before we get into your COVID story, we would like for you to give our audience an overview of your distinguished career before the pandemic hit. Dr. Paul Marik: Yes, very distinguished. Yes. So I did my medical school training in South Africa, I entered a residency and some critical care training. I then did a critical care fellowship in London, Ontario, Canada. And then after I came to the U S and I was in academic medicine for close to 30 years at teaching hospitals. And that's what I was doing till the pandemic arrived. Unfortunately, you know, due to circumstances, which we can talk about, you know, I, I didn't follow the narrative. I refuse to follow the narrative. And basically that ended my career. Doug Truax: Yeah. So let's get into the specifics on that. So when, when everything got going and, and, and you saw how they were recommending covid be treated well, what did you see different that you're like, wait a minute, let's do something. Let's do something different that's actually going to work. Dr. Paul Marik: Yeah. So, I mean, it's a good question. So this started in March of 2020, you know, when COVID arrived on the Eastern shore and maybe on the west coast. So we were getting ready for it. And at that time, the treatment from the NIH, the CDC the WH was supportive care, and what supportive care means is essentially no care, which is completely absurd. You know, we knew that in New York, the mortality, you know, in the ICU was 80%. So, you know what disease is there that physicians will say, Hey, I'm not going to treat this. I'm just going to do nothing. It's an absurdity. So what we did is we put together a treatment protocol for COVID. If you hospitalized patients, there was based on clinical observations, based published data and information that we knew. So we put together a treatment protocol, which at that time included corticosteroids, because we knew there was significant inflammation and included anticoagulation because we knew these patients had clotting problems. And, you know, we were ridiculed at bedtime and people said, you can't use corticosteroids. It's malpractice, you know, six months later down the road, obviously a study came out, which showed corticosteroids, saved people's lives. So, you know, it validated what we were doing. And then our protocol evolved with time. We then obviously recognize that the goal really is to keep patients out of the hospital. Once they get to the hospital, they're ready, you know, us critically ill, they, their chances of doing of surviving are not good, have lots of problems. So we then developed an early outpatient treatment protocol, which rarely is, is the essence of controlling this pandemic. So there are a whole host of drugs, you know, it's not just ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, but there must be 20 or 30 drugs, medications, nutraceuticals that have actually been shown scientifically proven to have a great impact in the early treatment of COVID yet to this day, early treatment has been ignored by the state agencies who the powers that be that the, that the mantra of the NIH was, you know, there's no treatment stay at home until you can't breathe. When you get blue and concrete and Gato hospital, which again is completely absurd. You know, they're all really effective treatments. And, you know, we strongly believe that the way to have controlled this pandemic was early treatment. What that would have done is it would have prevented progression. People go to hospital, it would have prevented spread of the disease. And in fact, the likelihood is a whatever eliminated this disease. If there had been widespread use of early medical therapy, we probably would have eliminated this disease. And we wouldn't be in the place we are now. And there is epidemiological data to support that, that concept. There's a large province in India called Uttar Pradesh. They did a very broad wide seek and treat program using ivermectin, and they managed to eliminate COVID. So it really was the key to solving this problem, but obviously the powers that be did not, you know, that was not part of their agenda because then it would have, you know, made the vaccination protocol or program or incentive null and void, and obviously the goal, their goal, and their stated goal. And I don't think there's any question of the Baptist is that their goal was a vaccine and every arm, whether it was safe and effective was irrelevant. And they were going to do everything make, could to prevent early treatment, basically to, to validate, to make people scared and to provide what they, you know, the only option people had for control of this disease. And we obviously know that that has not happened, you know, despite the lockdowns, the masks, social distancing and the vaccination, you know, the disease is still uncontrolled. The cases are rising, BA five is out of control, right? And if you remember going back, you know, what they said is, you know, we need to vaccinate you once we have 70% of people vaccinated, we'll have herd immunity and the disease will go away. And obviously I was completely false. Doug Truax: Right? Absolutely so much has been wrong. And I want to go back to something you said a second ago, you're talking about the NIH, not not looking at the evidence. So you have like the, the province in India or the state in India, all this data's coming in, you're you and your team, you're presenting your data. It builds and it builds, but the NIH and the medical establishment is just like, don't want to see it. So what you're saying though, to go back to what you said, they had already know no matter what they had bought into the vaccine thing. So they're not even a look at new data as it comes in, or is it, is there a, what's your opinion of the motivation of them at that moment? Do you have one? What, what's the deal with that? Dr. Paul Marik: It was just inconvenient science for them with inconvenient truth. So for multiple reasons, they did not want to look at the data. They just, they disparaged the data, they dismissed the data. Firstly, the EUA for all these experimental therapies, including the vaccine. If you look at the FDA rules and regulations is pretty catered on the fact, there's no effect of alternative therapy. And when they sign the EOA, they have to basically say, we, you know, we have an easy way because there's no other alternative therapy. If they accepted hydroxy, chloroquine or ivermectin as a reasonable effective therapy, it really have made the EOS completely now null and void legally and you know, would have stopped this billion dollar industry. So they went out of their way to disparage the data, ignore the data. And indeed, you know, what they did, which is unconscionable, especially with four hydroxy, chloroquine is they designed clinical studies that were designed to fail. I mean, it's an outrageous thing that they would actually expose people to the risk of a study where the study was designed to fail. So what they did with hydroxychloroquine firstly is the studies used it in the late hospital phase. And we know it doesn't work at that time. The virus has stopped replicating. It works in the early phase. The men, what they did is they used a toxic dose. So the normal dose is 200 to 400 milligrams a day. They use the dose of 2,800 milligrams. And unlike ivermectin hydroxychloroquine has a much narrow therapeutic index. So what actually happened, the actually killed patients because they use such a high toxic dose. And then obviously they say, see, it doesn't work, but that's scientific misconduct. It's actually immoral illegal. And as I understand in a part of the study was done in Brazil. And the attorney general in Brazil, I think is going to, is late charges against these scientists for manslaughter because the study actually killed people, but they did it intentionally. Doug Truax: Unbelievable. So I've always been trying to figure this out. So you have decision makers and NIH, are they, you know, are they being, are they being paid off by pharmaceutical companies? I'm trying to figure out how, how, why is that happening that way? I D I not coming up with anything else. And, and then I give, well, the only thing I might add in there potentially is governmental hubris. You know, we can, we can solve any problem now here at the government. So we're going to come up with, forget about the easy stuff that's ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine or therapeutics. We're so smart. We're going to come up with this vaccine and it's all going to be great. And along the way, the pharmaceutical guys are gonna love us. They're gonna, we're all gonna be in bed together and keep moving it along. I mean, is it something like that in your opinion? Or is there any, Dr. Paul Marik: So, you know what I mean, unfortunately, COVID has shun a bright light on what's been going on with this agencies and big pharma. So w w we know it's an unfortunate statement that I'm going to say, but it is actually the truth is the agencies are captured. They, they are controlled by big pharma and this Pharmaca industrial complex, the FDA and the CDC and NIH, they do not work for the American population. They do not work for the benefit of Americans. They work for big pharma. And there's absolutely no question of doubt about it. Many of them have worked for big pharma. There's this room revolving door. They're absolutely controlled by big pharma, big pharma, you know, supports the FDA. And there's no question of doubt. I mean, it's, it's, it's so obvious and clear to anyone who looks that, you know, the big pharma control the FDA, and you just have to look at the fact that the FDA was prepared to bury the Pfizer data for 75 years. Right. But seventy-five years now. W why would you do such a thing unless you want to hide the data, right. And the FDA where work conspirators in this plot, and you know what I discovered, you know, this has been shocking and it's, it's opened up a whole can of worms that I really was not aware of is that, you know, when a scientific journal publishes the data of a steady, they never given access to the actual data. They never see the data. The, the, the company writes the study, they provide the data and the peer review is, assume the data's correct. And obviously often it's not correct. The FDA has access to the data, but they will not make it available. And we know now definitively categorically and undeniably that the studies that Pfizer did, they cheated, they cooked the data that misrepresented the data that manipulated the data. And we know this now from the freedom of information act that the judge said, no, you can't bury this to 75 years. So the data's now coming out. And, you know, and apart from that, there is a whistleblower who worked for Pfizer. Who's now suing Pfizer, I think for a trillion dollars, a trillion dollars, because she was involved in the Pfizer study and she was witnessed to them, manipulating the data, unblinding the patients, dismissing data, and basically covering up their, their side effects complications. So, you know, what, what what's published in the medical journals is just not true. And just to make it even worse, the, you know, the editor of new England journal and Lancet, who, you know, they have the most premiere journals who, you know, I used to look up in awe as the, the, the pinnacle of science have publicly admitted that pharmaceutical companies are so powerful and so influential. They actually forced to publish papers that they otherwise wouldn't publish. It's a, it's a, it's a remarkable admission. And obviously that profit from this, because what they do is they have a relationship with big pharma, big pharma, won't buy reprints of the papers and it at a high cost. So there's a financial incentive for the journals to go along with this scientific misconduct. And, you know, you look at the Pfizer study, you know, we know, I mean, there's no question that it was, they did not publish the truth. You know, we know this from the whistleblower. We know this from the leak data, for example, in the first 90 days after release of the buys, the vaccine. So this is until February of 2021 Pfizer, we're aware of over 1200 deaths, 1200 deaths, and over 40,000 serious adverse events related to the vaccine directly related to the backseat. So at that time, the whole program should have been shut down. You, we talking about February 21, the data was so overwhelming at that time as to the serious adverse events, it should have been shut down, but the data was hidden and the FDA and the CDC just turned a blind eye. Doug Truax: Well, let me ask you about the percentages on this, just so I understand, cause I'm with you, they should've shut it down. I just saw Dr. Fauci in an interview. He's now talking in a way relative to these adverse effects. It's like, well, we had to make decisions about the bigger, the greater good versus some damage. And I feel like where they're headed here is, well, so many people got the vaccine that there's going to be the absolute number of people that have an adverse effect is going to be higher than you might want, but that's, that's just comes with the territory. So can you talk to that a little bit? I totally am with you, they're hiding the adverse effects and the damages of the vaccine, but how does that play out when you have all these people take it and you do have these adverse effects. Well, how do the numbers shake out relative to the people who took it and the amount of folks that have the adverse effect? Dr. Paul Marik: Yeah, so I, I saw that press release and I was sick to the core because the fact that he could, so blatantly lie is truly astonishing. So they're multiple sources of data that, that indicate the profound effect and the profound toxicity of these vaccines. They're not safe. So firstly, if you look at the vaers data, which is the vaccine adverse event reporting system run by the end of the department health and human services. So in that database itself, there are something like 20,000 deaths. And if you look at the trend of all the vaccines, you know, in the last 20 years, we're looking at a really low number, suddenly in 2021, there's a massive spike in the number of deaths and adverse events related to vaccination. You know, there's the yellow card system in, in the UK. And then there's something called VG access, which is run by the who, which is the biggest pharmaco vigilance database in the world. And they track, you know, multiple medications and vaccinations. So if you look at their database and this is run by the who, they currently over 20,000 deaths at 4 million, let me say that again, 4 million serious adverse events against the vaccine. Whereas you look at ivermectin in the same database, which has been used for 25 years in their database. There so-called 18 deaths and 4,000 adverse events. So the absurd paradox is the FDA and NIH and CDC consider ivermectin a dangerous toxic toasty worming medicine, which in 25 years is so-called called 18 desert, which most of those were due to the parasite yet the vaccine, which is safe and effective, according to their own data in 18 months has racked up over 4 million adverse events. So the, the hypocrisy, the lies, the deceit is truly astonishing. So, you know, we do have some data. So, you know, I mean, you know, if you look at all the other vaccines, there's never, the first of all, this is not a vaccine. You know, this is an experimental genetic experiment. It's never been used before. There's no medical precedent. This is an experimental therapy of which the long-term benefits. We just don't know. It's never been used before. So you, you, the, you know, if you look at the department of defense database, the increased risk of complications, which includes strokes, heart attacks, cancer, miscarriages increased by three to 400%. And this is in the department of defense database. So we have multiple sources of data confirming that something, something is, is wrong. And then we have the, the life insurance data. So, you know, the life insurance company is that they obviously acutely aware of young people buying unexpectedly and the most recent studies show there's 110% increase in the non COVID deaths of people between the ages of 20 and 60. And this is across the board. So something very irregular is happening. Doug Truax: Yeah. It's, it's just terrible. Yeah, go ahead. Dr. Paul Marik: You know, if you look at the Pfizer data, the risk of adverse events is probably 2%, but they, there is a study done by an independent polling company that reported 8.6% of people who vaccinated 8.6 will have a serious adverse event. And there was a study done in the VA looking at adverse events with Madonna and Pfizer. And again, it was 8%. So that is a enormous number of patients. So if you consider the number of people that are vaccinated, you know, maybe, you know, 350 million people we talking about over at, you know, over 10 to 15 million people who are vaccine injured, this is, this is a catastrophic and monumental problem we facing. Doug Truax: Yeah. It could be the greatest it's. I think it's going to be the greatest medical blunder in the history of the world. And I think that that point you made about it, not being a vaccine is a good one. That was a marketing problem. From the beginning, you start calling this thing a vaccine when it's just a treatment, it's not, you know, the, the connotation began and everybody's my well, it's going to get rid of it. It's going to protect me from that, all these things, it's going to suppress the symptoms and you're still going to carry it around. But all these things were conspiring. It felt like to just like you said, everybody take the shot. You know, the pharmaceutical companies don't have any liability anymore. They got control of the data. The medical journals are using data that they've got control of. And they're pushing it, pushing it out there, no matter what. And it just feels like this, you know? And you brought up the point about people on the inside of the FDA and NIH, former, former SuiteGL people. It is just it. I think a lot of people need to go to jail. I'm happy to hear about the situation in Brazil, but do you think this is where this is going to land over time, right. More and more is going to come out. It's like, wait a minute. Who said yes to that in spite of this information, and those people are going to be there, there's going to be some criminal charges at some point. Right? Dr. Paul Marik: So yeah. I mean, you know, the data is overwhelming. You know, if you look for it, you can see the data, you know, obviously there's, this is a crime against humanity, something that's never been perpetrated at this level ever. You know, the problem is the people, the stakeholders now are so deeply involved that they never, they never gonna admit that they made a mistake. Doug Truax: Right. Dr. Paul Marik: I don't think they ever gonna admit it. Yeah. So, you know, it's, it's to have to be, you know, legislators maybe with, you know, w when the Congress changes towards the end of the year, maybe people, they are, there are some legislators who know what's going on, who are investigating this, but they are the small minority, because unfortunately, you know, you have to follow the narrative. And, you know, people like Tony Fowchee on not questioned, you know, any alternative point of view is censored. As you know, everything I say gets censored. YouTube takes me down. Facebook takes me down because although I'm absolutely telling the truth, I'm considered a mis informationist. So misinformation is actually the definition is, is anyone who says anything against the narrative it's safe and effective. If you say anything, which questions that you or misinformation is. And if you think about it, science is based on people asking questions. It's based on people having an exchange of ideas. It's about having a conversation. Like we having a conversation and we open and we honest, and we talk about things and that's how we progress. But when you silence everyone, I mean, this is truly astonishing is that science has been decapitated because it's been censored. And only one, one point of view is disseminated. And, you know, they have spent millions and billions of dollars in advertising and the same people that, you know, did the misinformation related to smoking the safety of smoking and promoting smoking it's these same bad players are the ones that are doing this public relations to, you know, provide the misinformation about the vaccines. Doug Truax: Yeah. It's all about the money. I think at the end of the day, you know, that's what, that's, what's this going to come down to the pharmaceutical companies are way too far into everything and they don't have any liability on this deal. So yeah, they're going to keep censoring. Dr. Paul Marik: The worst thing is that, you know, by, by, by the regulation set up by the federal government, they have indemnity. So basically they can do what they want to, they have no recourse, and that's what gives them the freedom. I mean, it's truly astonishing. And you know, when people get the vaccine, they sign a consent form, but it's not truly a true consent form because they're not given the true information and any consent form should include, you know, what are the options? What are the alternatives to this therapy? And patients are not told about alternatives, and they're not, they're not told the truth about the adverse events. Doug Truax: That's right. That's right. Well, you are a great example for how to be a true professional in the medical profession, which we need way more of. I love having folks like you on, because it brings back some faith in the rest of us that are there. Our faith is waning as we've watched all this happen, but I know it's been difficult. We appreciate your boldness and your willingness to tell the truth and your dedication to what you do. You know, we're going to get the word out as best we can. And I do believe they will come a day. Will you be truly vindicated? And because the truth always does come out. So I appreciate you telling me that. Dr. Paul Marik: Yeah. So I think the bottom line is you can hide the truth for only so long, but the truth will come out and you want to be on the right side of the truth. You want to be on the right side of science and you want to be on the right side of history. And I think these people are, have a lot of accountability to, you know, to, to, to be responsible for, because, you know, the, the, the, the effect that this has had on society, as we all know it has been catastrophic, you know, not only the human suffering, but the social isolation, the effect on the economy, the effect on children, the effect on Kansas be terrible. The horrible childhood has been turned upside down, and that should never have happened. Doug Truax: That's Dr. Paul Marik: Right. We should never close the schools. We should never have treated kids the way we treated them. Doug Truax: Yeah. It's wrong decisions early on. And here we are. So, well, thanks again for all you're doing, and I appreciate you coming on the show. We'll get this out far and wide and make sure your message gets out there and appreciate all you've done. Dr. Paul Marik: Thanks. And thanks for, thanks for speaking and things for what you're doing. It's, it's, it's, it's, it's helpful that you can have a conversation with somebody who is prepared to, you know, understand and listen. It's somewhat unique. Doug Truax: Well, we do. We need more of it. We need more people like you for sure. Thanks doctor. Dr. Paul Marik: Have a good day. Doug Truax: All right. That's our show for today. Thank you so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media. Don't forget that by working together and staying diligent, we conservatives can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America First, right? A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant every morning in your inbox. Always free subscribe by texting first, right to 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGHT All caps. One word to 3 0 1 6, 1.

