The Vast Graveyard of Ivermectin Lies with Dr. Pierre Kory and John O'Shea

Hey everybody, the impeachment of Ken Paxton is underway in Texas.

And Dr. Pierre Corey on the War on Ivermectin, very important conversation. Email us as always, freedom at charliekirk.com. Get involved with Turning Point USA today at tpusa.com. That is tpusa.com.

Start a high school or college chapter today at tpusa.com. Buckle up everybody, here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House folks. I want to thank Charlie, he's an incredible guy. His spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.

We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Brought to you by the loan experts I trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandtodd.com This is not a defense of everything Ken Paxton has done. I'm not going to do that. I find some of it to be morally objectionable. But I've known Ken for a while, and I've been told by him and others that these are private matters that are being dealt with. But I don't look at it as a reason why he should be removed from the Attorney's General Office. Nor do I look at it as a way that a reason that we should make this an impeachment proceeding. It's ridiculous.

Now this looks to be intentional as a way to try to make an example. You are too bold as an Attorney General. We're going to clobber you. Remember we talked about in our op-ed, it's time to indict the left. Well, how can you indict the left if the good guys, the good law enforcement officers are impeached? And other attorneys generals are watching and they're taking notice.

This is a massive, chilling problem. This is a project to chill the speech and the activity of bold attorneys general. We must stand against the impeachment of Ken Paxton. We must not support the impeachment of Ken Paxton. We must rally behind the principle that Ken Paxton has done a lot of good for the people of Texas. And joining us now is John O'Shea, congressional candidate in Texas' 12th congressional district. He's also a Fort Worth area businessman. And he has all the information that our audience is really interested in regarding the impeachment of Ken Paxton. John, thank you for joining us.

Thank you for having me. We have a 19 to 12 advantage as well, although Angela Paxton, Ken's wife, is not allowed to vote. But it still needs a 21 vote level in order to impeach Ken Paxton. And unfortunately, there are a number of Republican senators who I just don't think we know until the final vote comes.

So it's going to be very tuck and go. So any Republican that votes for this needs to be removed from office in Texas. And I'm not I'm not making an excuse for Ken's alleged behavior.

I'm not that interested in that, to be perfectly honest. He's a effective attorney general. He's fulfilled the mandate from his voters. So, John, make sure our audience understands this is being primarily driven by Republicans. What the heck is going on in the state of Texas while the southern border remains wide open and we are being invaded on a daily basis? We're worried about Ken Paxton's alleged mistresses.

What the heck? Well, it's even more egregious than that because so the Texas House is largely viewed as a squish institution. They allow Democratic committee chairs, even though the Texas population of the voters gave the House a large Republican majority.

And they put these people in positions of power. We were unable to get key legislative issues that were platforms for the state Republican Party through the House because they were just held up. But they used this 88th congressional session to actually on the last day hold a four hour public hearing, which for a lot of people was the very first time that they even understood that there was an investigative committee that was going on. And on top of that, which makes it even more egregious, because like you said, it was led by Dave Phelan, who is the House Speaker, as Lieutenant Governor Patrick called him, California Dade, who clearly is not a conservative and clearly doesn't hold to the Republican values of the electorate base here in Texas. But you had a impeachment trial that didn't even follow Texas code. I've been watching the Senate hearing this morning, and in fact, they just got finished reading the charges against Ken. And what to me I think was just kind of most just egregious was that they kept reading Texas code in which supposedly Ken's behavior violated. Well, the whole impeachment hearing violated Texas code. We have what's known as the prior election doctrine, Texas Code 605, which says that a elected official cannot be impeached for events that were known to the public prior to an election.

Well, Ken alleged his situation was very public through both the primary and then the general election with tens of millions of dollars being spent on media against him, and he still garnered 4.3 million votes and won by a landslide. And then on top of that, there's another Texas code which governs legislative witnesses needing to be under oath. Well, the way that this whole sham impeachment was handled by this investigative committee, you had two former DOJ officials holding secret investigations, talking to witnesses who are not under oath, then going and reporting to the committee, not under oath. And then the committee went and reported to the House, not under oath. So it's hearsay upon hearsay upon hearsay.

So it's just it's a sham. It is a political witch hunt, regardless of whether or not Ken did do some of the things that he has alleged. I, like you and frankly, the grassroots and all the other precinct chairs that I speak to are just outraged at this.

