Please go to MyPillow.com and use the promo code Truth to save up to 66% off and Mike Lindell will give a generous percentage back to The Absolute Truth with Emerald Robinson show to support our free broadcasts.
Emerald Robinson: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi receives an award for protecting the interest of a certain country. Hint, it's not the United States, as she leads a delegation overseas. Former President Donald Trump's lawyers are asking for the public's help in the January 6th case. And the WHCA dinner was just as swampy as you would have expected. Plus, the latest on disinformation. Welcome to Monday and a new week of The Absolute Truth. Well, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi can't seem to find the southern border, but she apparently can find the borders of Ukraine. The House's top Democrat traveled with a delegation that included Representative Adam Schiff to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky over the weekend. Now, the timing comes after President Biden asked for another $33 billion from Congress for the war in Ukraine. For her endeavors, Zelensky was awarded the House Speaker with the Order of Princess Olga. Congresswoman Lauren Boebert noted Pelosi's priorities in this tweet, slamming her for not visiting the southern border while traveling all the way to Ukraine. The trip also coincides with rumors circling about Russian President Vladimir Putin's health, with unconfirmed reports that the Russian leader must undergo cancer surgery forthwith. The report also suggests that Putin has tapped his national security secretary, Nikolai Patrushev, to run things while he is absent. But again, those are unconfirmed reports, and there has been so much misreporting in this crisis. So, let's bring in independent journalist Jordan Schachtel. He's also the author of The Dossier on Substack, where he seeks to break through all the propaganda and contradictory information to give you the right information. Now, Jordan, what do you make of these reports on Putin?
Jordan Schachtel: It's really unclear what exactly is going on in the war with Ukraine, and this has been a common issue we've had with all of the propaganda since day one. I mean, the Ukrainian government has such an atrocious track record of just stating the facts on the ground, or who's exactly in charge over there still remains unclear. It's just a very strange situation. It goes to show that the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and whatnot seem to be more interested in what's going on in Kyiv than in the southern border because it just shows the priorities of America's ruling class right now.
Emerald Robinson: So, what was the real reason for Pelosi and her delegation going to Ukraine to meet with Zelensky? And she also met with President Duda of Poland.
Jordan Schachtel: It seems that they're just very interested in protecting their interests. Ukraine has in recent history been an important place for the Biden family and for America's ruling class to launder money and influence. So, I think they view Zelensky as like kind of their client, their pet, and they want to check in on him physically to make sure that he knows that they're in charge over there, it seems. And it was just a very strange visit. I mean, this is supposed to be a war zone, and Nancy Pelosi is just strolling through the streets of Ukraine's capital city. From the wars I've studied, you wouldn't have foreign dignitaries waltzing in dress clothes during the middle of the war. So, something very strange is going on over there.
Emerald Robinson: Bright blue, to be specific; now, we also talked about propaganda. There are reports or were reports of this Ukrainian ghost fighter who was sort of this vigilante that went out. That turns out to be false. Isn't that correct? Who was behind this propaganda?
Jordan Schachtel: So, early on, the Ukrainian government was creating fake war heroes to establish credibility for their military and kind of rally international support, and it worked. But, you know, the people who were shining a light on this were saying, "Hey, I don't think these stories are particularly true. There's no evidence of that." We're kind of just like shut out from the conversation. So, we finally got confirmation that this ghost of Kyiv, this supposed amazing fighter jet pilot who had taken down all of these Russian MiGs and whatnot, actually does not exist. They killed him off in some press, and in other press, they admitted that he doesn't exist. So, it's a very strange narrative that they need to get together from their ministry of propaganda. They need to get their messaging in order.
Emerald Robinson: Now I want to talk about some US messaging, particularly on the Department of Defense where Friday, I don't know if you saw this briefing with Press Secretary John Kirby over the DOD, but he had quite an emotional moment when talking about Ukraine. Listen.
Press Secretary John Kirby: It's hard to look at what he's doing in Ukraine. What his forces are doing in Ukraine, and think that any ethical-moral individual could justify that. It's difficult to look at them... sorry. (Holding back tears) It's difficult to look at some of the images.
Emerald Robinson: Kirby, breaking down there. Your reaction, Jordan?
Jordan Schachtel: Yeah. As the famous saying goes, DC is Hollywood for ugly people. Those are crocodile tears. Even worse, it would be horrifying to hear that he's a true believer. But Kirby has been a press agent for past administrations. He was in the same role during the Obama administration. He knows how this game is played. He's overseen tons of propaganda operations in the past. And as the spokesman for the Pentagon, he has to, you know, cover up a lot of atrocities; unfortunately, that has been committed, such as the horrific attacks in Afghanistan that took so many innocent lives. I'm glad that that war is over, but Kirby has a pretty bad track record. I don't believe for a second that he's really emotionally invested in this war or anything.
