All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 30, 2023 - Lionel Nation
01:05:20
Lionel on the Dr. Drew Show
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The storm is coming.
Markets are crashing.
Banks are closing.
When the economy collapses, how will you survive?
You need a plan.
Cash, gold, bitcoin, dirty man safes keep your assets hidden underground at a secret location ready for any crisis.
Don't wait for disaster to strike.
Get your Dirty Man safe today.
Use promo code DIRTY10 for 10% off your order.
When uncertainty strikes, peace of mind is priceless.
Dirty Man underground safes protects what matters most.
Discreetly designed, these safes are where innovation meets reliability, keeping your valuables close yet secure.
Be ready for anything.
Use code DIRTY10 for 10% off today.
And take the first step towards safeguarding your future.
Dirty Man Safe.
Because protecting your family starts with protecting what you treasure.
Disaster can strike when least expected.
Wildfires, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes.
They can instantly turn your world upside down.
Dirty Man Underground Safes is a safeguard against chaos.
Hidden below, your valuables remain protected no matter what.
Prepare for the unexpected.
Use code DIRTY10 for 10% off and secure peace of mind for you and your family.
Dirty man safe.
When disaster hits, security isn't optional.
Lionel makes comeback today by himself.
You can follow him at YouTube, Lionel Nation.
Also on Twitter, Lionel Media, L-I-O-N-E-L.
He's a radio veteran, a trial lawyer, a former prosecutor, author.
He is a renaissance man of sorts.
He owns his subscription video channel.
Again, that is the lionelmedia.com and Lionel Nation on YouTube.
So Lionel joins me and maybe we'll have a chance to even take a few calls right after this.
Our laws, as it pertain to substances, are draconian and bizarre.
A psychopath started this way.
He was an alcoholic.
Because of social media and pornography.
PTSD.
Love addiction.
Fentanyl and heroin.
Ridiculous.
I'm a doctor for f***ing sake.
Where the hell do you think I learned that?
I'm just saying.
You go to treatment before you kill people.
I am a clinician.
I observe things about these chemicals.
Let's just deal with what's real.
We used to get these calls on Loveline all the time.
Educate adolescents and to prevent and to treat.
If you have trouble, you can't stop and you might help stop it.
I can help.
I got a lot to say.
I got a lot more to say.
A lot of interesting people coming to join us, including today's guest, Lionel.
Here he is.
Welcome.
Lionel Media, Lionel Nation.
There he is.
Welcome, sir.
Thank you.
And I'm so glad that your marriage was saved by virtue of a...
By a toothbrush.
A toothbrush.
A toothbrush.
Let me tell you.
You don't listen.
Tell us.
Go ahead.
I cannot say enough about how important it is for people to prevent, I don't know if it's gingival health, but to floss.
It's critical.
How it's associated with inflammation and heart disease.
By the way, the thing I'm fascinated right now is I'm going to open up a chain of fecal transplant.
I think fecal transplant is the most exciting, fascinating thing.
It's been linked to improvements in not only bipolar disorder, alcoholism, C. diff.
See, you laugh because you laugh.
Well, C. diff for sure.
I didn't laugh.
Susan's behind the camera laughing there.
But C. diff for sure.
And when people think of fecal transplant, they imagine that somebody's stool is being pushed up the took eye.
That's exactly what I'm talking about.
No, it's made into a capsule.
No, no, no.
That's the old-fashioned way.
No, no.
You want to have Toka's transplant.
Okay, but your point about the toothbrush, absolutely gingival health and coronary disease being now correlated, other inflammatory conditions.
But the comedy here, Lionel, is we were on a cruise, and what was the question they asked me about what your wife says is your most annoying feature?
We did like a newlywed game thing, and I said, oh, she's going to say my toothbrush immediately.
She came out and she goes, his toothbrush!
And that was before we found this group.
Nothing else is annoying about you.
This has changed our life.
Literally.
Look, when you live with somebody for long periods of time, these little annoyances can become big annoyances if you're not careful.
Just like for the camera pans.
Very smooth.
By the way, a couple of things which is also important regarding cruises.
I would rather lick a belt sander or drink ink than go on a cruise.
Hell, to me, would be on a cruise.
And it's just, there's something about do whatever you want.
Don't waterboard me.
You don't have to do anything.
Just threaten me with the cruise.
I'll tell you where all the spies are.
I'll get everything up.
Just don't get me anywhere near those people.
You don't know what you've been missing.
Oh, I do.
It's the other people on the cruise you don't like.
I see.
Oh, absolutely.
I see.
I get it.
So listen, let's get right to it.
Yes, please.
I am preoccupied around issues of free speech.
The old simple notion that I grew up with was the speech that I fight the most to protect is the speech I hate the most.
Exactly.
And now we've gone to a very weird place now where if somebody has deemed you a bad or evil person because of some something – You must be stopped.
Your enemies must be silenced is the new sort of call to arms.
And what I don't understand is, let's start with just this simple question.
Where do people think or how do they imagine it's going to work?
Who's going to determine who needs to be silenced?
Yes, you right now, self-righteously, not you, but anybody that would Adhere to this sort of notion would think self-righteously.
Well, me, I'm going to decide, of course.
But no, eventually somebody else decides.
Much like in the French Revolution, as I always point out, eventually everyone goes on the guillotine.
That's a feature of this sort of excess.
So go ahead.
Well, first, let's start with this wonderful thing called this wonderful constitution that even if you read it, it doesn't tell you anything.
It doesn't tell you anything.
You need years and years of saying, what do you mean by clear and present danger?
And what about this?
And what about yelling theater in a crowded fire?
And all that stuff.
Let me get down to brass tacks.