This was a shooting ourselves in the foot and very intentionally so. So what is the call to action here? I'm told that these are the senators, Birdwell, Flores, Hancock, Huffman, Hughes, King, Middleton, Nichols, Sparks and Springer in Texas. We need a grassroots push to contact these senators and say no or what is the technical vote? Whatever the vote is. Right. The essence is no to impeach Attorney General Ken Paxton. John. Yeah.

No. And in fact, to your point, it's it's interesting because they just laid out the rules for the public. Lieutenant Governor Patrick did. And actually, each charge is going to have a whether or not the senator thinks that and was in fact guilty of that charge. But then it's a two part question, because then the second part of that question is whether or not that is in and of itself sufficient to remove Ken from office.

So I like you. I mean, I've been friends with Ken for 20 years. We're all flawed human beings. And if Ken is guilty of some of these allegations, you know, then that's disappointing.

But it's also not unheard of. But that in and of itself is not sufficient to remove him from office. So we've actually already been working on censoring the House representatives who voted for Ken's impeachment. All the Republicans, all 60 of them. In fact, I personally know three people who are primary individuals who are in the state legislature in the area. And we're seeking to solicit a couple more to go because the people are fed up.

They are so angry. We have a gentleman in the White House who supposedly won with 81 million votes who clearly sold out his country. And we're not doing anything about that. But because Ken supposedly got granite countertops and maybe had a mistress who was hired by a campaign donor. We're going to take him off the board when when the state of Texas, to your point, is suffering not only worse problems, but needs him at the wall.

No. And let's let's be honest. Ken Paxton, the knives have been out for Ken because he has been one of the most forceful in a good way. AGs in the country and they want to make an example. It's a show trial. This is not about a defense of Ken Paxton's personal life. This is that he was bold enough to enforce the law in a way that most Republican AGs won't.

And they want to make an example. The reason we're hearing about any of this is because he's effective. And before I get lectured by anybody else, if I choose, if I picked the 50 AGs across the country, unfortunately, I bet one out of five are actively having affairs. It's what happens in politics. I don't like it.

But this is not a reason I'll pander to the Democrats and pander to the Uniparty to remove AG Paxton, who's done a wonderful job. John, thank you so much. I appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you, Troy. For 10 years, Patriot Mobile has been America's only Christian conservative wireless provider. When I say only, trust me, they're the only one. Glenn and the team have been great supporters of mine and Turning Point USA, which is why I'm proud to partner with them. Patriot Mobile offers dependable nationwide coverage, giving you the ability to access all three major networks, which means you get the same coverage you've been accustomed to without funding the left. When you switch to Patriot Mobile, you're sending the message that you support free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life, Second Amendment and our military veterans and first responder heroes. Their 100 percent U.S.-based customer service team makes switching easy. Keep your number, keep your phone or upgrade.

Their team will help you find the best plan for your needs. Just go to patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 878-PATRIOT. Free activation when you say offer code Charlie. Join me today and make the switch today to this excellent company. Go to patriotmobile.com slash Charlie.

That is patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 878-PATRIOT. I want to tell you how you could support the Michigan electors. There is a telethon that is going on right now.

Gateway Pundit is streaming it amongst many others. And it's called Save the Electors Telethon. And you guys can contribute to the Michigan electors. So for those of you that are not, you know, tracking this, we've covered it a fair amount. But it's amazing when I go to the grassroots, not everybody's aware of this.

The Michigan Attorney General has indicted rank and file senior citizens in Michigan for signing a piece of paper that is within their constitutional authority, obviously free speech, to become an alternate elector. The phone number is 888-403-8550. I'm trying to find if there's a website. Yeah, it's givesendgo.com slash Michiganelectors.

I personally have donated to Rose Rook, who is from Pawpaw, Michigan, 81 years old. Remember, the cruelty is the point. Again, the phone number is 888-403-8550. We have to, as a rule, rally behind the rank and file of our movement when they come under attack.

It's 888-403-8550 or givesendgo.com slash Michiganelectors. They win when we betray our own. These people did nothing wrong. This is not even a hard call, everybody.

It's not like these people all have DUIs and we have to defend something morally questionable. They signed a piece of paper. They signed a piece of paper and they want to put an 81-year-old, Rose Rook. Can we get a picture of Rose Rook in prison for the rest of her life? You can burn down a Wendy's, loot, rob, burn, steal.