Emerald Robinson: I don't remember him breaking down over those US service members killed in the Kabul airport attack back in the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan. Speaking of Hollywood, Hollywood did come to; ugly Hollywood, DC, over the weekend, and we'll have that a little bit later. But thanks for being with us, Jordan. We appreciate it.
Jordan Schachtel: Thanks for having me, Emerald.
Emerald Robinson: Now, whatever the geopolitics of the Ukrainian-Russian conflict, the regular people on the ground and their lives are real casualties of the war. This is the daily scene for many in the city of Lviv.
Video Clip: (Air raid sirens going off in the city of Lviv)
Emerald Robinson: Now, the man joining me next took that video and has just returned from Ukraine last week, where he hoped to spread goodwill. Welcome, Father Benedict Kiely of the Nazarene.org. It's so good to see you.
Father Benedict Kiely: Thank you as always, Emerald. Thank you for your support.
Emerald Robinson: Now, Father Ben, you were there for a few days. You came back last week. Can you just tell us what you experienced with the Ukrainian people during your time there?
Father Benedict Kiely: Well, I was there, Emerald for Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Easter. They celebrate according to the Julian calendar. So, a week after, we have. So, I had two Easters. In fact, one in England and one in Ukraine. I was there with a reporter from the London Daily Telegraph, but I was there really to show support for the Ukrainian Catholic Church. The Ukrainian Catholic churches, according to Eastern rights, celebrate very much like the Orthodox, but they were terribly persecuted during the time of communism. All the way from 1946 right up to 1989. Unfortunately, where the Russians are winning, that persecution is beginning again. They are imposing, as you know, the rule of the Russian Orthodox Church. Patriarch Kirill is basically a puppet of Putin. The patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church has been blessing the Russian troops, saying this is a holy crusade. How can it be a crusade when Ukrainians are Christians? Let's not forget this is Christians now, fighting Christians. Not Muslims fighting Christians. This is Christians fighting Christians. So, whatever your view of the politics, it's a terribly sad situation if you're a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ to see brothers and sisters fighting one another.
Emerald Robinson: Yeah. It's extremely sad. Now, you said they sound like they're very afraid. Have many of them left?
Father Benedict Kiely: Yes, many, of course. We know many millions have left Ukraine to go into Poland. Poland, what a marvelous country, taking 2.5 million Ukrainians. Hungry, also taking well, many more than half a million in other countries. But the real story that isn't, I think, being reported much in the media is the internal migration, as it were. You can't be a refugee in your own country, so you can't call them refugees. But millions of Ukrainians have been moved because of the war there, what's called IDPs, Internally Displaced Persons. They've been driven from the east of the country all the way into the west, and in fact, the city of Lviv, which has thousands upon thousands of IDPs, Internally Displaced Ukrainians.
Emerald Robinson: Now, you mentioned this is Christian on Christian, but your organization works a lot in Muslim countries like Iraq, where Christians are persecuted on a continual basis. And we have some videos of what recently happened in Mosul. This is a life every day that we don't really focus on these persecuted Christians in Iraq. Can you tell us about the current situation for them? And then also tell us about some of the things your organization does. I saw your newsletter. You helped a man there set up a candy shop in order to kind of, you know, do something. I don't think we ever focus on what can you actually do? So, just tell us about the current situation there, father.
Father Benedict Kiely: That is correct, Emerald. Well, the situation is, unfortunately, again getting very serious. This time it's not ISIS. Although ISIS is rising, we must not think that ISIS is gone. It just has a new name. It's always the same thing. Unfortunately, the real problem is the Shia militias who are controlled by Iran are encircling the Christian towns. They're not killing the Christians yet. But last night, in fact, they shot missiles from one of the Christian towns where we support many businesses into Erbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan. So, they're making the Christians feel extremely unsafe and wondering whether they have a future. But what we're trying to do in our little way is allow people to stay by giving them some hope, in other words, supporting them with a job. So, yes, for example, we support many family businesses. We give them money. We don't loan it. We give it to them, and they start a family business. That way, they stay in their country, and they don't become migrants, economic migrants. It's one of the real answers to migration. Keep people in their own countries by giving them support. So, yes, one of the businesses is a Little Family Candy Shop.
Emerald Robinson: It was so sweet in the pictures. Well, Father Ben, thank you for your work. Joining us from the UK, and if you'd like to learn more about his organization and support it, you can go to Nazarian.org. Now coming up, Trump's legal team is crowdsourcing video and information regarding January 6th. We'll discuss this with attorney Peter Tipton after the break.
Commercial: (Commercial Break)
Emerald Robinson: Recently, former President Donald Trump filed a lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, claiming that she and her camp tried to rig the 2016 election by creating and pushing the false, verifiably false Russian collusion narrative. Now, Trump's lawyer in the case, Attorney Peter Ticktin, joins us to discuss a little bit about that and a new campaign for crowdsource information related to January 6th. Welcome, Peters. Good to see you.
Attorney Peter Ticktin: Good to see you, too. Good morning.