You know, Dr. Drew, we as Americans, and I love my country, hate my government.
Hate it!
If I ran this country, Washington would be a ghost town.
You wouldn't see.
There would be nobody there.
And we'd be better off.
But the country itself, we have these internal, almost reflexive, Pavlovian, obeisant kind of thoughts where we say, come on, that's not fair.
That's un-American.
It's not constitutional.
And like Judges Scalia used to always say, there was a Prego.
The spaghetti commercial where these always say, what about basil?
It's in there.
What about the oregano?
It's in there.
People think the Constitution, everything's in there.
Virtually nothing's in there.
We have to compartmentalize our free speech and there's that governmental draconian thing which doesn't come up that much.
But here's where we have an interesting thing, Dr. Drew.
Historically, the First Amendment only applied to the government.
Government was the one that shut you up and threw you in jail and took away your license or did whatever.
That was fine.
That was direct and nobody questioned it.
Then came this thing called social media.
Social media platforms.
And they started off kind of quaint.
Oh, look, there's Twitter.
Isn't that nice?
Oh, YouTube.
Funny.
Look, there's a cat video.
That's wonderful.
Now, it is the primary way that people in the world communicate.
It is the art.
The artery system, it was like this communicative angiogenesis.
It grew.
And it's how the world speaks and how people make money.
And we learn.
It's beyond the phone.
Okay.
So then what happened was somebody said, okay, good.
Do you like your social media?
Russell Brand?
Dr. Drew?
Do you like it?
Tucker or whoever your person is.
Do you like that?
Alex Jones?
Pick.
The person you like or don't like.
Do you like it?
Good.
Do you need this for your business?
Good.
Have a lot of followers?
Good.
Boom.
Not anymore.
Then the people who would say, wait a minute.
How did you just do this?
This is my livelihood, my commerce.
Excuse me.
This is a private entity.
This isn't the government.
The government didn't tell us to do this.
We don't work for the government.
We're not agents of the government.
This is private.
There's no state action.
There's no entanglement.
Well, the Twitter files come along and guess what?
There was.
And now we have to do something which is different.
We, as a country, have to get off our duffs and we have to go and we have to declare either by statute, by fiat, by legislation, by court order or something.
We have to reclaim and reestablish these social media platforms.
As utilities.
As the phone.
Doctor, do you imagine if you were on the phone and you're talking to Naomi Campbell or Naomi Campbell and you're talking about COVID.
You're talking about something.
Wolf.
Cry wolf indeed.
Or you're talking to them and all of a sudden your phone goes dead.
And Verizon or whoever says, excuse me, we don't like what you were talking about.
That's unproven.
This is misinformation.
This is hate space.
You say, wait, wait, wait.
You're the phone company.
You can't tell me that.
Well, that's what I submit social media are.
Let me give you my latest one.
As you mentioned so astutely, Dr. Drew, we have to...
The First Amendment and the spirit of it is not to protect the Johnny Man singers or Florence Henderson.
It's vile, horrible things.
Now, recently, there's a story about Roger Waters.
Roger Waters of Pink Floyd...
Yes, indeed.
What you do when you clean it up, wear a long coat, nobody will notice.
So in any event, is that what the kids call it today?
But as I was saying, this is a guy who apparently says these terrible anti-Semitic things.
Terrible, horrible things I would never say.
Now, here's the latest one.
Dr. Drew, let's say you say the most horrible things imagined against the Alsatians.
I mean, as vile, as virulent.
But you said it, not here.
Maybe 14 years ago.
Or maybe somebody accused you of making lewd noises while they changed a mannequin at Macy's.
14 years ago.
What if a woman claims you said something untoward?
14 years ago.
Okay, that's the criminal and civil statute.
But now, social media platforms say, oh, no, no, no, no, no, no.
We just don't like you.
So your speech and your speech and your actions, unproved, uncharged, no due process.
A due process is noticing the opportunity to be heard, meaning I have to charge you with something and give you the opportunity to rebut it.
You're saying, for all you know, 14 years ago, wait a minute, what?
That's right.
You're done.
You're finished.
Now, in the case of, let's say, Roger Waters, whether you like him or not, it doesn't really matter.
We have to take a new position called hashtag so what?
This is going to be tough for people.
We say, okay, Roger Waters said this.
So what?
Roger Brand, Roger Brand, Russell Brand was accused of such and such.
So what?
It doesn't matter.
We don't condone it.
We don't like it.
Let him address it.
Let people sue.
But we don't cut his tongue out.
Because he did something that has nothing to do with what we're talking about now.
Speech.
You can still speak when you're on death row.
And we are, and this is the worst part, I think we mentioned last time with Le Bon and, you know, these weird murmurations of people.
People sit back and they just think, bless you, people look back and they just say, you know what?
If it's wrong, let me give you an example.
COVID.
Isn't it funny how all of these, not you, mind you, not you, but some of your colleagues all of a sudden now said, hey, is this coast clear?
Yeah.
Let's talk about it.
You knew about this before.
Oh, no, no, no.
These studies are different.
Don't give me that.
You knew about it, and I don't blame you for keeping your mouth shut.
Have you ever heard about this guy on YouTube?
His name is Dr. John Campbell.
He's got about 2.8.
This guy, at first, when COVID, he was talking about, and it's the most awful thing with the virions and they're coming into the spike protein.
It was like Bela Lugosi.
Now, all of a sudden, somebody said, everybody out of the pool, it's okay.
Now he's talking about all of these things, which a lot of the crazy folks who hawk...
You know, ivermectin and blah, blah, blah.
Who made the connection between myocarditis and blah, blah, blah.
Now, all of a sudden, it's cool.
So here's the thing I don't understand.