Half of all murders in Chicago go solved, so half of murderers walk free in Chicago. But the focus of Democrat AGs in this top-down color cultural revolution is Rose Rook and many others. You can put Rose's picture up.

We helped promote her. That's what the regime thinks is a domestic terrorist. That. Dangerous. Insurrectionist.

They want to put her in jail for the rest of her life. So check it out. It's GiveSendGo.com slash Michiganelectors. Okay, I want to go to the story here that I hope is not true. And I've done some independent research here, but it's very troubling based on what I'm seeing. So when I first got my start at Turning Point USA, I spoke at a lot of National Federation of Republican Women events. NFRW. They're great, so I want to make sure I preface it. They are grassroots.

They're active. But there's a controversy that has come up here with the NFRW. According to WND.com, and I verified this through a couple other sources, the National Federation of Republican Women refuse to pass a resolution saying that biological men who think they are women are not allowed to come into the NFRW. Eileen Sobjek, who is the head of the organization, I'm sorry, the NFRW's national president, Eileen Sobjek, on advice from the organization's attorney, fears a lawsuit saying that if we make this, addressing this issue would end us, saying that biological men are not allowed in the organization.

I will not let this issue be our demise. Sobjek continued, Laura Carlson, who is the woman leading the effort to get the NFRW to align with a very popular GOP and women's cause, how about this, defending real women's spaces from being infiltrated by trans fake women, says she and her allies would be willing to raise the money necessary, obviously, for the challenges. But Eileen Sobjek is saying that this would be too costly from attorneys for us to pass a resolution for the National Federation of Republican Women to say what a woman is. The National Republican Women's Organization is afraid of lawsuits. This is a huge disappointment.

I hope that there's more to this story. If any of you are part of the NFRW or any of the state chapters who do a great job, objectively a great job, they have their biennial conference coming up in Oklahoma City later this month. They have a bylaws proposal that is being pushed back against. They say, no, it's too controversial. We don't want the lawsuits. If the NFRW, the National Federation of Republican Women, can't define what a woman is, we've got serious problems. I hope that you guys act on this.

If you know anybody in the leadership of NFRW or are aware of it, I would hope that the premier women's organization and the Republican side can define what a woman is. Do you know that the average American spends about 20 years in retirement? That's a long time to live without a steady income. And we want to make sure you enjoy every moment of it and don't outlive your money. Retirement is about more than just investments.

It's about living your best life. Let's not retire. Let's pivot. My friends at PAX Financial, who I use for my wealth management future, develop a course for the sole purpose of helping you pivot.

If you want your own free guide to pivoting into the new chapter of life with purpose, visit paxfg.com slash charlie. Joining us now is one of my favorite guests, a courageous truth teller, Dr. Pierre Corry, author of the book The War on Ivermectin, the medicine that saved millions and could have ended the pandemic. Dr. Corry, welcome back. I want to discuss this Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, ruled in favor of three doctors allowing to move forward with their lawsuit, saying the FDA abused its authority with the anti-ivermectin messaging to Americans, saying that the FDA is not a physician.

Dr. Corry, explain this to us. Yeah, so, you know, let's go back to the original court case, right? So, when we, when Paul and Mary Talley Bowden and Robert Apter, you know, brought their lawsuit against the FDA for essentially infringing and interfering with the physician's ability to practice medicine, you know, the FDA argued that they had sovereign immunity and they could not be sued. And that lower court judge actually, you know, dismissed the case based on that argument, which is absolutely absurd. And then it went to a higher court and what happened here is the higher court said, no, no, no, this is absolutely a case of the FDA overstepping its authority. They're interfering with the practice of medicine. And, you know, in my words, I'm going to say this is really an example of the integrity of our government in how they practice public health. I mean, they're literally influencing the behavior of citizens, physicians, hospitals, with pithy little tweets.

You know, on Twitter, this is absurd. This is our federal government and its agencies. You know, and so this is a really, I think this sends a loud message. This is like, I'll use a baseball analogy, Charlie. Like, this is a brushback pitch, right? So, we're under federal regulatory.