Emerald Robinson: Now, I know you're a bit limited in how much you can talk about these cases, but I think our viewers are curious, given that so much time was spent attacking the former president during, you know, after the 2016 and Russiagate. Then the January 6th situation now. But I have to ask you. Will you be able to sue Perkins Cody, and you're continuing to sue Hillary Clinton? Will you be able to sue all of these Democratic operatives in just one lawsuit? It reads like a RICO crime conspiracy.
Attorney Peter Ticktin: It is a RICO crime conspiracy. You know, when you look at what was done. I'm not talking so much about the case, but I can talk more freely about the underlying facts of what occurred because when you think about it, really, what is this case about? What did these people actually do? It seems that we'll get to the bottom of the real answers. But a way of looking at it, you know, Hillary Clinton woke up one morning and said, "I know what I'm going to do in regard to Donald Trump running against me. I'm going to make up a story that he had some connection with Russia, and let me see. What I'm going to do is I'll get some lawyers to do this for me. That way, I can be protected by attorney-client privilege because if I give the lawyers instructions to do wrong things and then they do wrong things, they can't say, I said to do it," which is absolute nonsense. But that may have been what was in her mind because she did orchestrate it through lawyers. That's one of the biggest mistakes she made because I'm talking more from what we know from Durham as well than our lawsuit. But we know from Durham that Sussman and Elias and so on, the lawyers at Perkins Coie, what they were doing was making bills. Because if your hire lawyers to do certain functions, those lawyers need to get paid, and all lawyers can get paid for is selling their time for their service. So, anyone who's ever had a lawsuit with lawyers doing the lawsuit for them knows the kinds of bills they get, very detailed bills of everything the lawyer does. So, that's evidence against her, you know, even just looking at the last thing against Sussman, what's against him. You know, Harry billed Hillary Clinton for going to the FBI at the time that he told the FBI he didn't have a client. He's there on his own.
Emerald Robinson: But he also, in other statements, I think, to the CIA assessment, actually admitted that he had a client that had a vested interest, but that he was just doing this of his own free will as a good citizen, despite having a client. So, those contradictory statements are in the Durham filings. Now, moving on to January 6th, you're taking an interesting tactic here. You've asked for help from the public in providing video footage of the January 6th events at the Capitol. You're crowdsourcing this stuff. I'm just curious, how is that going?
Attorney Peter Ticktin: We've got a lot of materials, and we're still looking for some. In fact, I did that. That was my doing. You know, it wasn't, you know, Donald Trump didn't say, "Do this for me." I just did it. And it's working out very well. You know, I didn't know how else we were going to get all these materials from so many people. They wouldn't know where to send them, and now they know. So, we're going to need to put together this whole scenario, the whole picture of what had occurred, because the left wants to call it an insurrection, and it wasn't Donald Trump's people that caused any kind of insurrection. It wasn't Donald Trump that caused any kind of insurrection. So, we have defenses. There are seven lawsuits that are going on in DC, you know, one by Eric Swalwell, of all people claiming emotional distress. Well, you know, so...
Emerald Robinson: I've had a lot of reporter colleagues who claimed emotional distress. I was there that day, and some of the ones I saw, the reporter sitting next to me, claimed emotional distress, and I was there with them the whole day and saw what they were really doing.
Attorney Peter Ticktin: You know, and the funny thing is that they accuse us, they accuse Donald Trump of being dishonest and lying, so on and so forth. But he just doesn't, and they do. It's really an amazing way they transfer what they do onto others constantly. They collude with Russia, and then they make this whole big thing about the fact that Donald Trump colluded with Russia, which was a complete fantasy. It was a complete fantasy.
Emerald Robinson: Right, now you said that you'd gotten a lot of materials, but you're still looking for some footage specific sounds like from January 6th. What are you looking for that you're hoping that people out there, the public, can send in that they might have?
Attorney Peter Ticktin: Well, there were some actual deaths. We've seen some footage of the police actually causing those deaths and for which nobody's been held accountable. That's not our job to hold anybody accountable for these things. We needed for our defenses in these cases where they're trying to basically say that Donald Trump had something to do with an insurrection so that they can try to invoke the 14th Amendment. That's what it's all about. So, we need to be able to show, you know, nobody has seen. I mean, I'm seeing some of these things for the first time. It's amazing when you see 2 million people were there. It wasn't just the crowds you see around the capital, but it goes on and on. I mean, we've all seen what it looks like with a million people there when Martin Luther King gave a speech, for instance, or even Farrakhan had a million people, but it's been estimated over 2 to 3 million people were there that day.
Attorney Peter Ticktin: And you see all these crowds, and they're all peaceful. They're all getting along, and they're all engaging in things that basically are a good time. It was a very peaceful protest, except for some people that caused the problems, and I need to see. You know, we've got people we think are related to the FBI waving people, rousing up the people, and getting them to go into the Capitol. We have police waving people in. We have police opening the doors, and then when they went in, it wasn't as though they went in looking to raise hell. You see them walking through the rotunda, walking between the ropes, and very peacefully and pleasantly. You see the police walking with them with their backs to the people. The police don't put their backs on people that they think are going to hit them or hurt them in any way. There was no such thing going on inside. Yet, we have these lawsuits, people making these claims.