When did they change the rules?
Now, is there a place I can go, like a website that says, okay, you can now talk about this.
You know, questioning school shootings are out.
Still, not that I want to, but...
There are these lists of things, moon landing questions, no, COVID, maybe, masks, definitely.
Six months ago, it was a different thing.
Now, here is the bottom line, and we talked about this biomedical tyranny that I'm worried about.
There's a Supreme Court case, Jacobson against Massachusetts, 1905, and it dealt with this fellow who was fined because he...
They said, you have to take a booster, either a smallpox vaccine or a booster.
This is 1905.
And he said, look, we had this in Holland or wherever the hell it was.
And I don't want to do it again.
I reacted so violently.
They said, sorry.
And the Supreme Court said, yes, the state of Massachusetts can fine him $15 then, which is about $150 now, but $15.
And that was it.
That's all it said.
Today, these...
Zealots are using this Jacobson case as an example for not only can you force people to take vaccines, but they can lose their jobs, religious exemptions don't apply, and you've got this pitchfork and torch crowd from once, ostensibly these people were liberals, coming out of the woodwork, who all of a sudden, in this weird kind of scrum, they're demanding this, and if you said, explain your virulence.
And I swear, Dr. Drew, I think it's because they just love the action of this.
They couldn't care less about vaccines or COVID.
Well, let me stop you.
There's a lot to unpack, obviously.
I want to unpack a little bit about Jacobson, if we can here, because we were talking about it yesterday as well.
It's coming up a bit now.
The excesses for which Jacobson is used.
So what you were describing, this sort of delight in hurting other people, is called scapegoating.
And scapegoating becomes a really serious mass action when there are lots of traumatized people and narcissists in the population.
That's when they, rather than get aggressive towards each other, they focus their aggression out there in the bad guys.
And together they gratify their aggression.
I mean, they literally will kill people.
I mean, that's what, again, the French Revolution was all about.
So the scapegoating is alive and well, and that's a lot of what you were describing, and I want to get more into that.
But before I do, I want to ask a question.
The law has a way of interpreting and reinterpreting itself, or previous judgments, or previous cases.
Jacobson said one thing.
You can ask somebody to do something, you can hold them to it, and you can fine them if they don't do it.
Is there anything in that case report or any subsequent reinterpretations of that case that suggest in any way...
That it can be interpreted the way it has been interpreted lately, which is, as you said, it's okay to take people's livelihoods away, move them out of the country, discriminate.
All these things are being used.
All these things, these incredible excesses in terms of infringements of civil liberties, people point at the Jacobson case as the reason they can do that.
How far from reality is that?
I will tell you how far.
There was a case in 1927, Buck against Bell.
Oliver Wendell Holmes, one of the greats who said you can't better do let a thousand guilty people go than to imprison one English guilty innocent person.
Buck against Bell was the case that allowed the states to sterilize the mentally enfeebled.
And it's good.
Good law!
Today!
But here's what it said.
Oliver Wendell Holmes, as opposed to Oliver Wendell Douglas from Green Acres, but Oliver Wendell Holmes said, well, after all, and I'll get the exact quote for you, but something to the effect of having somebody mandate, fining somebody for refusal to get a booster or a vaccination is far more problem than just snipping some fallopian tubes.
They use that.
Roe against Wade in this notion of substantive due process.
Oh, they took this.
Look, let me explain, and you're spot on with this.
For some reason, we Americans think that we're the most, we're just, I mean, we're just beautiful.
We had the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution until the 13th Amendment came along.
We had a provision that says, now wait, wait, wait, before we talk about any kind of special rights, we got to have something in there that says that if your slave runs away, I've got to give them back.
Okay.
This was primary on their concern.
But they're also using this idea, and this really kills people, or obsesses people.
Let me ask you, Dr. Drew, do you think there is anything in the Constitution that guarantees gay marriage?
Or guarantees marriage?
Or guarantees...
I hate to use the word they called it then, sodomy or some particular...
Is there anything that guarantees an abortion in the Constitution?
Not by virtue of interpretation.
And the answer is, they are still arguing this.
I say no.
But that doesn't mean that states can't do anything.
There's a lot of...
So, your point is spot on.
The thing is that when you want to look for something...
Remember, Dred Scott case.
Was absolutely correct under the law.
Absolutely.
And if the Supreme Court had decided in the case of Brown, maintain Plessy and said separate but equal, that would have been it.
You know, we live under this illusion.
But here is the thing.
More importantly, you are a man of science.
And if it wasn't for somebody who dared to question some...
Who was it?
Semmelweis who washed his hands?
Or Ignat Semmelweis who said, I think we should maybe wash our hands?
What are you, crazy?
Somebody breaking away from this, whether it's Copernicus or Galileo or string theorists.
Science is always about taking something and saying, you know what, I think maybe we want to revisit this.
Well, then they came up with, they said, oh, no, no, no, no.
We're going to introduce a couple of new concepts.
Misinformation, disinformation, data information.
I don't know the differences between this.
Also, it's the science.
Dr. Drew, trust the science.
How much?
Look at what you've done.
I'm sorry.
So the science is, if you watch the video of Harvey Reich before we went live here, he was saying the science is not the theories and the concept.
The science is the examination, the re-examination of hypothesis and theory with experimentation.
And then analytic sort of, you know, evaluating the numbers that you get from the experimentation.
And that's the science.
The science is not the story that evolves as a result of experimentation.
That's sort of a description of reality based on findings in the science.
Go ahead.
What you've done, and somebody that I've always admired, Nora Volkoff and others in terms of addiction, in the old days, and I don't blame people in the days of witches where they would say, these people are weak and it's the devil.