Yeah, it's a little chin music, as we would call it in baseball, right? Yes, well said. And, you know, yeah, it's a brushback pitch because, listen, we know the agencies are working in the service of the pharmaceutical industry and we know that's why they were attacking our government and they did it in this way. It was highly effective because, Charlie, let's recognize what happened in the wake of that tweet, right? So, suddenly it just snowballed and you had hospitals removing it from their formularies, pharmacists around the country stopping to fill.

You know, many patients didn't know that they could seek it out or that it was effective. And so, it was immensely damaging and, you know, now they're getting called to task. And so, I think, you know, this is a huge case. This decision is massive.

In my opinion, Charlie, this is the win because this is the message that sends them that they can't do this again, otherwise this is going to happen. And, by the way, I don't know if you saw or saw some of the transcripts of the hearing. The FDA lawyer looked like a fool. I mean, those arguments were just, couldn't stand up. And the absurdity came out and I think that's what's important.

And I want to just read this tweet. This is your federal government, everybody. This is as if a 19-year-old that is the head of some sorority Twitter account, who's kind of like snark queen, ends up getting the FDA's Twitter account. Quote, you are not a horse.

You are not a cow. Seriously, y'all, stop it. Why you should not use ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19. So, the federal government comes in and is setting out these sarcastic, pithy tweets mocking doctors' decisions.

And the engagement was 108,000 people liked it, 47,000 people reposted it or retweeted it. And so, Dr. Corey, this is an important issue, which I have been told by a lot of people. Charlie, what happens between a doctor and a patient is private between a doctor and a patient, that you have HIPAA, that you should never challenge that. And regardless of the audience's opinions on abortion, that is the argument they always make on the abortion thing. It's just a fact, right?

This is a medical procedure. Don't get in the way of it. Okay, fine.

Let's put that aside. However, when it came to the administration of a drug where you do not know the whole patient's history, off-label use, it was this blunt, forced instrument from the government to tell every doctor, you can't use this. Regardless of the fact that ivermectin won a Nobel Prize, they kept early treatments out of our hands.

And so, Dr. Corey, just riff on this. This was one of the great, not just censorship, is it unfair to say that the FDA has blood on its hands? How many lives were lost because of this? I mean, in this country, hundreds of thousands to millions. Across the globe, it's massive. Because, you know, Charlie, I mean, the US federal health agencies have a larger reach than the US. I mean, so their behaviors ripple across the globe. I mean, they set examples. A lot of agencies fall in lockstep around the world, like Europeans and whatnot.

But, you know, I like your point. I mean, we're talking about the government entering the exam room, which is private between a doctor and a patient, right? They are literally violating the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by trying to practice medicine. They're interfering with the practice, and they have no statutory authority to do that.

And, you know, this is so important going forward, right? Again, we need to stop this interference and, again, support the doctors in their autonomy. And I like your point. I mean, this is an FDA-approved drug. You know, even in their defense of this decision, so the FDA put out statements, you know, saying, you know, okay, you know, it's okay to prescribe, but we still haven't approved it. You know, that is such a misleading statement. We do not need the FDA to approve this drug.

It's already FDA-approved, and it's off-label use. And you're absolutely correct about that. And, again, I think this is really important that people pay attention to what's going on.

And, you know, one other point, Charlie, is let's put this in a little historical context. Before COVID, you know what regulated or kind of restricted my behavior? It was essentially fear of malpractice. It was on me. It was my responsibility. Let's say I was going to use a drug that was ineffective and had some dangers, yet I still thought it would work. And I did that, and it harmed the patient. That's my responsibility, and I'm going to be held accountable for that. But it's a very personal individual.

I don't need the government interfering, you know, telling me what to do and whatnot. What do they know about medicine? Have they ever seen a COVID patient?

Have they ever treated a used ivermectin? I mean, it's absolutely, you know, unconscionable, really, what's going on here. Yeah, it's this massive contradiction. At one point, they're telling us when it comes to, you know, transgender reassignment surgeries and abortion, again, that privacy and the sacrosanct decisions of doctors cannot be questioned.

And yet when it comes to the treatment of somebody who has something where they might die, the FDA has a one-size-fits-all policy. And so, Dr. Corey, you and I have, you know, played around with this topic before, but I want to really lean into it. Regulatory capture. This is something that some people refuse to acknowledge or believe.