Doug talks to John Lott Jr., founder and president of the Crime Prevention Research Center. (CHE GENERATED) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast. Your weekly conservative news show brought to you by Restoration PAC. I'm Doug Truax, founder, and CEO of Restoration PAC. Today. We're blessed to have a first-time guest on John Lott Jr. Best known for his book. More guns, less crime. He's the guy that's used hard data over the years to really knock down liberal narratives. And he's still doing it because the liberals like Joe Biden are still attacking guns. So it's really great to have John to talk about this and this in this time that we're in. me to the show, John! John Lott Jr.: Thanks for having me on. Doug Truax: So you've got this incredible background on the gun issue, and this is just one of those narratives that, you know, in as conservatives it's, it becomes our opinion at this point, it's almost fact that the liberals take facts and just throw them out the window in support of their narratives. And it feels like the gun issue was the first one that went down this path. Is that kinda how you see it or what's, what's your history on, on how you view their take on guns? John Lott Jr.: Well, I mean, for decades, if you look at surveys, the one issue that's most divided liberals and conservatives has, has been gun control. I think if anything, that's just become exasperated. Even further recently, there were polls that came out at the end of last year that showed that while support for gun control was falling overall. And following among, I mean, it was already low for Republicans, but falling among independents, it was actually still rising for Democrats. You'd have something like 94% of Democrats want to have stricter gun control. And also he would notice just how extreme a lot of the claims were go. So you'd have 40% of Democrats would support a complete ban on the private ownership of handguns. Obviously it'd be talking about something around 80% or so that would support a ban on so-called assault weapons. Of course, Biden would include any type of semi-automatic gun as an assault semi automatic gun as a weapon. And some of his recent statements and 85% of handguns sold in the United States are semi-automatic guns. So, you know, it's, you look at something like surveys on, on gun registry. You have like a two to one support among Democrats for a national gun registry, two to one opposition to it among Republicans. But what's interesting is, is that the Republicans oppose the national registry because they think it would lead to eventual confiscation of all guns and by similar percentages, the reason why the Democrats supported national registry is because they believe it will eventually lead to confiscation of all guns. So, you know, it's, you know, the question is to some extent, why is there such a dichotomy there? I think there are a couple of reasons for it, but the most basic one is just who do you trust to make decisions? So I suppose kind of the analogy I could make is two views on healthcare. When that is, you know, Democrats don't trust individuals to go and determine what's going to be covered by their health care. You know, with Obamacare, the only decisions you had was the size of the deductible that you were allowed. Basically Republicans support a much broader array of choices for individuals to make. And, and the point is is that if you don't even believe people can properly choose what health insurance that they're going to get, are you going to rust them with web? And I think that's kind of the ultimate decision on whether you trust individuals to make decisions or not. Doug Truax: I was wondering too about all these labels they put on there, what's up with this ghost gun thing that Biden was talking about. I mean like this for most people, like, is this some new category that we've got to deal with now? John Lott Jr.: Well, I mean, ghost guns are privately built guns. People in north America have had privately built guns since before there was a country. The type of people who normally do that are kind of engineer types, who like to take around with different things with Biden left out in his discussion was that, you know, it's already, there are already many laws that deal with ghost guns. One of the laws is that if you make a gun and transferred or sell it to somebody else, it's a felony punishable by five years in prison. So, you know, the types of criminals that might have guns, and it's extremely rare, aren't the type who go and are building their own gun. They'd go and obtain it from somebody else. But, you know, I think there are a couple of points to make here. One is by once when he talks about violent crime, his entire focus is on guns. And you know, the problem is, is that over 92% of violent crime has absolutely nothing to do with, if you want to go and reduce gun violence, it's the same way you reduce this huge percentage of violent crime, which has been increasing. And that as you make it riskier for criminals to go on committed crimes, you increase arrest rates, conviction, rates, prison, sentence, legs, and that's not been the approach that Biden has taken. Doug Truax: And so now you've got this spilling out into the swanky neighborhoods. You know what, what's the, what's your take on what's going on in, in those situations? John Lott Jr.: Well, we just look through some numbers for Los Angeles county where over 37 months from January, 2019 to January, 2022, we looked at where the crimes were occurring by zip code in Los Angeles county. We linked it with the census data to get information on like immediate housing prices and the different zip codes or racial breakdowns or income. And it's really startling to see how the share of crimes has changed over just those 37 months. You see big increases in crime and in areas where you have high housing prices, like over $2 million for the median price. At the same time, the sheriff primes biomed crimes in four areas has, has fallen, you know, and property crimes like car theft and shoplifting has increased dramatically in the predominantly white, heavily heavy high-income areas have fallen. And the other, I think part of what's going on is you've had big changes in how California and Los Angeles approach CRI they made it so that it's not as risky for criminals to go and commit crime. And that I think explains why violent crime has been going up, but my own guests and more work needs to be done on this is that that drop and risk as pretty much occurred all over the place. But it used to be a lot riskier for criminals to go and commit crime in, you know, high income wealthy areas. And, and, and if it falls dramatically, it's fallen dramatically, even more in, in these, in those areas where it was particularly risky. So now criminals are, are moving out of the areas, which are kind of their home turf and to other areas. Doug Truax: So let's go back to this other issue too. So if this is such a issue for them, that this crime is going up and they're coming, why would they come out against guns even more now with crime, such an issue? It just seems so counterintuitive. We've got an election coming up, or maybe it's just a dumb thing that they're doing, but what's your take on why the Democrats would go down that path to, John Lott Jr.: Well, I think they, they don't want to blame their policies. So they have to blame some guns, an easy scapegoat, or they think it is. But you know, the irony is at the same time, they've made it very difficult for law enforcement to go and do its job. They want to make it difficult for private citizens to be able to go and protect themselves. And I think, you know, people, the reason why people have been buying a lot more guns. So for the last couple of years is because they've seen violent crime go up, they've seen violent crime go up in their neighborhoods and they are worried that people aren't acting to protect. And so they've realized that ultimately protecting themselves and their family depends on their own app. And so look, the types of rules that Biden wants to put forward, really aren't going to do anything to help solve crime, take something like the so-called ghost guns privately made gun regulations that he wants to have. He wants to have serial numbers on essentially all the different parts of, you know, before it was the firing mechanism and the mechanism that took a magazine that had to have serial numbers on them. But now, basically everything you could break a gun down into is going to have a serial number on it. And I think that's partly the point. They want to have the zero tolerance policy for any paperwork, mistakes, no matter how trivial, you know, they'll look at your paperwork over the last 15 years, whatever. And if they find something they're going to click out of business, just one mistake. Well, you know, having to keep track of what are all the different serial numbers for all the different parts of a gun. If you move a barrel from one gun to another, you're going to have to redo all the paperwork. They just want to try to make it more difficult for them to be in business. Just be one more mistake that might be possible for them to make, but serial numbers on crimes don't really work. I mean, maybe in the TV cop shows who something that does, but in the real world, you know, in theory, if a criminal leaves a gun at a crime scene and it has a serial number on it, and the criminal obtained the gun legally through some, you know, licensed dealer, then you could go and trace it back to the criminal and find out who committed the crime. There's big problems with that. One crime guns are very rarely left. The few times that crime guns have been left at the scene, the criminal is usually killed or seriously wounded. So you got them anyway. And the couple of times where they're not killed or seriously wounded the gun, isn't traceable back to the person who committed the crime because they didn't legally buy the gun through a licensed dealer. They got it through some black market or they got it from a drug dealer someplace. And so, you know, the reason why you see it on like TV shows like law and order and what have you. And then they usually bring in things like gun registry, which is even a step further is, you know, they got a half hour to solve crime. And so they go and bring it in and just say, well, you know, this solves a crime, but you look at even registration and licensing. There are plenty of places in the United States or a number of many way that have had registration licensing. And yet time after time, therefore could admit that they can't identify a single crime that they been able to solve. As a result of registration licensing, Y said, registration licensing since 1960, it's an island state. You would think it would be an ideal place to be able to go and use that type of system. But yet they can't point to cases that they've been able to solve. So, Doug Truax: And just the, the government overreach all the time. And to your point, they're going to try to find any reason they possibly can to get you to do whatever they want you to do. So last question for you in this, in this day and age, where we have so much government intrusion, what's your, what's your best advice you can give to, you know, patriotic Americans out there who want to protect their second amendment rights? What would you tell? John Lott Jr.: Well, I think they need to be well-informed about the issue so that they can go and push back on a lot of the claims because the media is constantly giving this information on this type of stuff. Not only in terms of what they cover. So, you know, for example, my guess is very few people hear about mass public shootings that are stopped from people that are legally have guns with, you know, the, the media rarely covers defensive gun uses just in general. We went through media coverage last year on it, and you may find the top five newspapers in the United States may cover thousands, literally thousands, many thousands of gun crimes. At the same time, the top five largest newspapers have carried a total of 10 defensive gun uses combined between the five papers. You know, I don't blame people who may think that they're, well-informed watch CNN and MSNBC and ABC, NBC, CBS, and read, you know, major newspapers who come away with the view that, well, you know, there are lots of gun crimes, you know, essentially zero defensive gun uses, you know, what's the harm for getting rid of guns. Let's just go and ban, you know, a few people would know that people use guns defensively about five times more frequent to stop crime. Then guns are used in the commission of crime. But you know, it's understandable to some extent if your editor, but a newspaper or something, and you have two stories that come across your desk, one case, a simple person, like a victim's been killed. And another case let's say a woman's brandished a gun. It wouldn't be a run runaway, no shots are fired, no dead body on the ground, no crime actually committed. You're the editor. Which one would you pick? Most people I would, I'm sure most people would pick the first story. Now we may hear about it from a newsworthiness standpoint, what's going to get people's attention. But if you care about it from a policy perspective, in terms of what's going to save the most lives, you know, you're going to care about both stories. And so, you know, that's just one out of many, many examples I can give you with regard to the media bias, but that's the reason why we have our website at crimeresearch.org, where we put together, you know, academic studies and other things so that people have an idea of the balance out there. Doug Truax: Yeah, that's a good, I would encourage all of our viewers to go check out that website, great book, great points you make on all this. And I think we all just need to, like you said, at the end here, just stay super informed on this and make sure we know where they're going with it so that we can do everything we can to, to prevent them from going that way, especially in this day and age. Well, John, thanks so much for coming on. Hope to have you back and really appreciate all that you've done over the years. John Lott Jr.: Thank you very much for sharing. Doug Truax: All right. That's our show for today. Thanks so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media owner. Forget that by working together and staying diligently, conservatives can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America First right A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant. Every morning in your inbox. Always free subscribe by texting first, right. to 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSIGHT All caps. One word to, 3 0 1 6 1.