Imagine seeing your first case of Tourette's or something in the 14th century if they even had it.
Well, your profession came along and said, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
We have this new interpretation.
Let's look at PET scan and imaging.
And you know what?
There may be, believe it or not, an actual palpable somatic neurological reason to disabuse people of this particular sense of guilt.
And maybe, and they look to you and go, And I'm sure they told you, you're just some liberal.
You're weak.
That's what's wrong with this country.
You and you pointy-headed scientists always trying to find some medical reason.
And you're thinking, wait a minute.
I'm not trying to do this.
Let me give you another one.
If ever you want to really get into trouble, look at what people like Thomas Sowell did who talked about population studies and what motivates certain ethnicities.
Try this one.
I have been in the...
For 40 years as a lawyer graduated, and I was a prosecutor, and whenever we would go to have some kind of a consortium or a conclave or something, they would say, what do you think are the reasons for crime?
And why are some particular ethnicities and demographics more, not prone to criminal activity, but why are they in the system more?
Why is this one particular group that makes up, let's say, 14% of the population, roughly 70% in state prisons?
And we used to say, even then, stop.
You don't want to hear the answer to this.
Just don't go there.
Don't go there.
Just let it go.
But it would behoove us to do as you say, Dr. Drew.
Look from an empirical point of view.
Look at the data.
Have a hypothesis.
And if you can repeat it, it becomes a theory.
And if it makes some sense, not this one.
Because what you need, we are...
Remember when we used to laugh at PC and political correctness?
That was the glory days.
Those were wonderful days.
Then came cancel culture.
What we're looking at right now is something so different.
We're looking at a world right now that is so, I think it was 980, whatever, 981 days since the Biden administration.
Now, that's the only thing I can figure.
Something happened there.
Dr. Drew, if I would have told you when you were in medical school that one day, Learned members, learned members of your profession from the most prestigious schools would actually be arguing about whether a gender, whether a male can have a baby, and whether it would be a good idea to have kids who cannot even decide their favorite color, who one day say, you know, Mom, I think maybe I'm a girl.
No problem!
Off you go.
Snip, snip, tuck, tuck.
An orchiectomy here.
Did you ever think, and not only that, we're not talking about somebody from some leftist pink organization, from the highest levels, from the lauded halls of the greatest medical institutions.
My question to you, sir, is this.
What has happened to us?
And I'm sure people have said this in one way or another throughout every epoch and every aspect of life.
And every period of time.
But dear God!
I've never seen...
We see crime.
Everything is exaggerated.
Everything is turbocharged.
Everything is gain of function.
And not COVID.
I mean the insanity that we are having.
It seems like it is just...
I don't know if this is scapegoating or if this is just some scrum or something.
But why?
God, I don't even know.
Where is it going to end?
And here's what I'm going to say, and this is not to be political because you're very important about this.
I cannot take four more years of whatever the hell this is.
I don't know what you want to call it, but I will go for anarchy.
I will go for anarcho-syndicalism.
I don't care.
Loincloths and anything.
I can't.
Take any more of this.
Do you hear me?
I can't.
We've covered a lot of ground here.
I agree.
We're going to have to take a little break in a second here, but I want to bring it back to the free speech conversation a little bit more.
I have another podcast I do with Christina P., who's a comedian.
Called Dr. Drew After Dark.
Right.
I always say to her, it's going to change.
She goes, you know what we need?
We need a rational revolution.
And I thought, oh, that is exactly what we need.
Caleb, do you have a picture of our cups with the iconography on that?
We use a little Soviet-style sort of imagery to mark our rational revolution.
Do you have that, Caleb, by any chance?
I'm going to try to find it.
There's a coffee cup, but you can get it on the YMH website for sure.
But when we get back, we'll show it to you guys.
When we get back, I want to bring it back to free speech.
I was listening to an interview with Greg Lukianoff, who's an attorney.
He's a civil rights attorney.
He was always very liberal, and now he is concerned about the excesses.
He specifically was concerned not about the He was worried what happens when the culture of free speech is undermined and how the culture of free speech leads to laws against free speech.
For instance, Alexis de Tocqueville, I point this out all the time, a Frenchman that came here in the 1820s to examine it.
It was a ruse, but he was supposed to be examining our so-called penitentiary system.
And what he ended up doing was meeting all the great leaders of the day and touring the country, and he wrote a very famous book called Democracy in America.
And in Democracy in America, one of the things he observed, amongst many others, one of the things he observed, by the way, was that he's never seen a country with so many lawyers, and that could destroy us, number one.
But number two, he noticed that we have the greatest prescriptions in the law for free speech, one of the least actual abilities to practice free speech because of something he called the town square.
He said in the town square, you're going to get destroyed.
You're going to lose you.
They're going to ostracize you.
Something's going to happen.
You have free speech.
You just can't use it because of the town square.
So when we get back, I want you to sort of address that specific issue.
And then I want to drift into a little bit of McCarthy era talk.
We'll be back right after this with more Lionel.
And we are back.
We are here with Lionel, of course.
And before the break, I was bringing up the issue of the culture of free speech as opposed to the prescription in the law and how the culture of suppression of free speech has crept certainly into our law schools and certainly into the administrative structures of our legal institutions as well as our institutes of higher education generally.
And how that leads to potentially very serious problems down the line.
Do you agree?
Oh, absolutely.
There used to be a time when I was studying, we always talked about what was allowed.
What was that?
Oh, there we go.
Wait, wait.
So, Lionel, there's my Rational Revolution cup.
I wanted to show it to you.
And I want you to notice, I'm in the middle there with Christina P over me, and we've got the sort of, I guess that's the star of the mouse star.
There it is.