Emerald Robinson: We actually just saw one January 6th defendant get freed in his case because of the footage that was presented by his lawyers and showing that police waved him in. It was very clear that Capitol Police did so. Well, we want to follow what you're getting and what you're uncovering. Also, we didn't get to it today, but maybe you can come back and react very soon to the Eastman emails that are being turned over. John Eastman and 10,000 emails related to that day, and President Trump, that's some breaking news. But we appreciate your time. Thank you, Mr. Ticktin, for being here today.
Attorney Peter Ticktin: It's really my pleasure. Thank you so much. Good to see you.
Emerald Robinson: Coming up, the Biden administration is pushing Pfizer's new antiviral. But how does it stack up? And which states are making it easier to obtain Ivermectin to treat COVID? We'll discuss this with Dr. Paul Marik after the break.
Commercial: (Commercial Break)
Emerald Robinson: States are beginning to take matters into their own hands when it comes to treating COVID. States like Tennessee and New Hampshire have their legislators voting on bills that would allow Ivermectin to be dispensed over the counter. Ivermectin is being used to treat COVID, but critics continue to say there is not enough evidence out there that proves it works. But let's welcome Dr. Paul Marik. Good to see you again.
Dr. Paul Marik: Yeah. Thanks for having me back.
Emerald Robinson: So, what do you make of this with states pushing bills to actually allow Ivermectin over the counter? I'm going to guess that you think this is a good move, correct.
Dr. Paul Marik: Yeah. So, actually, I testified personally both in New Hampshire and in Tennessee. You know, what's important to realize is this was a bipartisan decision. These legislators were given the data they were able to objectively an impartial, objective, unpolitical way, review the data and come to the same conclusion. This is an effective drug for the treatment of COVID, and there's no reason that the public should be denied access to the drug. In fact, they made a very bold move to make the medication available over the counter. So, I think that's a very important decision because, firstly, this was bipartisan, non-political, and objective-based on science. So, these people recognize the role of Ivermectin. Secondly, they recognize that this is an exceedingly safe medication, and it's safe enough to be dispensed over the counter with a standing order. So, this is a major breakthrough because I think it goes against the deceptive, lying, malignant narrative that is being proposed by the federal and state agencies. So, this is a major breakthrough, and obviously, for patients in Tennessee, this is wonderful for them because the concern was when people are desperate, they'll do desperate things. You know, they will use veterinary-grade Ivermectin, which will not be dosed adequately. Here they can go to the pharmacy, and the pharmacy can test for drug interactions, and the patient can get the correct dose. So, this is the way it should be. This is the way it's done in hundreds of countries across the world.
Emerald Robinson: That almost seems unreal to me because I know when I suspected that I had COVID, it was very difficult to get Ivermectin. It took several days, and then it took several days to get more when my husband became ill. Do you expect that other states will follow suit? Are there any other states close to doing this?
Dr. Paul Marik: So, hopefully, this is a precedent, and other states will follow because this is just the logical thing to do. I mean, we are here to protect the public. We have to treat the patients. We need to put politics aside, so there are other states, North Carolina, Ohio, and Florida, that are looking at similar bills. Hopefully, this will become a wave across the country, and some kind of sensibility and normality will return. We know that the state agencies are captured. They are controlled. So, the best way out of this is through the state legislature.
Emerald Robinson: Now I want to turn to the drug, the antiviral Paxlovid, which is a Pfizer product, relatively new. It is being pushed heavily by the Biden administration. They announced that when Vice President Kamala Harris recently tested positive for COVID, though multi-times vaccinated, she was being treated with this antiviral. What kind of results are patients seeing with this particular Pfizer drug that seems to be okay with everyone?
Dr. Paul Marik: Yes. So, you know, the juxtaposition of Ivermectin and Paxlovid is so striking because it seems the White House, President Biden, and Kamala Harris actually seem to be drug agents. They are pharmaceutical representatives for Pfizer, and we know how this drug works. And it's less effective than Ivermectin. It has a similar mechanism of action, but really good in vitro studies show that Ivermectin is a much more potent drug in inhibiting this protease enzyme of SARS-CoV-2. Secondly, the use of Paxlovid is based on one single study done by Pfizer in unvaccinated patients who had not had COVID. Firstly, we cannot trust the results from Pfizer. We know they have faced a $3.2 billion lawsuit, which they settled for promoting medical misinformation. So, Pfizer cannot be trusted. It's just the way it is, and it seems like the federal government is in bed with Pfizer. Secondly, the emerging data now shows the truth will come out, that patients who are treated with Paxlovid seem to decrease the viral count. Then on about day nine, they have a rebound and get symptomatic again.
