All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
May 31, 2023 - The Charlie Kirk Show
35:27
The War on Ivermectin with Dr. Pierre Kory and Gregg Jarrett
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
The War on Ivermectin 00:15:06
Hey everybody, today on the Charlie Kirk show, we have Dr. Pierre Corey to talk about the war on ivermectin and Greg Jarrett.
Greg Jarrett has a new book out about the Scopes Monkey Trial.
He has some opinions that I disagree with.
I did not push back just for the sake of time.
We were doing this live.
I just want to make it clear I do not share his views on the Bible when they are mentioned.
I didn't respond.
I didn't want to ruin the flow of conversation.
He was giving a pitch.
I have a lot of respect for him.
He's super smart on the FBI.
But I just want to make sure that you understand my silence is not agreement with his analysis of the scriptures or on evolution.
Email us freedom at charliekirk.com and subscribe to the Charlie Kirk Show podcast.
Get involved with Turning PointUSA at tpusa.com.
Start a high school or college chapter and attend our Young Women's Leadership Summit.
We have Candace Owens coming, Alex Clark, Carrie Lake, Allie B. Stuckey, and more.
Get your tickets today at tpusa.com slash YWLS.
That is tpusa.com slash YWLS.
They are a lot happening, so check it out, tpusa.com slash YWLS.
Buckle up, everybody.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses.
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.
Dr. Pierre Corey, a man I have great respect for, joins us now.
Dr. Corey, welcome to the program.
Your new book, The War on Ivermectin, the Medicine That Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic.
Dr. Corey, I want to talk about your book and then also broaden some of the implications on it.
So let's talk right there, though.
Tell us about your book and welcome to the show, Dr. Corey.
Yeah, thanks, Charlie.
Good to see you again.
Yeah, the book is done and it's coming out.
I'm pretty excited about it.
You know, Charlie, that book was really the result of a commitment I made early on in what I have to call this COVID war.
You know, once I became one of the clinical experts on the use of ivermectin worldwide and started to advocate for it and became quite well known for it, you know, I discovered that we, you know, myself, my colleagues, and our nonprofit, you know, flcc.net, that we had launched ourselves into a decades-long war on generic off-patent repurposed drugs.
And, you know, that book is a little bit of my biography, not only my career, but also my COVID biography, because I've been involved in a lot of things in COVID.
But it really is almost like a case study of how industry, and in particular the pharmaceutical industry, how they counter science that's inconvenient to their interests.
And there's never been a more inconvenient science than all of the data supporting ivermectin and the use of COVID.
And they pulled every single trick in the book.
And Charlie, you know, a year and a half, two years ago, I made him a commitment that I was going to document everything.
I was going to document everything they were doing because, you know, at the core of what I do in my career is I've been an educator, a physician, an educator, and I want to teach people how they do what they do, how they get you to believe that a medicine that could save your life is, you know, an uncredible horse dewormer.
And I mean, you know the story, Charlie.
You've watched it.
You've had me on before.
And, you know, I think I did a really good, readable job of documenting all of those tactics that they pulled and what they accomplished and how many millions have died as a result of that case.
So, yeah, let's, I mean, you come from a very accomplished background, very well respected, and you never planned to get into this space.
But when you see something that can help people, you know, you want to go in that way.
So tell us the short story.
How did you get into this?
And all of a sudden, you saw all the lockdowns and you saw people's lives suffering over the threat of this virus.
And here you are, you say, hey, there's this drug that is showing incredible efficacy.
Tell us about that.
Yeah.
So, you know, Charlie, my background is I'm a pulmonary and critical care physician, right?
So I'm an expert at lung diseases and really critical illness.
You know, in the ICU, I take care of patients that are gravely ill and I teach that specialty.
And, you know, when this pandemic hit, you know, it was kind of strange.
I remember thinking to myself, you know, here is a pulmonary and critical care disease, a novel one that's impacting the world.
And then I looked at myself.
I mean, I was a guy at the peak of my career.