And what I love about this, amongst other things, is you'll notice my Lennon-esque pose.
One of the famous, if I just had a little beard on, it would be a perfect rendition of one of the most famous pictures of Lennon.
Who made that logo?
It's somebody, one of the fans, that's Christina Overmay.
It really was, it's seriously brilliant.
I'm sure it's an art student or something.
Should have bought one.
We don't have one?
They're still for sale.
Christine, yes.
Go ahead.
When you said Christina P. Overmay, it reminds me of some undenism, some uralagnic reference to the P. reference from the dossier.
But I digress.
A couple of things here.
One of the, you know, it's funny how we always have to go back.
And look at how sometimes a law got it right in a similar vein.
Your point's well taken.
The Constitution means nothing if the citizens never have even an allergy to the idea of free speech being curtailed.
So they would...
Listen, if nobody ever says, no, that's okay.
That's okay.
You know, the Constitution is not self-regulating.
It doesn't just correct things.
Let me throw this one at you.
I consider one of the biggest potential One of the most interesting aspects of First Amendment free speech is the idea of CSAM.
And my wife, who is an expert in this, we talk about this, this is child sexual abuse material.
And she is with Lynn's Warriors and has dedicated her life.
And so we're always talking about how this has trans...
Mogrified into levels of depravity that we could never even imagine before.
But here's a twist, and follow me through this.
Let's assume that I were to show you something, and you were to drop it.
Recoil in horror, as they're depicted, was the most unimaginable scene with a child, an infant, whatever, and you were sickened.
And I said, whoa, whoa, whoa, wait.
Good news.
That's not real.
That's artificially intelligent, AGI, whatever.
It's not real.
It isn't.
It isn't.
It's horrible.
Now, most people would say, that doesn't matter.
The very fact that you have it is enough to ban it.
Now, I, who find the whole notion detestable, say there's a bigger issue here.
If this is not what you say it is, what's the difference between that and a sketch or a crude drawing?
Or a thought.
This is a thought.
Now, granted, it's reduced to something which looks almost identical to an actual picture, but it is a thought.
Do you believe?
See, we don't, in this kind of a town square idea, I always hold the First Amendment and free speech, that is supreme.
We hold our nose, we say, this must prevail.
This must mean...
That terrible things must be said.
Remember, perhaps during our generation, the anarchist cookbook?
People said, you can't have a book that tells you how to make bombs.
Oh, yes, you can.
There was something called Paladin Press years ago.
So we live, and I think we're the same generation, we remember how it was cool when Carlin's Dirty Joe and Lenny Bruce and even the PMRC with Tipper Gore, our whole world.
Mine has been one example of limitation of speech after another.
And that's how we were raised and we were kind of like indoctrinated.
And we appreciate that.
And we understand that sometimes the more creative it is, the more problematic.
Okay, let's cut to today.
And before you cut to today, and let's also recall that most of the suppression was coming from the right.
Myself, Howard Stern, people that were on the radio talking about provocative topics.
Remember when General Powell's son was the head of the FCC?
And when he was, he started cracking down on the speech of people on the radio.
It got ridiculous.
And that was the group.
And then there was a bunch of people trying to change the music and lyrics.
And that was the right.
And even they never took the kind of egregious, dangerous, destructive techniques to get their way.
They just raised a lot of hell.
But people whose lives are being destroyed now.
Thank you for saying this.
I don't know about the medical profession, whether you have conservatives or liberals, because this left-right paradigm is ridiculous.
I don't even know what it means, and I still don't know what it means.
You're right.
People in the old days were...
Pretty much to the left.
But it was sexual.
For the most part, it was words and sexual.
Now, today, with all due respect to Howard Stern, who was certainly a pioneer, and when I started in talk radio, it was around the time of Howard and Rush Limbaugh and others.
They used to have these things called shock jocks.
Do you know what shocks people today is the truth.
What will get people today is you can say anything you want about anything sexual.
That doesn't matter.
What bothers people more than anything today is for you to dare to contest or to reframe or restructure an accepted truth.
And that could be an historical reference, assassination.
Let me give you an example.
This is the way I think.
Alex Jones purportedly said that he did not believe that certain shootings took place.
Okay.
The issue is never, do I agree with this?
The issue is not whether I find this reprehensible.
That's not the issue.
The issue is very simply this.
The issue is, in fact, in law school, we always had the IRAC rule.
Issue, rule, analysis, conclusion.
What's the issue?
What's the rule?
Analyze the two and conclude it.
That's it.
Linear, critical thinking.
What's the issue?
The issue is, does he have the right to merely opine as to whether he believes an event did or didn't take place?
9-11, JFK, but whatever it is.
The answer I think most people would say, yes, he does have the right.
And you could argue in his case it was different.
Now, let's take today's kids.
Whatever that means, the kids.
The kids will say, but it's wrong.
Okay, to you.
No, no.
They'd say it hurts people.
It hurts people.
Well, that's the next one.
People get hurt.
It's hateful.
It's hurtful.
It's wrong.
Or they will say that they believe in this apodictic, manichaean, absolute of a trust to science.
And it's dangerous.
So what they're saying is, but the only good speech is dangerous.
What if somebody came along and said that this, I always was amazed by this.
Somebody comes along and says, I've got a glioma, a brain tumor, and I found out that papaya enemas will cure you.
Now you can say, no, wait a minute.
That's your opinion.
Yeah, but what if somebody were to forego medical treatment?
You know what I say?
That's the way it goes.
Free speech is a bitch.
It happens all the time.
It really is.
Look, Steve McQueen, if you remember, did not take medical treatment.
Steve Jobs.
I went down to Mexico.
DMSO.
Steve Jobs, terrible.