Dr. Paul Marik: So, why this is happening is unclear to me. Maybe because Paxlovid is interfering with natural immunity, and just by the way, natural immunity is a real thing. The state of Tennessee recognizes natural immunity. So, you know what? This is an ineffective drug. We see all these rebounds, yet people will push Paxlovid. Ivermectin does not demonstrate this rebound effect. We do not see it with Ivermectin. I should add that the data actually shows that Ivermectin potentiates the host immune response to the virus. So, it potentiates it, whereas Paxlovid actually inhibits the natural immune response. So, it makes no scientific sense that you're going to use Paxlovid. It's a highly expensive drug. It's less effective, and we are seeing this rebound. In addition, Pfizer has admitted they did a study looking at prophylaxis in individuals who were exposed to household contacts of people exposed to SARS-CoV-2. The study failed, so Paxlovid in prophylaxis, whereas multiple studies have shown that Ivermectin is effective in prophylaxis. So, we are in this absurd way.
Emerald Robinson: My next question.
Dr. Paul Marik: Sorry, so in an absurd situation that the federal government in the White House is promoting a drug that is ineffective for prophylaxis and seems to be somewhat questionable for acute treatment, whereas they consider Ivermectin a dangerous horse deworming medicine.
Emerald Robinson: Well, let me ask you, and we got about 30 seconds real quick talking about the prophylactic properties of Ivermectin, given that it will soon be available over the counter for people in New Hampshire and Tennessee. Should people look at picking up Ivermectin over the counter and using it as a prophylactic?
Dr. Paul Marik: Absolutely. So, if you were in a high-risk situation or a high-risk person, there's no question of doubt that Ivermectin is effective in prophylaxis. So, it's not for everybody, but there are certain high-risk people who should be taking it prophylactically. Most importantly, for the very first signs of COVID, you need to get Ivermectin started early. Early treatment is the key, and obviously, we think Ivermectin is far superior to Paxlovid, which is a designer drug that doesn't work.
Emerald Robinson: Very interesting. We will see if other states follow suit. Thanks for being here, Dr. Marik, to give us all the details about these developments. Thank you.
Dr. Paul Marik: Sure, and it's always a pleasure. Thank you for asking all the good questions.
Emerald Robinson: Earlier last week, Dr. Anthony Fauci declared the end of the COVID pandemic. Fauci's comments were rejected by White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki. Psaki told reporters last week that the pandemic is not over. Over the weekend, Bill Gates started fearmongering again by saying, quote, "We've not seen the worst of COVID." Gates also went on to say that there could be a more transmissible and fatal variant on the horizon. Let's welcome the founder and president of the Health Freedom Defense Fund, Leslie Manookian. Hi, it's good to see you, Leslie.
Leslie Manookian: Nice to be here with you, Emerald. What a wild two weeks it's been.
Emerald Robinson: You have been on quite the roller coaster ride. First the order to shoot down the mandate. Then you have unexpectedly the administration did come back and is trying to fight it. Then now you have them selling this, there's going to be another variant. Now, I have to ask you because I know, for me, they've always told us what is going to happen, and a lot of times it ends up being true in some form, you know, with COVID. Dr. Fauci said there was going to be a pandemic, a global pandemic, during Trump's time. What do you make of these recent statements of Gates and Psaki?
Leslie Manookian: Well, I think that there's another way to look at some of this, which is that they're really working on trying and preserving the administrative state. The administrative state in which they're trying to expand power. It's interesting that even if you go back to the beginning of last week, they made all the comments that you said. But before that, at the end of the week prior, Fauci said that we had to be careful. We're probably going to go back into a pandemic. You know, don't take your eye off the ball. Then he flip-flopped within two days, three times, saying that we were exiting the pandemic phase, to we're still in the pandemic. And then he basically said ultimately that we shouldn't have a judge overruling a public health official and that it might set a dangerous precedent. To me, that is a big portion of what is going on right here. They're trying to kind of have this balancing act between keeping the public afraid and in support of potential measures while they try to figure out how they're going to solidify the powers that they grabbed during the crisis under the CDC. So, the CDC has been thoroughly rebuked in two different court cases now, a third with ours, for overstepping its statutory authority. But they seem to be trying to kind of make the case that we need to keep everybody upset and worried, but not too worried because they've got to realize that the public does not support the mask mandate. You know, I had a friend fly last week, and she said that she was on two planes from Virginia to Idaho, and not a single person on either of the planes was wearing a mask. So, they're in this balancing act of trying to figure out how do we preserve this power that we want for future use? That's where I think you get to what could possibly happen. Unfortunately, they seem to have the playbook, and we don't, but we're doing our best to stop it.
Emerald Robinson: Yeah. I mean, clearly, people could still wear a mask on the plane if they want to. You know, right now, it's a free country in that regard. It wasn't before, but people could still wear them. So how do you feel this push by the administration to say, "No, the pandemic is not over?" Do you feel that, given the judge you're with, it'll have a bearing on your case?