Doug talks to Robert Cahaly, one of the few accurate pollsters. (Machine Generated) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast. Your weekly conservative news show brought to you by Restoration PAC. I'm Doug Truax, president and founder of Restoration PAC. So today we're delighted to have our favorite pollster on Robert Cahaly We've had him on the show before, because he's right lot when most of the pollsters are wrong a lot. So Robert, welcome to show! Robert Cahaly: Not only is it good to be on the show. Doug Truax: Good, good. So thanks for coming well. So, you know, we continue to watch the president flail around and it's, it's difficult for us patriotic Americans to watch. And you know, here we are eight months out from a midterm. So what's the current state of play politically in the country from your perspective. Robert Cahaly: Yeah, there's a general lack of confidence in the Democrat brand. I mean, the the brand is really suffered. What's happened with Afghanistan, kind of started it where it just all kind of collapsed together. And people started to realize that everything they're doing is the opposite of what they want. I mean, that's, that's what we keep getting is that there's this, the government is in the middle of everything that we don't care about pushing, you know, using the right pronouns, a agreed agenda that raised their gas prices and people not to work. And the government isn't taking care of the things they ought to be taken care of. If you can, America strong, internationally people feeling safe in their homes, from crime, having their rights respected and being empowered to grow their families and their businesses. It's just the complete, the Democrats have all that hung on them. And that's why you see what you see now. Doug Truax: Yeah. And so my take on it, and I'd like to get your take. So when you watch a political party kind of imploding in that way, and it's so obvious to, you know, most everybody that God they're doing the exact wrong thing, like you said, is that just the echo chamber inside there with their base. And they're just kind of wrapped up in it and the donors and just the small group of people are just keep driving it that direction. Robert Cahaly: Yeah. I think that has a lot to do with it. There's a, there's a great deal of money that is used to on these campaigns and thunder party. And so, you know, most Democrats that are in like a swing district are faced with a choice. I can alienate my voters or I can alienate my funders. And it's an it very difficult choice then, you know, the Republicans are to blame when they don't make the Democrats face that joy. And we've seen that in too many elections in 2020, where they had that choice and they weren't faced it, but know that the Democrat party has an element, that fundamental element of it that is no longer the least bit in line with American mainstream. I mean, if anything, Pelosi and Schumer are trying to hold back a tab that is so much worse than they are. Doug Truax: Yeah. Which is terror, that's terrifying, you know, it's that bad. Yeah. So we're watching at restoration pack. We're always watching inflation and crime and this, you know, demonization based on your skin color and stuff like that. There's all these other issues. Obviously COVID-19, you know, foreign policy failures, you know, what are the issues that you're really watching most when you're going after you're polling nowadays? Robert Cahaly: Well, we see a lot when people look at the inflation, especially, and inflation, I guess in gas prices are tied up and they don't, they're not always traditionally that if they are right now, people just, what they're, what they're telling us is why is the government doing nothing to make this better? And when they put two and two together and they realized that some of the climate stuff is so far to the freedom that America not only whittled away, their advantage, you know, the American advantage in the domestic oil and gas production is being dissipated because we're not taking advantage of it, handing the stuff off the countries in the middle east, Russia, and it is causing them great harm. And they don't really understand it. Like this is an agenda that basically only America, maybe Western Europe seems to care about and China and Russia don't. So how does that fix the globe and about why is that making my life more difficult? That's what I keep getting him. America's, want clean air, clean water, and, you know, they don't want toxic waste, but they're not going to pay nine bucks a gallon to get it. Doug Truax: Yeah. Right. And that seems to be, to listen to the Democrats now, this whole concept of, well, you know, there's sacrifices to be made. So just sit down and shut up and make them, and we'll let you know when this, when you're, when you're done with your, with your sacrificing and yeah. That's just not going to fly. So, so is there any advice that you would give at this point to Republicans? You know, I I'm encouraged by what I see, but I've also just like the rest of us, you know, we've seen situations where it's like, wow, we have this opportunity and we blew it in some way. So, so what would you say to Republicans now that you know, are getting kinda like, I don't know, lack of a better term kind of giddy about the whole thing? Robert Cahaly: Well, recognize that you have a chance to actually win the majority's and there's two ways you win a majority and a close election, you run a bunch of candidates that are toward the middle, so you can win a few of those swing seats because the country's kind of at a middle place. And then there's the way you win a majority when you don't have to do that. And the first thing that Republicans need to recognize is this is not a year that you need to run a bunch of soft, moderate, Republican to win. This is a year that you're more conservative, Republican and win. And so don't squander this opportunity with image with the majority that's tied barely to people that you can't count on. It it'd be much better to have a majority of 25-30 Republicans that you can count on and 40 that you got to wonder about 20 of them. Yeah. Doug Truax: Right. That's a great point. So, conversely, is there anything that you would tell the Democrats at this point, is there any, is there any way to save this for them other than basically I guess just the, you know, coming out and being like, Hey, you know, while we, we had it wrong, we're going to focus on inflation and we're going to figure out gas prices and stuff like that. I mean, is there any path for them at this point to salvage this a little bit before the midterms? Robert Cahaly: Yeah. I mean, a lot of it's up to Biden, but if, you know, if I was telling Bob and I say, Hey, you need to talk about the fact that while, while we won't, we want to, we want to protect the planet. We want to deal with climate change. The fact is until we get the whole world on board, it doesn't matter. And, and we're not going to have America suffer just so the rest of, to the rest of the world can keep on polluting. And that people in Europe have given up so much control of their energy. And what's happening in Ukraine is the cost. This is the cost of the green agenda. And, and what, what he could talk about is how we have good people who want democracy like America don't produce energy, that we will fail you without strings, and you're not going to have democracy. And then you're really not going to have people being able to choose what type of government they have. Therefore you're never going to get the green agenda that you want in the long run. So address that and also take a strong stand against China. You'd be surprised how fast the American public would rally and baseball and completely focused and fixated on restoring our economy as it relates to production of energy and dealing with China, with it, with an iron fist. I think you'd be shocked at how quickly the pulse would change for. Doug Truax: Yeah. We've had that conversation before about China is that I wanted to ask you, is there like one issue out there that, that you see a lot that people just aren't talking about enough? And if it is it, would it be China or is it something else? Robert Cahaly: China is one of the few places that you have Republican and Democrats almost always on the same page. Nobody is for China. Everybody realizes the growing threat they represent. I mean, it is literally a few corporate masters and no one else. I mean, if you're not a professional athlete, if you're not, you know, who's making money off countries that take advantage of people and, and, and engage in slavery. If you're not a, that focused on a Chinese market, then you're not about China. I hear it every day, Americans restaurant, they can't buy what they want. They're spending more and more time looking for products that are made in America when they go online and they really don't want to empower China anymore. They want the supply chain back. They want the medical supply chain back. They want anything related to defending the country back. So a focus on doing something about China is something that is, I think that if the Republicans would own that issue would be very uniting. I mean, look at the Olympics. It wasn't just Republicans not watching the Olympics because the ratings to be so bad, that was a lot of people. Doug Truax: That's right. That's right. And I think this whole concept around the COVID-19 and where it started, I it's just been so strange to watch it over the years now. It was just like, you couldn't really talk about the fact that China, you know, created this thing and let it go. And now we're getting to the other side, finally, the pandemic and, and that's, I think a lot of Americans are out there going, oh, wait a minute. These guys, what did they steal from us? You know, in terms of our, just our, our wellbeing over the last couple of years and just, you know, the people that you've known that died from COVID obviously, and even if you haven't just what we've been through, and then, yeah, you're right. Oh, the Olympics are still going on and they got Uyghur and concentration camps, and we're just like, acting like everything's fine. And I think that a lot of people are super frustrated with that. So we'll see how it plays out. If it's going to be an election issue coming up, certainly in the 24, would you say, Robert Cahaly: I think it's gonna be an election issue both times, because I think China's gonna make probably some moves. In probably on Taiwan. And I'll tell you what I tell anybody else. If you see China go after Taiwan, you better go out and buy a new car and a new computer that day. Cause it's going to be awhile before any computer chip. Doug Truax: Yeah. How about it? And then back to what you said about made in America, you know, and this is just that, that obsession with globalism, you know, and I I've said before, I think there's a lot of CEOs out there, these big companies that their grandparents who were part of the greatest generation, if they could see what they have done to this country, they'd slap them across the face. I mean, it's just terrible. What has happened over the decades of the farming out of everything that we've done in this country. That was so great in the, in the, in the name of just making another buck. And I think people are seeing that now, and it's really frustrating and we just let these guys do whatever they want. They get the Olympics and everything else. And, and, and that super aggressive, that hyper aggressive foreign policy, they had even leading up to here where their ambassadors were out. Just beating everybody over the head. It's like, they're trying to call us all down and you know, Biden's going along with it. And the Democrats are too. So I, I couldn't agree more. It's going to be a big deal coming up and as well as should be. And so last question then, you know, did the Democrats, do they have any bench left as far as leadership goes? I mean, are we just, you know, we're just left with, you know, Pelosi, Biden, Harris. I mean, what do you see out there for them? I feel really strongly great about where we're going as a party, but what do you see on the Democrats? Did they have anything out there besides Stacey Abrams potentially? Robert Cahaly: Oh, I don't know this Stacey Abrams of, is there a, is there best player? I think Stacy, everyone has been very defined more and more is coming out in Georgia. People are beginning to see a lot of what went down. I think the Lester is wearing off of Stacey. Didn't know him wrong. Stacey Abrams is a political, she isn't political operative, extraordinary. She is one of the smartest political operators I've seen in the Democrat party. She knows how to motivate people. She knows how to organize, but I think that this new face, a new direction has kind of worn off. And the last four years and people have kind of realized what else she might stand for things that weren't issues four years ago. You know, I would look toward the Democrats that some of the lesser known players that, that ha that aren't getting a lot of attention right now. I still think that Klobuchar is probably one of their stronger leaders out there who has not been completely destroyed in the media. And they have a few, but not very many. And, and, you know, even she has a lock wall, their problem is they haven't developed a bench. They haven't worried about legislative races. They haven't worried about winning so many things in the, and there people in Congress are just tired. I mean, it's freezing. So ever leaving. I mean, they w the Democrat party is making the same mistake that the major league baseball is beginning to make. If you start squandering your, your minor leagues, you're going to end up having a negative effect on your major league. Doug Truax: Yeah, absolutely. That's a great analogy. And I think that, that if you start canceling your minor league players too, you know, I think that's the great thing about what's happened. That's Republicans have finally stood up and said, you know, we don't care about the media. You try to cancel me. I don't care. It's one of the great things about Trump. You know, he led the way on that. He's like, he just, he just ran right through it, but the left there's still cancel each other all the time. You know? So you don't get sideways with the squad over there. You know, they may enjoy your career, but, you know, let them have it, let them have it. I it's, it's, it's in some way, it's fun to watch so well, Hey, Robert really appreciate all the work you've done over the years and how accurate you are, and looking forward to this next season that we're headed into. And I hope you're, you're dead on again. Robert Cahaly: We're looking forward to it, Virginia and New Jersey this year were a nice preview of what's going to happen. And we, we, we're proud to lead the in both, both of those states in the poll. Doug Truax: Well, amen to that good stuff. All right. Well, thanks for coming on. Robert Cahaly: Thank you. Doug Truax: All right. That's our show for today. Thank you so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media. Don't forget that by working together and staying diligent, we conservatives can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America. First Right A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant every morning in your inbox, always free subscribe by texting FIRSTRIGHT 2, 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGHT All caps. One word to 3 0 1 6 1.

Conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza sits down with host Nick Givas to discuss his latest project Police State and why he thinks American freedom is under attack. The famed author and writer of such films as America: Imagine the World Without Her said he hopes the movie can serve as a warning about where the U.S. is headed and inspire people to act before it’s too late. The movie is due out in select theaters October 23rd. Tickets can be purchased at: https://policestatefilm.net/ Read the Restoration News article on Police State: https://www.restorationofamerica.com/restoration-news/culture-war/dinesh-dsouza-conservatives-must-use-any-means-necessary-to-save-america-from-the-lefts-police-state/

First Right welcomes Neal Harmon, CEO of Angel Studios, a media company and streaming service that offers enlightened content as an alternative to woke entertainment. Their latest box office hit, Sound of Freedom, is the incredible true story of a former government agent who embarks on a dangerous mission to rescue hundreds of children from sex traffickers. Not enough people know child sex trafficking exists, and there’s no better time to see this eye-opening movie. Watch now to learn the story behind the film! Get tickets to Sound of Freedom and watch more inspirational Angel Studios content here: https://www.angel.com/ Want daily news without the liberal slant? Subscribe to First Right here: https://www.restorationofamerica.com/first-right/

Jerry speaks with Greg Stenstrom and Leah Hoopes, authors of The Parallel Election.

Doug talks to Georgia election integrity advocate Garland Favorito about his important litigation that will result in the forensic examination of 147,000 ballots in Fulton County from the 2020 election.

First Right welcomes Liz Collin, producer of the groundbreaking film The Fall of Minneapolis. Liz is a former mainstream media reporter who went against the narrative to expose the holes in the story surrounding George Floyd's death, the 2020 riots, the trial of Derek Chauvin, and the fallout the city of Minneapolis has suffered ever since. Watch now for insight on the media, our justice system, and why future law enforcement is at risk. Watch The Fall of Minneapolis for free here: https://www.thefallofminneapolis.com/ Follow Liz on Alpha News for more truth in journalism: https://alphanews.org/ Want daily news without the liberal slant? Subscribe to First Right here: https://www.restorationofamerica.com/first-right/

First Right welcomes Andrew Wynne, Executive Director of Fair Courts America. Andrew is fighting important battles across America to ensure we have conservative rather than activist judges. Learn why judicial races are important and how Fair Courts America keeps voters informed. Learn more about Fair Courts America here: https://faircourtsamerica.org/ Want daily news without the liberal slant? Subscribe to First Right here: https://www.restorationofamerica.com/first-right/

Tony Heller, climate expert and Real Climate Science founder.

John Solomon, editor-in-chief of Just the News, is back to discuss everything from the Biden crime family to CIA/FBI corruption to the Durham Report. The elites are hanging on for dear life as new information breaks their narrative, and John is ready to report news as soon as it breaks. Don't miss this informative episode! You can read John Solomon Reports at https://justthenews.com/podcasts/john-solomon-reports and watch his podcast "Just the News, No Noise" every weeknight on Real America’s Voice: https://americasvoice.news/playlists/just-the-news-no-noise/ Want daily news without the liberal slant? Subscribe to First Right at https://www.restorationofamerica.com/first-right/

Jerry speaks with John Fund, one of the nation’s foremost experts on election integrity and voter fraud.