He could have been cured easily with a surgery.
Instead, he refused it.
He's entitled to refuse it, no matter how dumb the decision.
And again, Steve McQueen went down to Mexico and got coffee enemas.
But I want to grab a couple other ideas here.
So when it comes to the suppression of free speech, right?
All of us have always looked at a few historical moments in horror.
The McCarthy era universally agreed upon as that was an excess.
And the things that were done, I sort of think maybe the Alien and Sedition Act also was sort of in a similar, would you agree?
Palmer Raid.
So those two...
Yeah.
So those two historical moments that pretty much everybody goes, Alien Sedition Act, we went mad.
Why did we do that?
We could never do that again.
McCarthyism, we went mad.
We can't possibly do that.
We must never do that again.
In the McCarthy era, for accusations, 100 professors in the institution of higher education, 100 professors lost their job because of accusations.
My understanding, a law was put in place to protect against that.
In spite of that law, If you are accused of something today of not towing the, what should we say, the current, saying anything against the current truths, you'll be fired in spite of that law.
And now we are at a position, this is what Greg Lukianoff pointed out, 200 professors have been...
Lost their jobs in the present moment, and that is accelerating.
So we can't, and we seem unable to make the connection between what we are doing now and what we did during the McCarthy area, but we're doing it even worse at a much higher clip, and more people are being harmed.
What is going on?
Okay, a couple of things, too.
Not to, I hope I don't incur your wrath, but...
Not everything, the McCarthy era was not exactly what you think it is.
A lot of people would say, first of all, there were a lot of folks who were indeed members of the Communist Party.
It was a different time then.
It was post.
And McCarthy would say, I didn't say fire these people.
All I wanted to know was I set the stage.
What Hollywood did, Dalton Trumbo and others, that's their business.
But you bring up a very good point.
But I said, just to defend myself, I said it's the excesses of the McCarthy era.
The excesses of what we all agree are not okay.
You will never have to defend yourself in front of me, sir, as long as I live.
I will defend you.
I will take a bullet for you.
I'll stand in front of you.
I'll even protect you when you're in your water pick.
But here's the story.
Nobody in society cared about this.
There's not this part.
Let me give you a terrible example.
Marine Le Pen, who's always said, oh, she's a right-wing.
Anybody who's called anything radical, I want to hear them.
Left or right, I want to hear them, because I like these people already.
Give me a radical anything versus that, eh.
They asked her one time, what do you think about burkinis?
And she said, that's not French.
Now let me ask you this.
What would we say today about what is American?
What would we say?
Would you say, oh, no, that'll never fly.
What?
Because we're American.
What does that mean today?
It means nothing.
I live in a world, and I'm going to say to you, Dr. Drew, you can stop anything you want, but here's a knife, and I'm going to cut off a portion of your finger.
You can go ahead and limit it, but I'm going to take out part of your finger.
You'd be very careful.
You would not.
You know what?
You'd say, I don't think I'm going to be doing this.
I don't think I'm going to be doing this.
That's what I say.
I want to live in a world where you can say anything you want.
Now, if you want to have warnings, that's fine.
I have serious issues.
Let me see if I can explain this to you.
See if you can dig this.
Because I have gotten nowhere in my professional career.
I was here on September the 11th, that Tuesday morning.
I was here.
What I saw, and what in many instances the news reported, had nothing to do with each other.
And what I will say to you, absolutely unequivocally, that there are some, some portions of the quote official narrative that in no way reflect reality.
Now, period.
Now.
Immediately, here's what happens.
They will say, they will call me a what?
What's the word, kids?
What is the word?
What am I word?
Somebody who dares to question the official narrative of something is called a conspiracy theorist.
Yeah, there's several words they use now to immediately label you as a bad person.
Oh, anti-vaxxer.
All you have to do is say conservative.
If you say conservative, you're a bad person and no longer need to be listened to.
So you don't need to be listened to anymore.
That's it.
That's it.
You're a bad person.
But look how...
Now, what happens is we make these words to be a...
Fashion, almost like a hiccup, like the verbal fry is, like people who say particular phrases, that's amazing.
It becomes a tick.
So whenever you ask somebody, whenever somebody says something, and I always stop and say, do you know what a conspiracy is?
It's the law hates two things.
The fact that you did it, and the fact that you maybe arranged it.
You talk to somebody about this.
Conspiracy, conspire, conspirare, to breathe with someone.
You're breathing together.
You're in unison.
The conspiracy is the act, is the confederation.
That's the thing they hated.
Not what you did.
Sometimes you could conspire and not even follow through with it, and they still hated that.
Now, it's become a tip.
Oh, they, the royal they.
The people who say, for example, well, you know, Dr. Drew, I noticed that he was questioning the efficacy of masks.
Oh, that's another conspiracy theory.
And it's become ten amount or similar to a crazy tinfoil hat.
And by the way, it's aluminum.
We haven't used tin in years.
But that's a self-censorship.
You hear what's happening?
That's a self-censorship.
That's not the government.
Now, there are people.
That's the culture.
Let me tell you something.
There are people in your profession.
Let me tell you something.
If you're a doctor, a family practitioner, a practitioner, or internal medicine, you've got a family, you've got an overhead, you've got people, and they're going to tell you, listen, we don't want to hear you opine about the etiology and teleology of COVID.
And you might say, okay, listen, everybody's telling me to do this, so I don't give doctors a hard time.
But that was a conspiracy.
The conspiracy of silence, the conspiracy of you saying, wait a minute, hold it.
Now, there's this other thing.
Have you noticed that we don't ever talk about anybody saying anything like the old days where something was sexually inappropriate?
We're now talking about what will get you in trouble.