I was 50 years old.
I was very well known in my specialty.
And myself and a few colleagues got together and we said, let's figure out how to treat this thing.
And we started diving deep, looking into mechanisms, data, and we started building protocols.
And really, it was when we touched on ivermectin, once we identified that signal, and, you know, and I gave that testimony in the Senate that kind of went viral and it kind of put the name, you know, the word ivermectin in everyone's vocabulary.
Things changed.
They changed quickly.
But, you know, in the beginning, Charlie, we just wanted to figure out how to treat this disease, not only for everyone, but for myself as well.
I was on the front lines.
I was as scared as anyone else in the beginning when you saw the ICUs filling and everyone dying.
And so, you know, we put a lot of work throughout the pandemic in trying to really give good guidance and sound medical evidence without any conflicts of interest.
That's super important, right?
We don't make money off of this.
I mean, we really do it as a public service.
And we've, you know, I think we've been celebrated, but boy, have we been attacked from every direction?
So let's, I mean, the argument you make in the book is the medicine that saved millions and could have ended the pandemic.
And so I don't want to get too deep into this, but I mean, I'm comfortable in these waters.
If you are, I know that you flirt on the edges of this.
Why then, doctor?
Why?
I mean, is it as simple as that there were hundreds of billions of dollars to be made and this thing was a shortcut?
Is it as simple to say that there was World Economic Forum tyrannical stuff?
Is that an oversimplification, doctor?
It's absolutely not.
Well, here's where I think the oversimplification is.
It's what I've done the whole time is when I lay this at the feet of the pharmaceutical industry, that might be oversimplifying it in that I don't know that it's just the pharmaceutical industry that drove this because there were more than just financial goals here in this pandemic.
And I will tell you, once we go outside of that topic of the pharmaceutical industry, that's where kind of my lane ends.
I mean, all of that I find terrifying and really disturbing.
And I know a lot about it.
But really what I spent a lot of time researching is really the pharmaceutical industry and how they do this.
And I think they were the tip of the spear.
I don't know who's holding the spear, who's driving that spear, but we know that the pharmaceutical companies were working for the Department of Defense, right?
All those contracts were from the military.
So, I mean, it goes deeper than pharmaceutical.
But certainly, Charlie, what you can say is their behaviors towards ivermectin are identical to their behaviors around any other generic off-patent drug that they've done over the last decades.
I mean, ivermectin is just the latest.
Well, give another example.
Give another example.
Here's another one: hydroxychloroquine, right?
So that's, that's another, that's a similar example.
The war on hydroxychloroquine was fought in 2020.
Ivermectin was 2021 and two.
But if you go further, I mean, look at Viox.
I mean, Vioxx, now that's a separate one.
That's a drug that they wanted to make money off of that had terrible side effects that was killing people by the tens of thousands.
During the reign of Viox, I mean, there was one quote that said, it would be like two jumbo jetliners crashing every week.
That's how many people died in this country when the pharmaceutical company knew that it was causing heart attacks and strokes and killing people.
And they just buried that evidence.
And they manipulate doctors, they control the media, they can write narratives.
I mean, it's that they can get you to believe whatever they want you to believe.
They want you to take a drug that's not good for you or that has really terrible evidence to support it.
They can market that drug.
And then they, yes, conversely, they can attack drugs that interfere with it.
I know it was frustrating.
You came on our show frequently.
It was frustrating for me to see that something that was just so simple that was working.
And now, doctor, I get fired up when I'm watching a basketball game or whatever, and I see these commercials for, I think it's called Pax Lovid or whatever the Pfizer thing is, where it's like, wait a second, now we could talk about treatments.
Now, after you did max vaccination and six or seven rounds of boosters and you make all your money, now we can have a conversation about early treatments.
And I mean, President Trump's instincts were right during this, and he just got pummeled by the bureaucracy and the medical.
He did say, just kind of off the cuff, why aren't we talking about treatments?
And he was attacked, attacked, attacked.