Doug talks to Tony Heller, "climate change" debunker and scientist Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right Podcast a weekly conservative new show brought to you by Restoration PAC. I'm Doug Truax, Founder, and President of Restoration PAC. Today we are blessed to have a guest that we've wanted to talk to for some time. Tony Heller is perhaps the nation's most influential climate change to bunker. Tony is an incredibly accomplished guy who does all this without any corporate or big money support. Well, Hi Tony. Thanks so much for coming on. Tony Heller: Yeah. Hi, it's great to be here. DT: It's great to have you here. So you've got this really interesting background, a geologist electrical engineer, master debugger, originally a, climate, global warming believer until you dug into everything. So it's really helpful. Just, just give our viewers a quick summary of your background and kind of how you got to where you are today. TH: Yeah, I started out as a geologist, um, out of college. Got my degree in geology. Um, did quite a few interesting projects at Los Alamos labs on volcano research. Um, I did nuclear waste disposal, geothermal energy, quite, quite a few different things, but I realized after a few years when the price of oil crashed in the early 1980s, that geology was kind of a hopeless profession. So went off and did other things. I worked as a wilderness ranger for the forest service taught school, and public and private schools for a number of years. TH: Then I went back to college, got, studied computer science in Northern Arizona university. Then I went to Rice University, got a master's in electrical engineering. And I worked on microprocessor design for many years and then branched out into graphics, um, got into software eventually, but my passion has always been science. So on the side I was, I was always interested in global warming. I was introduced to it by my boss at Los Alamos around 1980, and I was a true believer in it. And in 2001, they were, I was living in Colorado and we were having a terrible drought and I was coaching soccer in the city of Longmont, shut down the soccer fields. So I went to a city council meeting and told them, look with this global warming thing going on. This drought's just going to get worse. So you might as well just accept the fact that the fields are going to be in bad shape from now on let the kids play, you know, kids in Brazil plan and, you know, asphalt or dirt, and they've got great players. So they listened, they believed me and they opened up several soccer fields. So we were able to have her soccer matches, um, that year.And then of course the drought ended and, and over the next few years I started realizing that the trends were not going the direction they were supposed to Colorado was getting much wetter, um, and greener and getting a lot more snow. So I started looking into it and I, and I was horrified at what I saw about how the data was being handled by government agencies like NASA and NOAA. They were, they were abusing the data very badly. So I looked into it more and more. I just came to realize quickly that the total global warming thing was a huge propaganda campaign. And I became interested. Why? So it's been my passion. I had been working most of the time since then, but, I was probably been putting in, you know, average of six to 12 hours a day on this for the past 14 years and uncovered all kinds of astounding stuff. Now I realize the things, just a giant scam. You know, the things you hear now about global warming don't have anything to do with the reality. I got to know some very famous scientists like, Dr. Bill gray at Colorado State University, who is the leading, tropical meteorologist in the world. And also the guy who invented modern hurricane forecasting. And the horror stories, He told me about how he was mistreated by Al Gore. In 1993, when Al Gore became Vice President and he invited Dr. Gray to a global warming conference in DC and Dr. Gray responded, he'd be happy to come to the conference, but he does not believe her in Gore's theories. And he got his funding cut off. He'd gotten money from NOAA every, every year, since the 1960s. And then he got his funding cut off, never got another penny out of the government, and this is how they control the academic community. Everyone in the academic community knows that if you want to get government grants, you have to go along. And tow the line in, and there's only a few people who are bold or honest enough, or brave enough and have the ability financially to do it. Unfortunately, Dr. Gray was one of those. So he wasn't in, he was an incredible influence on me right up until his death five years ago. And, um, he's sorely missed. He was, he was in a giant of a man in every way. He was originally wanted to be a baseball player for the Washington baseball team, but he suffered a knee injury in high school and then ended up having to be a meteorologist and stuff well much to our benefit and much to yours. DT: And you have, uh, you have picked up where he left off in many ways, I suppose. And I got to tell you, I just I mentioned this to you before we started, how much I love the videos and, and any time I'm with somebody and we get into this climate piece, I always begin with, "so there's this guy, Tony Heller. And he has these great charts and these great videos." And let me explain some of it to you. And so I don't, you know, I paraphrase and do my best, but here we have you. So, so having said all that, we're going to let you in eight different charts. I got some slides we'll be running through, right, right. Quick here. And, uh, we'll, we'll keep going through them. As we discuss this, we're going to have you describe in eight charts, how this whole climate change thing is a fraud. So let's begin, this first one, uh, kick us off Tony. TH: Yeah, this one's my favorite. Um, this is a graph of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels measured at the Mauna LOA observatory in Hawaii, which is a very good location. It's at high altitude. It's, it's in the middle of the ocean. It's far away from any cities. So it's fairly accurate record of carbon dioxide levels. It goes back to 1960 and you can see how, um, the levels have been increasing over the past 60 years. Um, and, and increasing an upwards. It's an exponential curve upwards. And I've annotated on the graph. The red, the red annotations are mine. Um, all of the different climate agreements, going back to the Rio agreement 30 years ago, it's every year governments get together and they have these big climate meetings and they may call these big promises to cut back on CO2, but they've done nothing. They've accomplished nothing. They, the atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have continued to increase at an accelerating pace. And even the lockdown last year had no impact on the growth of CO2. So all these meetings they're having and they get together and they, they talk about saving the planet. It's, it's garbage, they're not doing anything. And they're just having boondoggles and nice places. It gives them good publicity. Gives them political cover. They say, they're solving this climate crisis, but they're accomplishing absolutely nothing. DT: It goes back to what you said a little bit ago about the funding. TH:Yeah. DT: And towing the line. And you know, we, around here, we call it big green and it's a massive thing now. And you got to, if you're going to participate and get your dollars, you know, you gotta, you gotta bend the knee, you know? And so that's what some of this is too. So, all right, let's go to the next slide. TH: Yeah. This graph shows, energy the proportion of energy being used by the world by different types. And you can see that coal oil and natural gas have increased tremendously and race in years. You know, we hear all this propaganda that fossil fuels are being replaced, but the exact opposite is happening. But if you look at the very top, there's a very narrow slice for renewables, which have hardly made any progress at all in recent years, you know, maybe add from 1% up to 3%. So 97% of the world's energy supply is not coming from renewables. It's coming from other sources, yet we constantly hear. This propaganda, that renewables are going to power the world. You know, we're going to be able to power the world with wind and solar, and it's complete nonsense. It's only producing 3%. If they're successful in shutting down fossil fuels like Joe Biden says would be a huge catastrophe. Literally billions of people would be dead in a matter of a few months because we depend on other energy sources to survive. You know, and we saw that in Texas, in February, their wind turbines froze up. They hadn't maintained their fossil fuel infrastructure properly. Huge amounts of people were without, without power. They didn't have electricity. The gas lines froze up and they've been building all of these lots of all electric houses recently. And in many places they're mandating that all electric.So when the power grid goes down, people are going to freeze and the, their government policies are leading us towards disaster. And it's based on a completely false belief that, that renewables are making a lot of progress and that they can successfully power the country and power the earth. And they can't, they're not reliable, you know, when it gets really cold or when it gets really hot, renewables tend to fail right at the worst possible times and Texas proved that in a very dramatic and deadly fashion, now last February. DT: Right! TH: You need the fossil fuels for reliability. DT: Right! It's just become like a big marketing ploy, almost in the subsidies and everything, again, back to the funding and the money and all that stuff. And then all the talk about what we're going to help the world. Well, you're not going to help, you know, India and some of these other countries that were, Hey, go to solar panels. It's not going to happen. They, they gotta, they gotta develop, like we developed and we gotta be smart about it, but this is, you know, it's fantasy land to talk that way. So I totally get it. All right, let's go to the next slide then. TH: So yeah, so this is shows on the left is Arctic Sea ICE. This one, these, these maps are the national snow and ice data center in Boulder chose Arctic Sea Ice on January 4th, 1991. And the, and the one on the right shows January 4th, this year, you can see there's essentially no difference. We have the same extent of Arctic ice. We had 30 years ago. So we ever every day in the news, if you, if you do a Google search for Arctic ice melt and you see the Arctic ice has disappeared, the polar bears are drowning, but it's not true. DT: Right! TH: There's, there's been no trend in Arctic sea ice over the last 15 years there wasn't there wasn't, there was a downward trend for awhile, but right now today, Arctic sea ice extent is the highest it's been for 18 years for this state. DT: Right. Again, the mass marketing and people just believing it. Uh, and, uh, here's the truth. Okay. So this is great. Next slide. TH: Okay. Yeah. So this is CO2 emissions, relative the relative change in CO2 emissions by China and the United States. And you can see the United States has been flat. It's actually down. It's been going down for the last 20 years, but China's emissions are skyrocketing. So we always hear, you know, we hear these claims from Democrats that we can control the climate. You know, if we cut back our CO2 emissions, um, you know, we can save the us has nothing to do with it. We're we're we only produce about 15% of CO2 emissions. China has got is their usages. Their production is greatly increasing. They're massively increasing their, their usage of coal. They're building hundreds of new coal-fired power plants. So the United States could disappear off the face of the earth, and it would have no impact on either CO2 emissions, indefinitely, no impact on climate. And John Kerry admitted this. He said that the U.S. doesn't control it. And without having China and Asia on board, the United States can't accomplish anything. DT: So once again, it's just a scam and we see so many of these leftists, they know this is true, but they're so afraid of the Chinese. And then they won't even admit that we're doing a great job of it. Uh, it's just, yeah, it's so frustrating to watch this happen. And, uh, you know, we're living through it right now with COVID don't wanna upset the Chinese. So, you know, it's like, okay, that's crazy. All right. Uh, moving on here to the next. Now we're going to really start getting into how this is kind of how the, the mechanics of this, how they're perpetuating this fraud. TH: Yeah. So there's, this graph shows United after this graph shows daily and average daily maximum temperatures for the United States going back a hundred years. And you can see there's been a downwards trend. The hottest years in the United States were during the 1930s, by far during the dust bowl, it was so hot and dry in the Great Plains and millions of people fled the great Plains and moved to California, which John Steinbeck wrote about in the Grapes of wrath. Unfortunately, high school kids don't read that anymore. So they don't know that part of history, the United States was much hotter 90 years ago. And temperatures have been trending downwards as a chosen the graph since then. DT: Yeah, absolutely. That's the reality of it right there. And then we're going to get into, so this is also the, um, that was the day to day data, which is the most accurate that you've said before. It's like, you have to look at what