You can say anything you want.
You can drop F-bombs.
You can say anything.
That isn't going to be the problem.
What's going to be the problem is if you dare question this particular narrative.
And where it came, Dr. Drew, I have no idea.
Now, let's get this little proviso out of the way.
We all say this.
I don't care if you want to be a mollusk.
Nobody cares about this.
We all understand this.
But here's the story.
I'm here in New York.
I've been here for 30 years.
My wife and I, we've been involved in entertainment.
We know more, probably, probably, I want you to say, more gay people than you've ever known.
And in New York City, it's like saying right-handed, left-handed, no big deal.
And we've seen.
I do not know.
In no way in my life has the number of true transgenders ever comported or matched with that which I see at schools and people on TikTok.
Now, I'm not suggesting anything, and I'm not calling into question whatever.
But here's what I want to do.
May I, Dr. Drew, discuss this?
May I, in addition to those people who want to affirm and state affirmatively their particular thoughts about this, may I question perhaps motivations?
The answer is no.
You will not do that because then you are, what is it class?
A transphobe.
You are a transphobe and a conspiracy theorist.
And all of a sudden, I love the way the word, this is my favorite.
Everybody's jumping now on Roger Waters, who's supposedly anti-Semitic, but you can say certain things about either Israel, and I don't want to go there, please, but that word is like you use to say, let me see, what have I not used?
Oh, here's one, anti-Semitic.
Let me put that one on.
Whether it applies or not, whether it has anything to do with Judaism, we love new words.
And if you've noticed that...
And by the way, I love social media.
Social media, and TikTok in particular, has done more.
And maybe you would know this better than I, doctor.
I'm sure there's a word for it.
To either potentiate, not mental illness, but create new levels of identity, confusion, delusion, whatever it is, by virtue of this, not a drug, but a platform that potentiates and accelerates and almost inspires new forms.
Of loud and raucous confusion and ostentatious declarations of trans...
I came up with the term cryptophobic.
Not transphobic, but cryptophobic.
Because I just made it up.
Now, put this together.
We've all discovered together.
And you have an asylum.
We live in a world...
And Dr. Drew...
I don't care whether you...
And please, I don't want to use this to say anything political.
I don't care who it is.
I believe the next president most probably is going to be Gavin Newsom.
I'm going to tell you right now, he is going to be the Democratic nominee.
There's no doubt about that.
I promise you.
And I hope to God he does a good job.
But I am saying this again.
Hello, world.
I cannot take four more years.
And whoever's involved, whoever's responsible for this...
Doctor, do you know diseases that just kind of peter out or do diseases tend to get worse?
Because this insanity, this collective psychosis that we are going through in this ceremonial scrum, this choreographed lunacy, it's getting worse.
And it's not left or right or Republican.
It's like this performance psychosis.
So there's an old...
Psychiatrist named Mirlu Just, or Just Mirlu.
And he talked about these mass formations that come upon populations periodically.
And apparently it is a normal part of history.
And we are certainly in an era of such.
Have you met Caitlyn Jenner?
Do you know her yet?
No, I've not.
I've not.
I'm a big fan.
It would be good for you to talk to her.
Yeah, she suffered greatly with her gender issues.
I mean, really, like, had a profound, lengthy suicidal depression.
And she can help kind of help people understand.
Get a deeper understanding of some of these things.
And she says, much like you did, when you talk to her, she goes, I don't want you to think about this, anything that, whether I'm left-handed and I'm this, and that's the same thing.
It's just, it's nothing.
It's a nothing.
It's my thing.
You shouldn't even be thinking about it.
And I thought, okay, all right, fine.
And we actually supported her run for governor.
We had an interesting experience getting to know her a little bit.
Let me get off there for a second.
I'd like to take a call here if we could.
We have a few people raising their hand.
Speaking of Gavin Newsom.
He just said he wasn't going to run last night.
Well, no, he didn't say it.
He was asked it and he refused to answer.
Absolutely.
And Gretchen Whitmer is going to be his vice president.
What he was asked was, under any circumstances, under the wildest of circumstances, would you yes or no accept the nomination?
He was like, I don't know what you're talking about.
He refused to answer it.
You know, my ability to get people up to the podium here is kind of weird.
It constantly...
Tech 101.
The wheel comes in.
Yeah, he can save your life, but he can't get a phone call.
He'll get it.
Yeah, go ahead.
Let's go to Dr. Drew in surgery.
Now, this scalpel thing here.
Why didn't he become a surgeon?
One of the many reasons.
Caleb, what was that?
I got it.
I was just making sure your phone wasn't plugged in.
Caleb, did you get my text?
Susan's worried about something.
When it comes to our presentation this weekend.
Can you have a special show called the Dr. Drew Warm-Up Show?
Because the best time I've ever had is when I get in early, just to make sure, and to see you go through the warm-up.
It is the greatest.
I never heard somebody scream expletives.
People coming in to hold you down.
That wasn't me.
That was my wife.
That's how she gets stuff done.
The brush head.
Something about a brush head.
Are you still talking about that toothache?
I don't know what this is.
I want to say one other thing while it's on my mind real quick, which is you were talking about You know, essentially you were saying there's sort of no apologies for crushing people for not towing the party line, as it were, the current narrative.
And then you said something about ivermectin, and then Caleb flashed on the screen, right?
Flash up what you put up there about ivermectin, because I want to discuss how things have changed.
CDC states that ivermectin is not effective.
That's no longer true, Caleb.
The CDC is now on the record saying that ivermectin can be prescribed for early COVID.
And the Mayo Clinic is on the record saying that hydroxychloroquine can be used for early COVID.
They're not suggesting that you do so.