I think it's starting to get out. You said something. You said that these agencies are nothing more than taxpayer-funded extensions of Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson. Please elaborate on that. So what I've said now for two, maybe three years, is every time you look at any policy on any aspect of COVID, and you see that being omitted from whether it's the FDA statement, CDC policies, NIH, ask yourself one simple question. What would a pharmaceutical company want this policy to look like? Then read the policy. Ask yourself, who is best served by this policy? You know, all of these mandates that are illegitimate, this recent FOIA request, where literally the vaccine committees at the FDA knew that there was very little efficacy of the mandates in September 2021, yet they mandated across the country, corporations, universities, schools. And it's so brazen, but that regulatory capture is so clear. I mean, if people think that our agencies are working in the service of our betterment of our health, they are not, right? So what is the primary responsibility of a pharmaceutical corporation? It's to their shareholder. It's about making money.

Health is absolutely secondary. The history of that industry is such. And if you look at the destruction wrought in COVID, it's literally these agencies working in the service of industry, running rampant over our lives, our health, our liberties. And I've never could never have imagined three years ago that it would be this extreme, where literally every day of our lives, every facet of our lives is now being interfered with and really deteriorating because of the overreach of the government. Well, and this is this is for some people, a red pill moment or just an eye opening moment, because Dr. Corey, the way that I was taught growing up is that there was an adversarial relationship between the bureaucracies and companies that Pfizer is fighting the FDA and the FDA is fighting Pfizer.

And they're constantly going after you can't do this, you have to do that and you have to make it. And they're constantly suing one another. What COVID revealed is that they're in a jacuzzi together.

Dr. Corey. Yeah, you know, and I'm going to speak personally here, Charlie. I mean, I grew up in New York City, liberal, voted Democrat my whole life. And, you know, going into COVID, what we just talked about, learning that what I thought was our government is not our government. They're literally working on the behest of corporations. And you're right, the government's role, I used to always be kind of pro-government because I thought they were like the referee leveling the playing field. They were there to protect us again from the rapaciousness of corporations. Now, when you see that the ref is literally being paid off by the other side, and all the calls they're making are going like, how can you win?

You're not only going to lose, but you're going to lose hugely. And that is what happened in COVID. We lost so much, trillions of dollars on our health, you know, excess mortality is exploding. Birth rates are dropping.

I mean, I can't imagine a more outsized loss than what's happened once the ref starts calling all the shots for the other side. It's very important, the war on ivermectin by Dr. Pierre Corry. And this is a topic I want to explain. And Dr. Corry, you're so disciplined, and I don't mean to politicize this, but I think it's a fact when we go through this part. By the way, both Republicans and Democrats screwed up COVID. But here's a fact, okay, is that if we would have had early treatments, the cascade of other tyrannical things would have been stopped.

School closures, mass mail-in voting, even potentially riots because of the pent-up, you know, just energy that people had. And so if you look at the cause, set, and motion, this is why they had to choke point ivermectin. This is why they had to choke point the idea of early treatments, that if there were early treatments, then you wouldn't have to have the vaccine. If there were early treatments, then you wouldn't have to have mask mandates. So it's not just, yes, the lives are obviously the most important takeaway. But look at all the other second, third, fourth, fifth sequence tragedies that occurred because we were not able to administer ivermectin.

The war on ivermectin, the medicine that helped millions and could have ended the pandemic, and you could go even as far as to say that you could get a one-world government order all the way through if you don't have early treatments. Think about that. and a 10-year warranty. Mike's latest incredible deal is the sale of the year. For a limited time, you'll receive 50% off the Gee's at DreamSheets, marking prices down as low as $29.98 depending on the size. Go to MyPillow.com, promo code Kirk. That is MyPillow.com, promo code Kirk, including the MyPillow 2.0 mattress topper, MyPillow kitchen towel sets, and so much more.

Call 800-875-0425, or go to MyPillow.com, use promo code Kirk, MyPillow.com, promo code Kirk. So Dr. Corey, I know that we have reached a new level, where here I am at Grand Teton National Park and people are wearing masks on the hiking trail. Not just one, but I'm talking about not a lot.

I mean, I'd say 10%. They're wearing N95s. And I go to the grocery store locally, more and more masks, and so Dr. Corey, it looks like they're heating up again.

They're doing the slow wind-up, right? They got the criminal Fauci out there. You know, he's starting to say that, oh, you know, we might need more.