happens on a day-to-day basis as opposed to this, you know, when they start extrapolating into the months and the years and things like that. TH: Right. Well, yeah. Could you go back to the other graph for, for just, okay, so this is the actual measure, temperature data, right? This is all, this is all from NOAA. This is publicly available data, and it's, they've got about a little more, almost 1300 stations, um, in the United States. And this is their actual measure data, but the next slide is the data they relate to the public. What they do is they alter it before they release it to the public. So what they do is they tamper with the data and they turn that cooling trend into a longterm warming trend and it's fake. So this is what the public sees. They see this, oh, wow, we're heating up really fast in this hockey stick. But the data is fake. The actual data shows that we're cooling and they don't tell people about it. They don't tell people they're manipulating it. So people look at their graphs and they say, wow, this is the government. This is what the thermometer show, but it's not what the thermometers show. The thermometer show that the United States has been cooling in the United. And the reason the United States data is extremely important because we have, by far the best long-term temperature data in the world, um, we've had a very stable society, at least until recently, for, for the know, for the past 125 years, there weren't any wars fought in the United States. So there was great disruptions in other countries due to wars, but the United States, we got this wonderful day-to-day temperature record, which just doesn't exist in very many other places. You know, there's a few other countries that have very good records like Germany, Japan, and parts of Australia. But for the most part, there's a huge void over most of the planet. So the United States temperature record is critical. It shows cooling and they manipulate it to show warming, which is the story which the government agencies want to present. DT: Yeah. And I think that's the really interesting point that you made is that, that daily graph that's NOAA, that's that, you know, it's not you making this up. This is from the government readings of the stations. And I remember watching a video of yours too, where you kind of got into this, you know, the manipulation relative to, there's been a decrease in stations. And so they take what would have been as a station previously. It's not there anymore, but they insert their modeling onto that one that doesn't exist. And that's how they're starting to get it to go up. TH: Right. DT: Am I remembering that correctly? TH: Yeah, that's correct. So what they, they've lost about one third of their data since the late 1980s. I don't understand why, but stations are disappearing and some slight of stations don't report every month. And so what I've seen is that the, all of the warming they're creating in the over the last 40 years has been de to just making up fake data for those missing stations. They report data for every months wehether for all 1,281 stations, whether there was any actual data or not. And this data is, and for the stations that didn't report it's fake. And actually in recent years, it's almost half of the data is fake at this point. Yeah. DT: Yeah. That's right. So they're taking data that doesn't exist because they're not getting it in from certain stations and there, and being like, well, you know what, if we did get it in based on what we believe, this is what we think the temperature would be. And then there you go. And then they show that graph to everybody. So it's like, they're building the lie into the data. That's, they're extrapolating their lie into the larger data set. When the, when the smallest one, the most accurate one is relatively flat. TH: Yeah. Well, it's downwards actually right down with the idea of the actual data's down. Whereas, but they, they make, they, they assume that everything's warming half of the data is fake. So they just create this fake warming trend, which does not exist the whole thing's a total fraud. DT: Yeah. Well, again, thank you for doing this. So, I'm really, I was really, I knew this was a fraud and then I came across your stuff and I'm like, Hey, there it is good. So, all right, next slide. All right. Uh, so this is, uh, well, you can get into this. This is, this is the stations as well. Yeah. TH: So this, this graph shows the difference between the actual measured data between the raw data they report and the actual measured data. So you can see the temperatures in the past, like going back to 1920, they've called them about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit. And last year they warmed at about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit. So they've created three degrees of warming by tampering with the data. This is the data tampering you're seeing right here. So there's a completely fake three degree warming trend they've made over the past century, which doesn't exist. DT: Yeah. And you've even got some and even got some Republican and conservative say, well, you know, I think there's some, there's some warming going on. I don't, you know, is it, is it us or is it, is it just the globe or whatever, but even that you have to take a step back and be like, no, what is the real data say? And like what you just said a minute ago, it's going down reality. Yeah. TH: Yeah. It's the situation is atrocious and they can get away with it because they've got complete control over the press. DT: Right. TH: Um, you know, everyone in the press knows about me. The New York Times knows about me. They've written hit pieces about me. I testified at the, testified at the Washington State Senate. Um, in 2007 for 45 minutes, gave a very detailed testimony. All of the Seattle press was there. They didn't report on a single thing. They said all that they reported after that was climate denier speaks for 45 minutes in Olympia. I talked to a number of the reporters that I explained everything that was going on and they refused to publish anything. I said, and after that, the New York Times said he did a hit piece on me. And I kept trying to contact them that to correct all the things that they'd said wrong. And they were, they didn't, they won't talk to me again, hit pieces, you know, written on me all the time from CNN, lean a lot, lots of lies, all kinds of other things. They never talked to me. They want to talk to me because they know that I'll destroy their story. So they, they just it's. And, but the fact that they have complete control over the press means they know they can get away with anything they want and they just, and the climate stories are getting more and more ridiculous every single day. DT: Right. Right. So I just can't believe this Tony, they would come in with a preconceived notion. And if you don't fall in line with it, you're a denier. So that's, that's the way this works now. And I know it's a terrible time and we have a lot of guests on and talk about the state of the media and what the heck is going on here. And it's still just the lack of truth. And, uh, you know, we just got to keep hanging in there and, the truth prevails. And somewhere in there, people go, wait a minute, what's going on? And it's like, what you just said, they have to go further and further and get more ridiculous to propagate the lie. And so we've just got to keep working on the truth. So yeah, it's it's yeah. TH: And it's also social media, right. Um, Twitter know I was on Twitter for 12 years. They have been trying to get rid of me for years. They finally banned me about a month ago, without an, you know, they didn't provide any explanation. They didn't tell me what it was, but I know they've been trying to get rid of me for years, YouTube, regularly, censors my staff and locks me out for a week. Um, so, you know, they're just pushing people up other platforms which do support free speech. They're, you know, they're, they're destroying their own business by doing this. And it's an insane suicidal business model they're engaged in. DT: Yeah, absolutely. Well, this is really great. I appreciate you doing all this. Is there anything else we didn't go over that you, that you want to coat? Wait, we got one more slide. I thought we were done. So let's uh, let's just, yeah. Okay. So this goes, okay, we'll go ahead. And this is the, uh, the downward trend here. TH: So yeah, so there's been all these news reports recently that, that, um, last year was the fifth hottest year on record in the United States. And it's complete nonsense. Uh, th this graph shows the percent of stations in, from NOAA in the United States, which reach 95 degrees Fahrenheit sometime during the year. And they peaked in 1931. And last year was actually among the lowest on record. So less and less of the United States has been getting very hot every summer. Um, and last year was among the lowest on record, but at the same time, the process claiming that last year we had record heat waves in the United States. And I made a video last night showing out totally fraudulent, that all thing was and went over in great detail about how much hotter the United States was in the past. DT: Yeah. And it's just, uh, the overall perspective on the whole thing is just lost. And I think that this goes to this idea now, especially, you know, you brought it up with the education with the younger generation. Sometimes it's difficult. It's like, no, nothing's more important than right now. Everything that's happening bad is to solve right now. It's like, no, no, no. Let's look at the history of things. Things go up and down and, you know, there's this other thing called weather that changes. And I'm always saying, you know, our weather person here in Chicago, they do their best, but often they're wrong about like tomorrow. So it's like, okay, we're going to predict that a hundred years. Exactly. What's going to happen. No, you're not. So, uh, I just, I just love what you do with the charts and the graphs. So, so that was our last slide that we have here. But anything else that you wanted to cover that we didn't, we didn't hit as part of the charts. TH: Yeah. I just wanted to throw in. So there's this problem, this belief that we're suffering the worst, most extreme weather is something which has plagued humanity for as long as there's people have been communicating. Um, I posted an article from 1947, yesterday about this belief that the world was warming up and it was from the U S whether we were explaining that it wasn't true. It just based on people's faulty memories, I've got another similar article from 1939. My favorite favorite ones from 1871 from the British press was imaginary changes of climate. And it goes into how every, according to people keeping records every month is the hottest driest, windiest, wetest worst ever known. And, and it's just based on miss people, exaggerate things. And if you go back to like the Salem Witch trials were probably largely based on the fact that there was a lot of bad while there during the little ice age. And it was blamed on witches was in, in Europe, they burned tens of thousands of witches at the stake in the 16th century for cooking the weather.The belief was that the bad weather of the little ice age was due to Pete, that climate change that was being caused by humans, which is exactly the same story we have. Now, it's the superstition that humans are causing climate change. DT: Yeah, that's right. And I just, uh, I covered this, uh, I think I had Eric Metaxas sign talking about his atheism dad, his new book, and it's a little bit of this, you know, the climate worship and mother nature and worship the earth and everything so well, you know, God made everything and he's in control. So we'll just have to see what happens. And we don't know exactly. And this is, it's great that you bring that up. I mean, that's what we all got to start saying more and more as, Hey, this has happened previously and we don't want to be associated with, you know, the same kinds of people that were, you know, Salem witch trials, right. And this is the same thing, you know, you're talking about, you know, what's going on with you and, and online and getting banned and stuff. And so, you know, it's not as bad, but the trend is not great with these people just pushing this lie over and over. So I appreciate your courage and, well, I appreciate you standing up and I'm just going to, we're going to do our best around here, Tony, to make sure all our viewers understand, you know, your deal and what you're about and make sure you get the stuff out. Cause the work you do is fantastic. And like I said, you know, you're not getting any corporate money for this or anything. You're just doing the, doing the right thing. So I really, really appreciate it. Great. Well, thank you. Well, I'd love to have you back on and uh, we'll keep everybody, we push out your stuff all the time and we'll, we'll direct everybody to your, to your website and all the great work you do. And, and just appreciate you coming on day. Have a good one. TH: Okay, fantastic. Thank you. DT: All right. That's our show for today. Thank you so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media. Don't ever forget that by working together and staying diligent, we conservatives can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America. First right, A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant every morning in your inbox, always free subscribed by texting firstright to 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGHT All caps. One word TO 3 0 1 6 1.