Leslie Manookian: Well, the administration, the DOJ essentially has made a couple of comments. First, they said they would appeal, provided the CDC's assessment of the situation warranted. So, they said, you know, we're going to defer to the CDC, and if CDC says it's an emergency, then we will appeal, which is kind of a peculiar thing to say. If you're in the middle of an emergency, you would think it would be so eminently clear that you wouldn't have to consider it or assess the situation. You just knew what was going on. That's one piece of it. The other piece of it is that they waited for a few days, then when they did appeal or when they did say that they were going to appeal. What happens is it's going to go to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has already struck down one of the CDC's previous intrusions into people's rights. People may remember that the state of Florida sued the CDC earlier this year, or maybe it was the end of last year. And this 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that it had asserted power that it didn't possess, under the exact same statute that we sued under. What the CDC tried to do was to require all passengers boarding cruise ships in the state of Florida departing Florida to be jabbed with the COVID jab. And the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that it was an illegal usurpation of the CDC's power and authority that they didn't have. It wasn't delegated under the Public Health Service Act of 1944, and they lost. So, that's a very bad precedent for the government going forward. Then there was another case that went to the Supreme Court, which was also against CDC under the same statute. So, we feel fairly optimistic that this panel of judges at the 11th Circuit will affirm the lower court's ruling, but if that doesn't happen, it will appeal to the Supreme Court.
Emerald Robinson: Yeah. I mean, this is one that could go all the way to the Supreme Court. But I do feel like probably where you're also seeing the balancing act with the DOJ is that currently, they're also in a legal contest over their desire to rescind Title 42 powers, right. And say that doesn't have any bearing on illegal migrants coming into the country. How has that played into your case? Because it seems like it's the DOJ contradicting itself.
Leslie Manookian: Well, exactly. I don't think it plays into our case directly, but it certainly shows confusion if I want to be generous, right. It shows some kind of confusion in the policy. Is there an emergency, or isn't there an emergency? If there's an emergency, why isn't it clear cut? That speaks to one of our other allegations is that how is it that the CDC, which has been around for decades and certainly existed all through President Trump's administration, never, ever issued a mask mandate for travel during the supposed peak of the crisis, but did so eight days after President Biden took office and issued an executive order the day his first full day in office. It strikes off political maneuvering, not public health, and that's what I think is really important for Americans to understand, that we want to trust that our public health officials aren't political creatures. I think that what they've done is they've politicized public health, and I'm hearing that more and more people don't trust public health agencies because of it. I think that is the biggest problem that the administration faces today.
Emerald Robinson: Yeah. There is some pretty good polling on that across the board, even from those pollsters who like to make it a little bit better for Democrats. Well, thank you, Leslie, for coming on and giving us these updates. We definitely want to follow your case all the way, even if it is to the Supreme Court. Thank you.
Leslie Manookian: Thank you, Emerald.
Emerald Robinson: Up next, Georgia gubernatorial candidates had another debate last night. We'll tell you how that went after the break.
Commercial: (Commercial Break)
Emerald Robinson: In Georgia last night, everything was on the table in the state GOP gubernatorial debate, from election fraud to the CCP. Even the state's current governor, Brian Kemp, got questioned about his relationship with the Chinese Communist Party by candidate Kandiss Taylor.
Brian Kemp, Governor of Georgia: So, what was your question again?
Kandiss Taylor, Candidate for Governor of Georgia: My question is, what's stopping you from severing ties for Georgia, renouncing the CCP, and putting Georgia first?
Emerald Robinson: Now, Kandiss Taylor is the underdog in this race. She isn't being endorsed by former President Donald Trump, but she still took the time yesterday to do what she could to leave an impression on Georgia voters. Let's welcome in Georgia candidate for Congress Suzi Voyles, in Georgia's 6th. Susie, election fraud which you know a thing or two about, was front and center in every Georgia primary debate this year. So, how did you feel about last night's debates?
Suzi Voyles, Candidate for Congress: Are you talking about my debate or the governor's debate?
Emerald Robinson: Well, let's start with the governors, and then let's get into your debate on the Georgia 6th.
Suzi Voyles, Candidate for Congress: I think there are an awful lot of things that have to be answered that have not been. That's what the voters are begging for. They are just begging for answers. They're begging for dialogue. This is what we saw that was wrong, and we have had utter silence from the secretary of state, the attorney general, and the governor. He says he is powerless to do things. He's my friend. I admire him. I respect him, but there have been a lot of unanswered questions. This did not start in 2020; 2020 was the Georgia Vesuvius, for lack of a better definition of it.
Emerald Robinson: Now, I watched some clips from the debate, and it doesn't seem that Kemp handled questions on election integrity or ties to the CCP possible ties to the CCP. It doesn't seem like he handled those very well. Polls can often be wrong; usually, they are. They have him very far ahead right now. Do you feel that his performance in the debate last night will hurt him?