You got all these sorts. The whisper campaign is now getting to the shouting match. In fact, I think we have, I think we have a Fauci clip here that the team, oh yeah, let's just go to cut one here and then we'll let you react.

Go to cut one. The most rigorous and comprehensive analysis of scientific studies conducted on the efficacy of masks for reducing the spread of respiratory illness, including COVID-19, was published last month. Its conclusions, said Tom Jefferson, the Oxford epidemiologist, who is the lead author, were unambiguous. There is just no evidence that they, masks, make any difference.

How do we get beyond that finding of that particular review? Yeah, but there are other studies, Michael, that show at an individual level for individual. When you're talking about the effect on the epidemic or the pandemic as a whole, the data are less strong.

Okay, Dr. Corey, you're going to have to explain the new speak because I'm not as cultured to understand what the heck he's talking about. Yeah, what he says, unfortunately, doesn't make scientific sense. I mean, when you look at all the collections of studies, they did study individual protection and there's no sustained or significant signal to show that it'll have individual protection. I mean, for sure we know from epidemiology that mask mandates, public mask mandates don't work, but those, you know, a lot of those studies were in focus groups and they followed individual patients and there's nothing conclusive to show that it helps. And, you know, that example you just gave me, Charlie, of people wearing masks and grantee Tom Park, the way I interpret that is it's just the results of the fearsome power of propaganda and repetition, right? It's that combination of inject fear, this variant's going to get you, masks worked, and then it sets you up for the savior, which is the vaccine, and just keep repeating it, wear your mask, wear your mask, wear your mask. And so many of our population are going to fall into those repeated suggestions combined with the fear of getting sick and they're always fear mongering.

And I just feel bad. I'm glad people are out there talking sense, getting people to think critically and not fall for this relentless propaganda. And by the way, when I see this uptake, Charlie, it's literally, I'm sorry to be blunt here, this is an advertising campaign to sell more vaccines. Vaccine uptake has plummeted. How are you going to pick up vaccine uptake?

You're going to do the same thing you did two years ago. Fear, propaganda, censorship, period. I just want everyone to just kind of take a second and understand what Dr. Corey is saying there. You have people that see declining profits and then they meet in a room and say, let's make people afraid. That's what Dr. Corey is saying. We're not making as much money as we want to make, so let's go manipulate the masses so they run around like sheep and they're in a state of fear.

That is a very, very deep point. I want to ask really quick, the current risk assessment, is it fair to say the CDC is saying that the B.A. 2.86 or whatever may be more capable of causing infection of people who have had the vaccine?

What's going on here? Yeah, I mean, that statement, they're basically just, you know, I think it's a tacit admission that they're saying the vaccine, those vaccinated, it's not going to protect you from this new variant. They're also saying that about natural immunity.

So basically they're saying this variant is more likely to evade either natural or vaccine immunity, which another way of saying that that's also a little bit of setup is go get your new vaccine. Now, the evidence that some new vaccine is going to protect, the one they're rolling out now is already a dollar late and a few steps short. I mean, this absurdity of a global vaccination campaign for a highly mutagenic coronavirus, I mean, it was illogical before this started. And we've had nothing but three years of evidence to show vaccinating against a mutagenic coronavirus does not work. And yet they keep doing it to that point that you and I just made. It sells an awful lot of vaccines. I mean, you know, this whole construct of the fear, you know, the onerous and oppressive government essentially forcing us to do this, do that, get your vaccine. I mean, it's led to immense transfers of wealth. I mean, let's be clear about this.

I mean, there are people who have benefited from this whole construct and it's not the common man. Well, and this is right. It's the oligarch. And so here we are.

I was in Jackson and I was talking to the local restaurant doers. They said, Charlie, the billionaires are replacing the millionaires. COVID has been a boom industry for the oligarchs.

The oligarchs are more powerful, they are more determined, and they have more control over society than after COVID. Makes you think, Dr. Corey, we're out of time. Warren Ivermectin, check out the book. We're getting lots of emails, by the way, Dr. Corey. People love the book. It's very powerful, especially as they're trying this again.

Read the book, The Warren Ivermectin. Dr. Corey, come back soon. Thank you. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us your thoughts, as always, freedom at charliekirk.com. Thank you so much for listening, and God bless.