So, doctor, I mean, ivermectin is part of a menu of options that we could have explored: ozone therapy, intravenous, vitamin D levels.
Let's talk about that one.
I mean, I don't think it's a magic, you know, it would have been a magic bullet, but it would have helped if we would have had a conversation and got everyone vitamin D level over 50, over 60, over 70.
Would that have benefited health outcomes when it came to fighting COVID?
100%.
We have data to support that, that conclusion is that had we done a national vitamin D repletion campaign, deaths would have disappeared.
And I've said that since the beginning: that if I was in charge, I mean, that's the first thing I would have done.
It would have been billboards and PSAs.
What's your vitamin D level?
Get it up.
You know, take vitamin Take D3.
And that's, I mean, that's easy, but no one makes money off of that, doctor, because it's abundant.
And it's also, I mean, literally, there's almost an unlimited supply in parts of the country coming from the sky.
I'm going to get more cynical, Charlie.
It's not only that vitamin D doesn't make them money, is that vitamin D crushes their ability to make money.
I mean, here's an interesting point I want to make to you, Charlie, is that a central, probably the central event that really led to that book happened in March of 2021.
It was three months after my testimony.
I couldn't figure out why the world was going sideways.
And ivermectin was getting attacked.
There was so much evidence to support it.
It was constantly being dismissed and derided in the media.
And then one day I got an email and it was from this man named, he was a professor, William B. Grant.
He's one of the most published researchers on vitamin D science in the world.
And he wrote me a two-line email and he said, Dear Dr. Corey, what they're doing to ivermectin, they've been doing to vitamin D for decades.
And then he included a link to an article called the Disinformation Playbook, which really recounts how industries practice the arts of disinformation, which is how to counter science.
And the tobacco industry invented it.
The pharmaceutical industry is the most expert at it.
They do it all the time.
They manipulate media, journals, agencies, all the societies to get what they want.
And they've been doing that to vitamin D for decades.
I will tell you, the published literature around vitamin D is so polluted with fraudulent trials, essentially conducted by the pharmaceutical industry to get you to believe that vitamin D is not important in cancer, you know, in diabetes, in autoimmunity.
I mean, vitamin D is critical to prevent a lot of diseases.
Yeah, I mean, and some people are even saying it's almost acts like a hormone almost, that it's almost that, yeah, and that shouldn't be debated, right?
I have to say, again, we're on YouTube, so I have to kind of cushion it, but it can potentially have positive protections about over 100 different health challenges, right?
Including from mood to depression to the ability to fight off flus and colds, the war on ivermectin by Dr. Pierre Corey.
Boy, the medicine that saved millions and could have ended the pandemic.
Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here.
Every day, the parallel economy grows bigger and bigger.
It's powered by everyday Americans who are sick and tired of all the woke nonsense being jammed into every product they consume.
Big mobile companies are no different.
For years, they've been dumping millions into left-wing causes, and we had to take it because you need a cell phone and probably thought that there was no alternative, but there is.
Patriot Mobile is America's only Christian conservative wireless provider.
They proudly offer dependable nationwide coverage on all three major networks.
Stop using woke wireless as they fund Pride Month and all this stuff.
When you switch to Patriot Mobile, you're sending a message that you support free speech, religious liberty, the sanctity of life, Second Amendment, and our military veterans and first responder heroes.
They're 100% U.S.-based customer service team, make switching easy.
Just go to patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 878-PARIOIT, get free activation today with the offer code Charlie.
Ask about their coverage guarantee while you're there.
Get the same dependable service and take a stand for your values and make the switch today.
PatriotMobile.com slash Charlie or call them at 878-PATRIOT.
So, Dr. Corey, I am not optimistic right now that this just won't happen again.
It seems as if when the powers to be have a certain agenda, and I believe there was a political agenda to a lot of the emergency use authorizations, but there was certainly a profit-driven one as well, and then just a power one, that they will crush alternatives.