Doug talks to Rachel Bovard, senior tech columnist with The Federalist (Machine Transcribed) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast, a weekly conservative new show brought to you by Restoration PAC. I'm Doug Truax, founder, and president of Restoration PAC. Today, we were blessed to have first-time guests and one of the most important young conservative voices in Washington, Rachel Bovard, Rachel is so influential that the fake conservative columnist from the New York times, David Brooks labeled her and other young conservatives as terrifying in a recent column. All right, Rachel, thanks so much for coming on. Rachel Bovard: My pleasure. Thanks for having me. Doug Truax: All right. So, so the David Brooks thing, even though he did say, I think he said you were charming and funny and things like that, he labeled you as terrifying. And so what's been the, what was your reaction to that? And what's kinda been the reaction around DC in, in your circles with that, regarding that, that article he wrote. Rachel Bovard: Well, I didn't see it for a while. I'm not a regular reader of the Atlantic, so I'm, I missed it when it came out. I got a few texts about it. I think Brooks made the sort of mortal sin of a hit piece, which is giving the subject, you're trying to mock too much airtime because it, I think it didn't make me sound that scary, to be honest. And most of the people I talked to were like, no, you, you know, I think he was trying to paint me as some sort of terror in a skirt and it didn't quite, I think it, I think it backfired slightly. Doug Truax: Right? Absolutely. Well, that's it? Yeah. It's always good to just kind of ridicule them back a little bit. Like, like what you're doing there. I think that's, that's wonderful. So, well, Hey, so you've got, I love, I love your posts. You're where you're at with the culture and, and the, and the party and everything. I think you're dead on in so many ways. We've been talking about cultural issues a lot around here lately. So what do you think conservatives are kind of doing right right now and what are we doing wrong when it comes to the culture? Rachel Bovard: Well, you know, I think a lot of conservatives are doing the right thing in pointing out that the culture matters because I think for a long time, the sort of emphasis of DCS, right leaning institutions anyway, were sort of to lean out of the culture. The culture is too divisive. You know, we need to focus on economics. If, you know, we just allow the mediating institutions to work. Everything will be fine. And maybe that was true at one time, but you know, the sort of institutions that we've always relied upon in civil society are completely captured by ideologies that we don't agree with. And I think if Trump's presidency showed us anything, it was that leaning into the culture war and standing up for the right of, you know, conservatives to speak, to have their own beliefs, to practice their faith that actually expanded the base.We have more voters in the Republican party because Trump emphasized those issues. He was probably a surprising vehicle for that for a lot of people, but, you know, he did that. He was fearless about it. And so I think keeping that momentum is going to be very important because generally speaking, when Republicans are in the majority, social conservatives are sort of like, nobody wants to talk to them, right? They are useful on the campaign trail. But when we actually get to Washington, nobody actually wants to listen to them or do what they have to say besides like the one pro-life vote a year. So I do think that we have to take conservative social concerns much more seriously. And, and the culture war generally, that is the word that matters. That's the war that's in front of us. And so we have to fight it on all fronts. Doug Truax: We were heavily involved in the Virginia race too. And you saw it there with Youngkin and that whole crowd, it's just like what you're talking about. People are super concerned about these things that nobody wants to talk about because they get beat down by the left. And then there's a great example of just politically it's in your favor because if a lot of people are concerned about it, you should be talking about it, Rachel Bovard: Right! No, and this is the thing like the, all the polls show this. And, you know, even, I think Gallup recently had a poll showing that the Republican party has the highest amount of identification in like decades. And it is because the left has gone so insane on the culture that it is actually driving people to the Republican party. And I think the mistake would be however, for the Republicans to think that it's because, you know, they've earned this support. No, they haven't. The left has just made it so unpalatable to be a leftist that they're coming to us for solutions. So if we don't provide them anything in the way of solutions, in the way of fearlessness, in the way of actually addressing the concerns that are affecting people day to day, this is not some like far off threat. This is at your child's school. This is at your church. You know, this is in your community. If people aren't the Republicans aren't willing to engage in those fights the way Glen Youngkin really leaned into it in Virginia, then we are going to lose all those voters that the leftist just sent to us. Doug Truax: Yeah, absolutely. And I think they're going to continue sending them to us. I think it was a Victor Davis Hanson, I think, was talking about this one time. The fatal flaw with the left is that they have no limit. They'll keep going and going. That's the interesting thing about the spectrum of things on the right. We have, well, there's a place in here where even, you know, culture warriors, they'll be like, no, let's not go that far on this certain thing, but the left, they just go off into space, you know? And it's, it's an opportunity for us to point it out and to get some people back, but you're right. If we don't step up and say, yeah, we'll actually fight for this. Or if we just use it as a, as a political opportunity, I mean, you see that so often, you know, especially in DC and around conservative politics, like, well, let's just use it to get through the election. You know, that that's not fair. You're just, you're being disingenuous. Then if you just use it to get through the election, and I know you've kind of been calling out Republican establishment too about, Hey guys, let's step this up and talk about some real things that we're going to actually, you know, do after we get elected, not just the same old thing we've been saying for decades in the Republican party. Rachel Bovard: Right. Yeah. I think you're absolutely right in the sense that, you know, DCS, Republican, institutional elite, they love to use the social conservatives or the cultural war on the campaign trail, but they have no intent of actually addressing it. You kind of saw this with Kevin McCarthy's proposed agenda for house Republican majority in 2022. He's like the closest he got to the culture war was talking about a parent's bill of rights. Well, what does that even mean? And is it actually enforceable? Are you talking about putting something into law? Cause okay. Then I'm at the table, right? You've caught my interest, but if you're talking about like a resolution non-binding on anyone simply saying that parents matter, you got to do more than that. Right now. You gotta, you gotta give us better in this moment. Doug Truax: That's right. That's right. I always think, is it, is this just marketing to raise money and get some votes? Or is this something you really believe in and you're going to do so. Yeah. Well, so you, you write a lot about tech issues too. And so, you know, big tech and censoring conservatives. So, so in your opinion, having watched all this and to where we are at this point, what do you think is the best thing we could be doing next as conservatives to fight back? Rachel Bovard: So we have, I think at this point we have to legislate this, you know, a lot of us don't, didn't start at that point in the beginning of this debate, because we've always relied on these sorts of things that the conservative movement has always relied upon. Like if we build our own platform, you know, if we build alternatives, if we try to boycott these platforms, they'll get the message and they'll reform. But what I don't think we accounted for was just how ubiquitous these platforms are in controlling our daily lives. Like there is no way to get off Google if you live in the modern world, every app on your smartphone runs on Google. You know, Google is, you know, tracking you across the web. Even if you're not using Google search, we didn't account for these things. And in many ways that's sort of the classic story of innovation and America in many ways is that, you know, we have a lot of innovation. That's what we built our economy to account for it. We love it. But at some point when that innovation reaches a tipping point, when it starts to actually change the nature of our social discourse, to put parameters around what we can and cannot say, to change how we interact with each other, how we vote, how we search for information, then that's the time where we usually take that innovation and we incorporate it into our values and traditions into our legal framework instead of simply allowing it to shape us. And I think we are, that is where we are in this debate. I think what happened to Parler was so instructive on how, you know, our alternatives will not be allowed to succeed because the point isn't to have alternatives, the left wants to control everything that we do wherever we're speaking. Doug Truax: Yeah, totally agree. Big tech is way too big. And it's like you said, it's a big ubiq- ubiquitous it's, everywhere. And we gotta make sure we fight back as much as we can. But so I have one, I had Emily Jashinsky on the show. We had the same topic about it is kind of like, well, it's so big, where do you go to get news now? There's, you know, you have the mainstream media is just, you know the normal news organizations are just crumbling as an institution. It's just horrible. So what, what do you see out there, where are you going to get your news? What, when your peers are asking you, you know, what do you do and where should I be going to, to figure out what's really going on? What do you tell them? Rachel Bovard: Well, Emily and I both write for the Federalist, which I think is a great, is a Doug Truax: Great, Rachel Bovard: Yeah, not the Federalist, but, you know, I think a lot of my peers anyway, which I think is very encouraging are turning off cable news, and they're starting to go to, again, sort of that those niche outlets, the Federalist, the blue, you know, blaze media, daily caller, but also beginning to follow, you know, individual reporters that they trust on platforms like substack, you know, going to YouTube channels if they're not, you know, banned and Rumble, if they are, you know, I think people are beginning to seek out trust that they've lost in the normal outlets. You know, because I think COVID has, I think unmasked sort of the establishment journalism for being in many cases, just an arm of, of the managerial elite. It's a propaganda machine on so many fronts, and it's not actually providing that sort of critical inquiry and feedback that that's what we expect from reporters. And we expect from news, but there are individuals who are doing it that I think my peers learned to trust. They trust their reporting. They think they're honest. And so they're following those people wherever they go. You know, this is sort of the Joe Rogan effect in many ways. You know, why people listen to Joe Rogan because they think he's an honest broker. And so I think that trust that used to be in institutions is now actually transferring to individuals. And so that's a really interesting dynamic, I think, in the media landscape, Doug Truax: It's like, who can you trust? And I think like what you're saying, if you trust the channel, then you never know what they're going to put on there. And it is, it does go back to, they're trying to make, you know, make money through the advertising and get, just get you to stay and push and fear and come back. We'll give you some more fear and you'll, you know, you'll, you'll keep paying us, watching the advertising. And so on that, you know, you mentioned the COVID thing and, you know, we're, I feel like what's happened here just like in the last couple of days is we've kind of got to that point now. It's like, all right, let's start re-evaluating what happened over the last couple of years. And the Johns Hopkins stuff is out now. And, and, you know, I have my opinions about how things have happened, especially for the younger generation. I was surprised too, at how compliant the lot of them got right out of the gate. And so maybe we could start there with the COVID piece, which were you surprised in, in your generation, how, you know, it used to be, Hey rebellion is good, but now it's like, oh, tell us what to do and we'll go and do it. It was, I was just surprised by the whole thing. Rachel Bovard: Yeah. I was surprised as well. Although, you know, it's an interesting generational question because I'm on the elder side of the millennials, they call us the geriatric millennials and we came of age, right. With 9/11. So I was a senior in high school in 9/ 1, and that sort of shaped our generation into a very, you know, sort of patriotic country first in many ways, I wouldn't say that that has carried over to like the younger millennials or the gen Zs, but for my generation, that's how it was. And so we weren't necessarily predisposed, I think, to be like our government's definitely lying to us here, even though, you know, you had the specter of the Iraq war, which I think galvanized many of us, you know, with a public health crisis, your first instinct is to be like, well, you know, let me, let me take this seriously for a little bit, at least. But then I think it became abundantly clear, you know, for many of us anyway, like what was actually happening, which is that we completely lost our minds. That coherent risk analysis was just not possible for these people anymore. Right. But you know, on the flip side of it, I think you do see some younger people that, you know, this sort of panic porn or, or this like living in fear and inflicting that fear on others, that's been their whole lives. That explains the sort of fragility, you know, ethos that you see in a lot of universities, in many cases, the elite institutions groomed. I think that generation to be the COVID tyrants, that they are to be enforcing their feelings and their, you know, opinions informed or not on everyone else and calling it violence when people don't agree. And that is a very dangerous way to live in society, right? When you have a ruling class that has that attitude. And unfortunately, I think that's where we are and who you're even seeing oddly enough, like the old hippies join in. You've seen it from like Neil young and, you know, Howard Stern of all people, you know, they, kind of grew up to become the man and that is distressing Doug Truax: And it's that attitude about, well, the government says it, we're all going to be in this together and we're all going to do it. And if we just do the together thing, we'll all get by it. And you know, if you're not participating, you're going down then. And I just, I've been shocked about the whole thing. It's just been really, it's really been sad to watch. I, I feel like we've just had this generational piece now where, you know, if you're just going to, if you're just going to go any, anything against the orthodoxy, then you know, we're going to, we're going to beat you down. And I just, it's, it's a, it's a bad place to be. And so... Rachel Bovard: I think, because it's not even, we're going to beat you down, we're going to expel you from polite society. It's not even like weird, you know, odd. It's like, you can't live with us. It's, it's very, discriminatory Doug Truax: And you talk about how people grew up and with government and things. I, had the thought for a long time that, well, we have this cool thing called the center for disease control. It's like a whole federal agency, and they're really smart in there and they're going to figure it out. And you know, when we got into this pandemic, I'm like, well, let's, the CDC is going to come out with something. It'll be, you know, this is exactly what the data's telling us. This is what you should do. But man, it's just turned into a disaster and like thousands and thousands of people working over there, what are they doing? You know, it's like what happened in this, in this scenario? Rachel Bovard: Yeah. The, one of the most stunning revelations from the pandemic has been the incompetence of our public health infrastructure. And I think the they've leaned into that and competence, which, which I think has bred such distrust of public health officials that I think that's going to linger for at least a generation, maybe more. And I, and I have, I think somewhat dire consequences for public health in America, because they've just been so incompetent and never admitted fault or humility or, you know, anything in that situation because that's how you restore trust, right? You say, oh, we got it wrong. You know, now, you know, we don't crack down on speech. We disagree with, we try to answer it. Those kinds of things. We haven't seen any of that behavior from our institutions. And that, like I said, that's going to be one of the lingering effects of COVID is, is the distrust of those institutions. Doug Truax: Yeah. They were incompetent coming into it. And nobody really quite knew how bad that was. And then it got on full display. And then like you said, they wouldn't humble themselves at all and say, well, maybe we got this wrong. We need to go this direction. It's just the continual doubling down. And now we've got the situation with the inflation is rampant because the dumping of the money. And I mean, we just like, it's going to keep, that's another show. We'll talk about the economy and some other show, but, but Hey, I just appreciate all that you do with your you're very courageous in your writing and saying the things that need to be said and really grateful that you came on the show and I'd love to have you back sometime. Rachel Bovard: Thanks so much for having me. I'd love to come back. Doug Truax: All right. That's our show for today. Thank you so much for tuning in and for supporting conservative media. Don't ever forget that by working together and staying diligent, we can serve as can bring our country back to true greatness until next week. Let's all keep praying that God will continue to bless America First right A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant every morning in your inbox, always free subscribe by texting FIRSTRIGHT 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGHT All caps. One word to 3, 0 1 6, 1.