Suzi Voyles, Candidate for Congress: Well, let's start with polls. I would agree. If you look at where Trump was polling in 2016, his win was a landslide surprise to everybody because that is not how he was polling. Polls are very subjective to how they're being done and how they're being put in. So, that being said, I think we have to rely more on how the voters are coming out, what the dialogue is everywhere and where the direction is going. Right now, that's kind of honestly a toss-up. If you look at the amount of money that Kemp has spent, and then you look at arrays, I guess you could say and has the ability to spend over the amount of money that David Perdue has raised and is going to be spending. What that is doing is causing quite a stir in the fact that David's money is going on an awful lot further.
Emerald Robinson: Gotcha. Now, let's talk about your particular debate in your district. Election fraud was still a big issue even when you're getting down to the district level, right. That was sort of one of the main topics last night.
Suzi Voyles, Candidate for Congress: Oh, yes, absolutely. I think one of the issues that people are not understanding is this has to do with our ability to voice our vote. This isn't new to George. As I said, I've been through five secretaries of state as a poll manager. I have seen this over and over again with a chain of custody, sloppiness, and absentee ballots. I've gone to every secretary of state trying to get things done in a decent and orderly manner and a forthright and honest manner. This isn't a Republican or Democrat issue. This is an American issue. So, what we saw particularly, let's come down to the microcosm of Fulton County. What I saw was an absolute fraud. I saw an awful lot of things that did not appear to be above board. But on the other hand, I saw things I absolutely knew without a shadow of a doubt were fraudulent. In case you don't remember, I had 110 ballots out of one batch. There should only be 100, and 107 of them were for Biden. Of those, it was originally the feel of the paper, the no folds, and the Biden vote that made me examine these a little bit closer. That's all we were supposed to look at was the presidential vote; 107 were for Biden, two were for Trump, and one was for Jorgensen. These looked like they had been done on a machine with toner. They were absentee-style ballots, but the slam dunk was the fact that every vote from the president all the way down to the poor guy at the very end of our Fulton County ballot is Soil and Conservation. Then we had some referendums on there. Every single office, every single referendum had been voted, and not only had they been voted, which is unusual in the first place, but they had been voted identically. We had a long column to replace Johnny Isakson, and that's not an improbability. That's a statistical impossibility. So, yes, it's at the forefront of the voter's mind.
Emerald Robinson: So real quick, we have about 30 seconds. You're in this race. This time you're on the ballot. You've seen all this over the years. You have direct experience with it. Do you feel that there are any improvements ahead of these 2022 midterms? Or are you still concerned about election fraud headed into November?
Suzi Voyles, Candidate for Congress: I am very concerned, and the reason I'm concerned is what we have got to do is we have to shrink the size of Washington. That can't be done if we still have the same old, same old voting irregularities, whether they're on the state level or whether they're on the federal level. Voting is a local issue, but I'm very concerned that these things have not been eradicated and corrected.
Emerald Robinson: Yeah. Well, Suzi, thanks for being with us today. We'd like to catch up with you a little bit later in the campaign cycle or very soon to continue talking through some of these issues in Georgia and what Georgia leadership is doing because I feel there's something every day to talk about with Georgia. So thanks, Suzi.
Suzi Voyles, Candidate for Congress: Thank you so much for having me.
Emerald Robinson: Children aren't only being groomed in our public schools. The media is also looking to ease the idea of becoming a child drag queen into the minds of kids. Take a look at this new series from Discovery Plus.
Video Clip: Welcome to the Pink Palace, my lovely friends. - I first discovered drag at 13. I didn't know what it was, but I knew I wanted it. Put on the wig and the makeup, and I'm someone completely different. I'm so drag. - My drag name is Vanessa Shimmer, and she is just a force you could not reckon with. - How do I parent a child that wants to do drag? - I never expected drag to be a part of our lives. - Oh, my God. These are so cute. - These are problems I never thought I had to prepare for.
Emerald Robinson: Wow. Well, this new series doesn't only take aim at promoting children being drag queens, but it also promotes the idea that children should decide what gender they want to be. Let's welcome Mama Grizzly founder Stacey Langton. Stacey, good to see you. Unfortunate circumstances.
Stacy Langton: As usual. I mean, honestly, that preview, watching that, it just - it really makes me angry. I have a visceral reaction to watching that. And I think there's something that we should probably delve into a little bit, which I started thinking about after I saw that trailer last night. Let's talk about what drag actually is, right. Let's talk about the history of drag a little bit. What drag is the impersonation by male homosexuals of a female, right. But it's not just any female. What females, in particular, are drag queens emulating? It's prostitutes. That's the origin of drag. So, if you ever have been to Los Angeles down on Sunset Boulevard late at night and seen how prostitutes dress or in any bad part of town in any sizable city. You're going to see these very high-heeled platform shoes, leather lace-up boots, very exaggerated makeup, and short shorts, hot pants, that sort of thing.
Stacy Langton: Kind of like Julia Robert's character in Pretty Woman, right. What was she playing? She was playing a prostitute, and that's what drag is. It started off in the early 1900s, and it was actually banned in many cities because of its connection to what the left likes to politically correctly call sex work. So, that's what we're doing here. We are normalizing prostitution, the emulation of prostitution for children, and particularly for boys because that was the majority of what was shown in this trailer. Little boys are pretending to dress up like streetwalkers. This is absolutely just demonic.