I think that ivermectin was the metaphorical gateway drug of liberty, that if we could have mass distributed it, then all these other measures that they were doing, from lockdowns to kids at school to the screen time to the suicide epidemic, is it as simple as that?
Could it have prevented a cascade from tyrannical interventions?
There's not even a question.
I mean, it would be a different disease if you had an effective, very safe, widely available, low-cost treatment.
Again, its efficacy was so large.
I mean, especially in the first wave, that first year, I mean, it was incredible.
Patients would take ivermectin within 12 to 24 hours repeatedly.
I would hear back, you know, my chest is loosening.
I feel better.
My fever broke.
I have more energy.
I mean, people were bouncing back from this disease in such a robust way.
I mean, that the fear would have been gone.
And actually, most importantly, Charlie, is Ivermectin would have skyrocketed vaccine hesitancy.
And that's why it was almost a double enemy.
It didn't just threaten profits.
It threatened the vaccine campaign.
I mean, you cannot have an effective medicine out there.
And if everybody was to be made aware that there was an effective, low-cost option available, how many would have lined up for those shots?
And they knew that.
They knew that Ivermectin was threatening that.
I mean, and the question is, what did they want to accomplish?
And that is an open-ended question.
So, doctor, you wrote this book.
You've been through the firing line.
You've been smeared.
Unlocking NAD Potential 00:05:23
You've been slandered.
What are just some of the lessons that you hope?
If you could teach the average ordinary American, listen to this, they're in their car, they're listening to podcasts, they're working out, they're not into the weeds of the medical journals, but they knew they were lied to.
You've been in the trenches, you've saved lives.
You're on a moral crusade.
What is the lesson?
What is the top three?
Boom, boom, boom.
What are the lessons from this?
So for me, I think the most pressing issue of our time is that our information dissemination technologies have been captured.
I mean, my lesson is that we are living in a time of unprecedented global propaganda and censorship.
Yes.
Being made to believe lies.
And we are taking actions.
When I say we, it's the majority of the society is taking actions, making them complicit sometimes in their own deaths.
I mean, they're literally being guided by really, really dangerous information.
And it's widely believed.
And we have to do something about the propaganda and censorship.
And the second lesson that I've learned is that our entire medical system, it's not a health system, it's a medical system, is literally under the control of the pharmaceutical industries, from the agencies to the highest impact journals to the studies they do, the pharma-conflicted researchers, what gets published, what gets taught, and what gets approved.
The regulatory approval process has been long ago captured.
And so what I would want everyone to do is be very, very skeptical of those terms scientific consensus.
Anything that's coming out of those agencies or their leaders, they are working directly in the service of the pharmaceutical industry.
And so you have to have alternative sources for information.
I think you need to look at a totality of the research and you need to be very, very skeptical of what the official lines are.
Because I will tell you, they're not in your interest.
They're in someone, there's some other goal.
We're out of time.
Dr. Croy, I want to have you back on where we could do a deeper dive into this because you're such an honest person.
And I know this for many reasons, but the simplest way I could describe it is you have no agenda going into this.
You are, and we're a doctor.
You wanted to save people's lives, and you were buttressed up against a leviathan, a monolith, an avalanche of lies and deceit and garbage.
And, you know, there was a debate earlier on Steve Bannon's program of what is the greatest virtue, truth, or courage.
I think courage is.
I think Aristotle had it right because without courage, you can't speak the truth.
Dr. Piercour, you are a courageous man.
Thank you so much.
Thanks, Charlie.
Are you feeling burned out and a little tired?
Look, I want to tell you about something that I've become a big believer in.
And if you do not know about it, you got to research it.
You could fact-check me.
It's NAD.
NAD is a precursor for your body to be able to create ATP, which is basically the life force of everything that you do.
And look, there's a lot of people out there that are promising energy and doing all this, but go do some research on NAD and go see actually how incredibly important it is for high performance to be able to go actually get it to the next level.
And so, what does NAD stand for?
Well, try to take a note here.
It is nicotinamide adenonide dinucleotide.
I did that pretty well, don't you think?