Dougs talks to Mark Weaver, political expert and author. (Machine Generated) Doug Truax: Welcome to the First Right podcast. Your weekly conservative news show brought to you by Restoration PAC. I'm Doug Truax, founder, and president of Restoration PAC. Today. We're happy to once again, to have Mark Weaver on, a political consultant in Ohio who knows all about that state politics, and he's got great views on what's going on with the rest of the world. So we're super happy to have you back. Mark. Welcome. Mark Weaver: Thank you, Doug. Great to be here. Well good. Doug Truax: So before we get into the nationwide stuff, I just want to get your take on this Ohio Senate race. There's so much going on some big names, lots of people coming and going off of Fox and everything else. And so who better than you to give the rundown on what you think is going on in that race? Mark Weaver: Yeah, our Senator, Rob Portman said he was not running for reelection and we have many different candidates. Who've announced our former state party chair, Jane Timkin, J D Vance. Some people know him from the book. He wrote Hillbilly Elegy, Josh Mandel, our former state treasurer, Mike Gibbons. There've been several people in the race and it's really unclear. Who's going to win because the race is getting very close and president Trump has not yet endorsed. And that could be a key factor in this race. Doug Truax: So what do you think right now, as far as you can tell how you're handicapping this thing, how do you see a plan out? What's the timing on that? Mark Weaver: Well, our primary is supposed to be May 3rd, but we're having a little fight with the Supreme court and the legislature through the lines. And so, although the Senate race doesn't really matter what the lines cause the state is the state. It may change the primary election day. So whether it's May 3rd or later, it's going to be sometime in the spring. And it's really too early to say, who's going to win. Josh Mandel had been in the lead, but his numbers have been T eight down like Gibbons. Who's a businessman has been making up. Jane Timken. The former state party chair was recently endorsed by Rob Portman. And that has given her campaign some momentum. So it's one to watch. And obviously we want to win this primary with a strong candidate. The Democrats pretty much are coming up behind Tim Ryan, Democrat congressmen from the Youngstown area. Right,. Doug Truax: Right, right. I remember that guy from way back. I knew he was always angling at some point. So here's his chance and we'll see what happens there. But yeah, we definitely got to put up a strong candidate and what I think we've all been encouraged over the years to see Ohio trending more and more red, which is, which is great for everybody. So, so that's good. So turning to the national scene then, so here at Restoration PAC, we're always talking about the different issues. Obviously big ones around here and around the country, inflation, crime, you know, we've got the demonization of people based on their skin color. That's what we talked about a lot. There's a lot of other things going on the border. COVID still all that stuff. What do you think going forward now are going to be the big national issues that are going to be playing out? Mark Weaver: Well, I've done a lot of over the years and most times people aren't paying much attention politics. This year's going to be different. People have figured out in the last few years that bad government policy can get manually affect their everyday life. Though whether its mandates, where there shouldn't be mandates, shutdowns where there shouldn't be shut down or oh, government spending to the extreme, which creates inflation. People realize that when you elect the wrong people, you get bad policies. It's always been true, but it's more noticeable lately. As a result, we'll see a Republican red wave similar to what we saw in 2010. And if you're buying continues to make mistakes has been making, it might be the biggest wave in modern history. Doug Truax: Right? And we're seeing that with the inflation piece by itself too. I mean, there's so much going on, but inflation, it hasn't been a real problem like it is now for a long time. And so it's one of those things that just touches everybody all the time. It's hurting your friends, it's hurting your family. It steals your dignity in certain ways. Cause you were going to do this and now you're not. And you gotta admit that you're not. And just the instability it creates in our whole economy and the, and the impact it has on people. It's just, it's just an escapable. So we'll see where that plays out. And you know, what do you see in the future with the inflation piece? I, I don't see it. I don't see it moderating much at all. I mean, print trillions of dollars and just the, the pent up demand that was there and what an incredible blunder they've made here. Mark Weaver: Yeah. We all watched the video of his wife, President Biden Jr. And he acknowledged this errors in overspending and some supply that might've been the right direction to see some of the pooling, but he doubled down on the same kind of rock where we are he's demonized business, because it made them think that they be out there running their business prop businesses do, which allows them to create jobs and products and help us help us in America. Don't standardly, president Biden has doubled down on the sink kinds of policies. They gave us this information and I don't think anything short of an election is going to pay. Doug Truax: Right. Right. So that's where I am too. So I kind of know your answer a little bit to this next question. I just want to see if there's any outliers here. Is there anything they can do to salvage this in terms of where this is going? I mean, I don't want us to sound like overly optimistic, obviously about our chances. It's terrible that our chances are getting so great relative to the poor condition of the economy and everything else around the world. But from an election standpoint, that's the way this works out. But is there anything that, any advice that you'd give to the Democrats at this point, other than, you know, Hey, stop doing that piece with the inflation, for sure. Is there anything else that could salvage this in any way for them? Mark Weaver: Well, they are backpedaling away from whose policies they backpedaled. The markets might notice that, and that could think the markets and it could theme the inflation as well, but I don't think that's going to happen. The Democrat party is adaptive to it's far left. It's an anti corporate basis that anti middle class base, it's more interested in things like global than it is in investing in American domestic energy, like natural gas and fracking and oil brought from our own country or from North America. And so the more we see that done, the more we see attacks on the very people who could affect inflation and can inflect gas prices, the worst that's going to get, which is why I think only an election can solve the problem. Doug Truax: Right? The leftist took over all the policies from the universities. And let's just go ahead and just start rolling this stuff out and see what happens. And boy, are we ever seeing what happens? And this is, this is how it goes, like you said, it's going to happen an election. So the flip side of that though, is, you know, we want to make sure as conservatives and Republicans, we get this thing done and we don't want to blow it. So what, what advice would you give to our party that take, keep an eye on this. Don't overextend over here. You know, anything like that, that you have in mind at this point? Mark Weaver: Well, the best thing is you have to talk about what voters care about and what they care about mostly is economic issues. Our party must make the case for why Republican and conservative principles bring about better economics for everybody. So it brings about more jobs, more growth, lower taxes, lower inflation, lower gas prices. These are all Republican strong suits. Now, of course the culture wars are important, but that's not going to win this election. We need to win based on pocketbook issues. And along the way we can correct some of the far overreach that's affecting the culture. Doug Truax: Yeah, that's right. It's a good time to make some ground up on these things and show people what we're really about, because I think we really needed the country right now. That's for sure. So last question for you then. So as far as the Democrats go and their leadership over there, you know, to me, it looks like total disarray and chaos and not a lot of great people, you know, able to step up. And I think this is a function of, you know, the hyper leftist overtake of their party. But so anybody that you see on that side that could be a future leader for them that would, nobody's talking about right now. Mark Weaver: Well, sadly their most likely future leader is AOC. And I don't say that happily. She has millions of followers on social media. She, she has an attractive persona. She's particularly weak on policy. Logic is not something that's familiar to her, but for some voters that doesn't matter. And she speaks to a lot of younger voters. If she were to, for example, primary Chuck Schumer for Senate, it's entirely possible. She could win that primary. And it's entirely possible that AOC could be in the United States Senate. And from there, we all saw Barack Obama leap from being junior Senator of Illinois to, to president. So I'm not predicting that, but I'm saying she has a bit of the formula that Democrats need to pay attention. And for those of us who care about good governance, it's a scary thought. Doug Truax: Yeah, that's terrifying. But the upside right now, like we were just talking about is there is an outcome to all these policies that they've been advocating and we're feeling it as a country. And hopefully we get to a place where people just say, wow, AOC. She's just like the next version of that same stuff that we all hated for awhile. And we got rid of, so, you know, maybe we'll end up there. Who knows, but yeah,l we'll see what happens to keep an eye on that, but Mark really appreciate your insights. So it's super great to have you on, a super smart guy that we like here in front of, and appreciate you coming on the show today. Mark Weaver: Thank you, Doug. Doug Truax: All right. That's our show for today. Thanks so much for tuning in. We'll see you next time! First Right A new kind of new summary without the liberal slant every morning in your inbox, always free subscribe by texting FIRST RIGHT to 3 0 1 6 1 that's FIRSTRIGHT All caps. One word to 3 0 1 6 1.

Frank LaRose, Ohio Secretary of State and former Green Beret, is passionate about election integrity. His concerns with the ERIC voter database ultimately led to Ohio cutting ties ERIC, and now he's on the path to increase election transparency and restore voter confidence. Watch to learn more about Ohio's ERIC experience and the state's plan for election integrity going forward. Want daily news without the liberal slant? Subscribe to First Right here: https://www.restorationofamerica.com/first-right/

First Right welcomes Lt. Col. Allen West, political commentator and executive director of American Constitutional Rights Union. Lt. Col. West courageously defends our constitution as American values are attacked, and conservatives must not remain timid as the Left installs woke ideologies, dangerous border policies, social credit scores, and other assaults on our freedom. Watch now and learn how every conservative can educate themselves and boldly fight this liberal attack on America! Want daily news without the liberal slant? Subscribe to First Right here: https://www.restorationofamerica.com/first-right/