Emerald Robinson: Well, you know, you mentioned Sunset Boulevard, but if you go one major street south on the Santa Monica Boulevard, it is actually drag queen prostitutes on that street. A few famous men have gotten caught on that street in the past, not to mention any names.
Stacy Langton: You mean Eddie Murphy? Hugh Grant. Oops. (laughing) The most famous...
Emerald Robinson: Yeah. That's just the thing, as you said. They're pushing this younger and younger. Remember, there was the kid over the last couple of years, and I can't remember what they call him. And his parents are pushing him into this drag queen lifestyle. The media celebrated it. He was on Good Morning America, where Michael Strahan applauded him for being so brave. I mean, he's a prepubescent kid. They're taking him to, you know, gay clubs to perform. What I seem to notice and to get your take on it, Stacey, is the more moms like yourself push against them. Clearly, there has been a success in the schools. Particularly in Florida with the new bill that wouldn't allow them to teach gender theory between kindergarten and third grade. Though I still think it should go beyond that age group as well. All elementary school kids should not be taught gender theory in general, but it seems like they're pushing back really hard in the media with the campaign to normalize it, given this push across the country from moms like you. Do you agree?
Stacy Langton: Well, I think parents are going to have to fight back really hard. You know, it isn't even really a recent phenomenon. If you think about it, this goes back all the way to 1992. Who is the first person who kind of normalized drag and made it seem sort of cutesy, campy, funny, and harmless? That was RuPaul. And he had that famous song that kind of caught fire at the moment in the zeitgeist of the early nineties, and it was called Supermodel. But what was the chorus that said, "You better work?" Right. He's not talking about walking the runway. He's talking about work in the sense of prostitution on the streets. You have to sell your body. So, this is what we're up against. As parents, we are normalizing pedophilia, the confusion of gender, the idea that maybe a boy isn't a boy or doesn't feel like a boy, and prostitution itself.
Stacy Langton: How do you do all of those things? You make it cute, you make it campy, and you make it seem like it's funny, fun, or cool, and it's absolutely catastrophic to our children. So, parents are just going to have to absolutely put a stop to this at every turn. You know, I'm starting to think after seeing the push right now. I may have to start organizing some protests against these drag queen-promoted events because we have them going on right here in Fairfax County, too, at several of the Fairfax County public libraries. The one in McLean had Drag Queen Story last summer several times, and people are showing up to protests. We're not going to tolerate this garbage being foisted upon our children.
Emerald Robinson: Well, look, you all have been pretty influential, and there was a New York Times story out in the last 24 hours defending the book Genderqueer, which is one of those you highlighted in the school board meeting because it has become what they say is the most banned book in America. That's due to parents like you. So thank you, Stacy, for being here.
Stacy Langton: Thanks for having me, Emerald.
Emerald Robinson: Up next, the White House Correspondents Association that I used to be a member of had their dinner over the weekend. And even President Joe Biden cracked jokes on Fox News being a sellout. We'll show you next.
Commercial: (Commercial Break)
Emerald Robinson: The White House Correspondents Association Dinner, which took place this weekend, is an abomination thrown by the most unpopular people in America, the corporate media. To celebrate themselves and their profession, but the event really shows why the corporate media is so mistrusted, and they deserve it. Their stupidity, narcissism, and hatred for ordinary Americans were all on display this weekend. Who invites Kim Kardashian to an event celebrating journalism? Well, these people do, and they can't wait to take a picture with her. They scramble around her. Who celebrates the career of a radio jockey and anti-Trump lunatic April Ryan? While these people do, just watch them laugh at inflation.
White House Correspondents Dinner: You know, I think ever since you've come into the office, things are really looking up. You know gas is up, rent is up, food is up, everything. It really has been a tough first year for you, Mr. President. (Laughing)
Emerald Robinson: It's so funny that you can't pay for food and gas anymore, peasant. Right. I can just hear all my former friends and neighbors laughing that they're going broke. The WHCA dinner has always been a joke, but this year the annual dinner felt more like a televised hate crime directed at working-class people. Biden got up on the stage to do what he does the best shill for the big pharma COVID vaccines. That's right. The world is falling apart, and this dementia patient wants to sell you on a booster shot.
White House Correspondents Dinner: Plus, everyone had to prove they were fully vaccinated and boosted. So, if you're at home watching this and you're wondering how to do that, just contact your favorite Fox News reporter. They're all here, vaccinated, and boosted. All of them. (Cheers)
Emerald Robinson: And they were. Not only were the Fox News people fully vaccinated and boosted, but they also added Bruce Jenner in drag to their table because he's the new trainee contributor over there at Fox. Remember when Fox tried to push him as the next governor of California last year? You know, because they're so conservative, and that's The Absolute Truth.