NAD.
It's a coenzyme that is central to metabolism.
Again, don't take my word for it.
Go watch a YouTube video or two or three or four and go fact-check me on it.
I've been taking NAD for quite some time.
And people say, Charlie, how do you travel 2,700 days in a decade?
How do you do the 300 days a year?
How do you do that?
Look, it's not only because of this.
I eat well and do other things as well.
But if you look at NADH, especially when it combines with CoQ10 and marine collagen, it boosts your body's cellular function.
I would never tell you guys to go do something I myself did not do.
And Strong Cell has been able to put together a scientific breakthrough in cellular health replenishment that combines NADH, CoQ10, and marine collagen.
When you combine them together, you get mental clarity.
And that's a must for me.
It's not just that.
It's for vitality.
It helps your immune system.
It's all good stuff.
So go to strongcell.com forward slash Charlie today and see for yourself.
It's not a stimulant.
It doesn't contain any caffeine.
I'm talking about overall health from the cellular level.
NADH has been called the anti-aging enzyme that helps with so many issues like brain fog, short-term memory loss, blood pressure, heart disease, blood sugar retention, and so much more.
And look, it's not a magic pill.
It's like, oh, I'm going to start taking this and I'm going to be super smart.
No, no, it's an additive, an amplifier on people that want to get better.
But I can tell you it makes a big difference.
I've personally seen undeniable benefits from taking Strong Cell and engaging with NAD every day.
So I had to partner with them.
I vetted them.
I checked out their ingredient profile.
And do yourself a favor and give Strong Cell a try.
Visit strongcell.com forward slash Charlie today and use promo code Charlie.
And you get a special 20% discount on your order.
Again, that's strongcell.com forward slash Charlie.
NAD is your body's ability to create ATP.
Don't believe me, go to WebMD, go to ScienceDirect, go to Nature Journal, NIH, YouTube.
It's all natural.
It's naturally occurring, and you're giving your body more of what it already needs.
Use promo code Charlie.
Again, that's strongcell.com forward slash Charlie.
Don't forget your 20% discount by using promo code Charlie at checkout strongsell.com slash Charlie.
The Trial of the Century 00:07:15
Okay, the book that we are going to be talking about with Greg Jarrett is The Trial of the Century by Greg Jarrett.
It is a gripping and comprehensive history of the iconic attorney Clarence Darrow and the famous Scopes monkey trial.
And Greg Jarrett does a great job.
I do want to set up, though, the FBI story because I want to talk to him about that.
So I want to definitely talk about his book, but also in harmony, talk about the FBI.
So let's play Cut 23, please.
Former FBI Director James Comey on the Durham Report, play cut 23.
Do you acknowledge perhaps that some mistakes were made along the way?
Oh, definitely.
And they were found four years ago by the Inspector General.
So there's nothing new in this new document.
What were some of those mistakes from your point of view?
Oh, that the FBI didn't communicate clearly the status of certain sources.
They didn't double-check certain information before putting it in a court application for a foreign intelligence wiretap and a bunch of others.
But in complex investigations, there's always going to be mistakes.
It doesn't mean the FBI is incompetent, honest, and independent.
We're going to talk about that with Greg Jarrett.
Greg, welcome to the program.
Hey, Charlie, great to see you.
Thank you.
So we'll get to the FBI in a second.
That'll be a tease.
Let's talk about your book, Trial of the Century.
Tell us about it.
You know, the Trial of the Century began for me about 55 years ago.
I was just a young teenager, and I plucked a book off my father's shelf.
It was a biography about the man you see there on the left, the great Clarence Darrell, the finest trial lawyer who ever lived.
I admired him for his passion about the law, his unyielding commitment to civil liberties and civil rights.
And, you know, at the end of the book, there was a small chapter on the most famous trial in America, the trial that changed the course of American history, the so-called Scopes monkey trial.
The media dubbed it.
It was a public misconception that man evolved from monkeys and other primates.
And, you know, what had happened is that after World War I, America turned inward and a great fundamentalist movement arose, led by William Jennings Bryan, the three-time Democrat presidential nominee who had become the fundamentalist leader.
He managed to convince states to pass laws banning books on evolution.
And in Tennessee, they took it a step further, Charlie, and they made it a crime for an educator in public schools to teach the theory of evolution, even though there was a chapter on it in state-approved textbooks.
And sure enough, within days, 25-year-old biology substitute teacher by the name of John Scopes was arrested, criminally charged, and taken off to jail because he had dared to teach from the textbook about evolution.
Darrow is reading about this in his office in Chicago.
He's the most famous lawyer in America at the time, a poetic orator, a popular public figure, just as Bryant was.
And he's incensed at what Brian has done.
Brian is actually so gratified with it, he's volunteered to personally prosecute John Scopes and does so.
Darrow volunteers to defend Scopes for free.
And that set up this titanic clash between two epic figures in America.
And journalists the world over converged on this tiny town of Dayton, Tennessee, where the trial took place.
It was the first trial to be broadcast live on radio to a riveted nationwide audience.
People stopped what they were doing.
They didn't go to work.
They wanted to listen to the trial as they tuned in to the radio, courtesy of WGN in Chicago.
They had newsreel cameras set up in the back of the courtroom and a plane waiting at the end of the day to fly the film to Chicago for immediate distribution in movie theaters everywhere to watch what was happening in this epic clash.
And, you know, it changed the course of American history because Darrow, even though he lost the trial with a biased jury and a biased judge, he dramatically shifted public opinion.
And that spelled the beginning of the end for banning books in classrooms and criminalizing the teaching of a scientific theory.
I shudder to think where America might be today, were it not for the courage of Clarence Darrow and his young schoolteacher client, John Scopes.
What do you think are some of the lessons that we can apply today from all the research you did for your book?
And the book, which I encourage you to look at, is The Trial of the Century.
It's just as relevant, if not more, today than it was nearly 100 years ago, because we're seeing the same sort of infringement on free speech rights and intellectual empowerment and academic autonomy now.
We're seeing the partisan censorship of political discourse, the polarizing disinformation campaigns, the classroom indoctrination of students,
and this punitive culture cancel culture under the guise of social justice, whereby, you know, conformity of thought supplants robust debate in America.
And so I think we're seeing once again, 100 years later, you know, America on the precipice of depriving us of our fundamental rights in the Bill of Rights, free speech, freedom of expression, freedom of thought.
You know, they fought for the indispensable proposition, Charlie, that no one should be told how to think.
And Americans today are being told how to think.
And if you don't conform, you know, hell to pay.
So the book is The Trial of the Century.
And so as you were doing the research, what is, especially the past couple years, what were one of the one or two things that really stood out to you that most Americans should know about this trial that typically is not always talked about?
Well, you know, as I say, I first learned about it when I was just a teenager.
Americans, what struck me as I started mulling over the idea of a book, talking to people about it, talking to publishers about it, nobody had ever heard of it.
Dayton's Moral Lessons 00:02:11
How can that be, I thought, which is the reason I decided to write the book.
I traveled to the tiny town of Dayton, Tennessee, a couple of years ago, and I gained access to the courthouse, which was closed.
I saw the courtroom, which still stands unchanged on the second floor.
And, you know, I went down into the basement, the dusty archives, and was able to obtain the original trial transcript of the trial.
Also in the book, I obtained roughly 40 photographs from the trial itself.
So that, you know, you can see what unfolded there.
You can see the epic confrontation between Darrow and William Jennings Bryan.
Darrow calling Brian to the witness stand as an expert on the Bible.
Brian believed that everything in the Bible should be taken literally.
And of course, we know the Bible, which is perhaps the greatest book ever written, is filled with parables and allegories.
They're spiritual.
They teach us important moral lessons.
And with Darrow sitting next to Brian on the witness stand, it was held outdoors because, as I say, the judge feared that the courtroom would collapse and there was stifling heat.
People were fainting.
He moves it outdoors to a platform that was left over from 4th of July festivities.
And you can see in the photographs thousands of people who were standing there watching and listening on loudspeakers as Darrow quite, you know, purposefully questions Brian about certain aspects of the Bible, you know, Jonah and the whale, Joshua making the sun stand still, the Garden of Eden, and so forth.
These are stories that are allegorical.
Theologians, 98% of them all agree.
Again, it teaches us important moral lessons, but not to be taken literally.
FBI Trust and Perjury 00:05:30
Greg, a lot I want to talk to you about, but we don't have time.
I want to get into the FBI because there's a lot happening there, Greg.
I played that clip of James Comey.
He said, well, some mistakes are made.
Greg, is anyone ever going to be held accountable for what they did weaponizing the Federal Bureau of Investigation?
No, I don't think so.
The sad coda of the Durham report is people got away with it.
They got away with lawlessness, depriving people of their constitutional rights, lying to the FISA court, lying to Congress, lying to the American, lying to the President of the United States, Donald Trump.
They knew that the accusation that he had colluded with Russia was invented personally by Hillary Clinton and bankrolled by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary's campaign.
They debunked it as bogus almost from the beginning.
But they used it Charlie as a pretext, first to try to stop Trump from getting elected.
And after they failed, they doubled down and they decided that they were going to use it to destroy him, to drive him from office.
Now, you know, this is the FBI engaging in not just lies that are prosecutable, but, you know, in an abuse of power in which they have squandered America's trust.
Trust is earned, and the FBI has lost that trust.
Look at any of the polling data.
Make no mistake, it was James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Kleinsmith, Jim Baker, and the whole gang at the FBI.
Yes, they're all gone.
Most of them were fired.
They should have, in my judgment, been prosecuted under the law for a variety of crimes, including perjury as well as, you know, conspiracy to deprive people of their constitutional rights, which is a felony statute under the criminal code.
But they got away with it.
And Durham tried to prosecute a couple of people in Washington area courts.
He couldn't get a fair trial.
He lost those cases.
The one triumph he had was against Kevin Kleinsmith, who finally copped a plea.
He doctored evidence in order to gain the warrant before the FISA court.
And Comey signed off on it, knowing that it was phony and false.
He vouched for the credibility of Christopher Steele, who composed the dossier, even though the FBI had fired him for lying repeatedly.
And he withheld that information from the judges.
So, you know, talk about perjury.
He should have been criminally charged, but he got away with it.
He also got away with stealing FBI documents when he was fired and leaking them to the media to trigger the appointment of a special counsel, which just happened to be his longtime friend and colleague, Bob Mueller.
But even Mueller's team of partisans could find no evidence of a collusion conspiracy, and the Durham Report puts an exclamation point on that.
So in closing, Greg, is there anything that the House can do from an oversight perspective?
Because there's mass cynicism in our audience about our justice system as it is currently configured.
Yes.
The Judiciary Committee has a subcommittee on the FBI weaponization of their powers.
And they continued to dig up incriminating information.
The Oversight Committee, in the meantime, is looking into how the FBI as well as the intelligence community covered up the Biden family crime syndicate, as I call it.
How else do you explain an investigation that has gone on now for almost six years without a single charge being filed, despite a plethora of incriminating information, which also shows President Joe Biden's complicity when he was Vice President of the United States?
It appears as though he was involved in his son and his family's influence peddling schemes to sell out America to its adversaries.
That is, in addition to being criminal, it is an impeachable offense.
Treason and bribery are impeachable offenses.
So, you know, I think it's important what the House is doing with those two committees.
They have uncovered more evidence of criminality in the last four months since they started than we learned from the Department of Justice and the FBI, which are crooked departments and agencies.
Got to run.
Greg Jarrett, thank you so much for your time.
And everyone, check out his book, The Trial of the Century.
Very good.
Thank you so much.
Charlie, thank you.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email us your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thanks so much for listening, and God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk. com.
Export Selection