They're saying that it can be used if your doctor feels appropriate, which has always been the case.
However, YouTube still disagrees.
We have to follow YouTube's laws instead of the laws of the actual land.
The AI bots disagree.
But the point is the CDC doesn't say that anymore.
That's what I'm wondering about the disclaimer.
But anyway, was that Lionel?
You have the right to remain silent in anything you say can and will be used against you.
Do you think that this information that you just cited, which I do not in any way subscribe to whatsoever?
But do you think that information is new?
Or did they know this the whole time?
This sudden change of heart.
Here's the part that was disturbing to me.
I actually do not think that hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin are much of anything for COVID.
I'm not impressed by the data.
I've not seen it very useful.
But these are inert.
Harmless medication.
And hydroxychloroquine is so harmless that in the Internal Medicine Board reviews this year, in the rheumatology subsection, they suggested that our lupus patients on hydroxychloroquine, very common, first-line medication.
People sit on it for years with mixed connective tissue disease and mild lupus.
They suggested that these women stay on the hydroxychloroquine.
While pregnant.
That is a recommendation I have never heard for any medication, any, I cannot name a single medication, where they say just simply leave it on.
They say you can't leave it on, there might be some risk.
They said it's inert on the pregnancy, which is why they're able to get away with that.
Right.
And by the way, in the CDC's website, if you look under the immigration recommendations, if you are a refugee from something like 50 different countries, you must take five days of ivermectin before you come into this country.
Nobody has to evaluate you.
There's no concern about the ivermectin.
You just have to take it before you can come on in.
That's the CDC's recommendation, and now it's also their recommendation that it could be used in early COVID.
My point is, they've known forever these are safe and inert medicines.
I still don't believe it does very much, but if a doctor feels it does and would like to prescribe it for his or her patient, much like free speech, that should be their privilege.
Remember the joke with the punchline?
Couldn't hurt!
Remember that classic, there's an opera and the guy dies and it's...
And somebody says, give him an enema.
I go, sir, he's dead.
He goes, give him an enema.
I said, do you understand?
He's dead.
He says, couldn't hide.
You know, well, that's the...
I didn't realize underneath that was an enema joke, but continue.
Any way I can work enemas into it, if you notice, six or seven times.
I've got a problem with it.
Fecal impact?
I'm sorry.
It's weird.
Well, you're talking about this woman peeing on you the whole time.
You know, what am I, chopped liver?
How dare you?
Let's go back to something.
We have to ask ourselves this, and I want everybody, and maybe you can help me.
I want to have a boot camp for citizens.
I want to say, ladies and gentlemen, chapter one.
Political parties mean nothing.
They did it one time, Democratic-Republicans, and then we were kind of figuring out the Federalists and the Whigs.
It doesn't mean anything.
Two sides of the same coin.
It doesn't mean anything.
They are so corrupt.
These people and the higher up.
Now, you know where politics works?
Local.
School boards.
You want to see something?
Go to a school board.
Go to county commission.
Talk about traffic lights.
Also to talk Phil's notes.
Yeah.
Pardon me?
De Tocqueville also noted that when he, De Tocqueville again, I keep referring, when he was trying to figure out why democracy in America was working so well, his number one conclusion was local people practice democracy locally.
They practice it in their classroom.
They practice it in their townships.
They practice it in their counties.
And that's what led to the success on a larger scale, the local practice of democracy.
As you also know, being an emergency room physician, notice how I always work in the medical analogy.
There's a lot going on there.
You're looking at this person and you say, there's a lot going on here.
First of all, we don't kill him.
But F. Scott Fitzgerald said something to the effect of the mark of a great mind is somebody who can handle two seemingly inconsistent thoughts simultaneously and not lose their mind.
Let me give you an example of one.
One of the biggest issues that Republicans are not going to be...
I'm just throwing this in there.
They have no interest.
You must be able to come up with a cogent answer to explain climate change.
And you might or might not laugh about it, but if that's what everybody's talking about as a politician, I want to know something about this.
Okay, so that's it.
Let's talk about abortion.
I explain this to people.
I do not believe...
That it makes sense politically or rationally to ever ban abortions.
You can't do it.
It's ridiculous and you will lose every election.
And here's the answer why.
Very, very simply, without going into whether it's a human life, I don't want to put a woman in prison for an abortion.
Because if you're going to ban it, that means you're going to put them in prison.
If you're not going to put her in prison, it's not a ban.
Save you for the doctor and the nurse.
So I don't want to live in a world where we're putting doctors and women in prison.
Okay, fine.
Now, that being said, do I think?
Abortion is guaranteed by the Constitution?
Absolutely not.
Bear with me.
Fifth Amendment says you cannot be denied of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
Meaning that you can deny somebody of life.
You can kill them.
You can throw them in prison forever and you can take their stuff so long as you give them due process.
It doesn't grant anything.
It doesn't say you have the right.
The only thing it talks about, the right...
It's a procedural right.
That's all it talks about.
It's a procedure.
In 1965, there was a case called the notion of this, oh God, the contraceptive law.
And the Griswold, and there was a Supreme Court justice, William O. Douglas, who said that he thought it was ridiculous for there to be this law in Connecticut that would prohibit people from buying and possessing.
Contraceptives.
Even married couples.
And there was a Knights of Columbus Catholic thing.
And nobody really...
But anyway, it was brought up.
Now, William O. Douglas, listen to what he did.
Instead of saying, look, I'm sorry, there's nothing in the Constitution.
If a state wants to ban contraceptive, that's up to them.
You go to Hartford and you figure it out.
He said, oh, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
You see, and he said this, that there are rights that emanate from the penumbra.
And he talked about...
You know, there's this globe and there's lights and the rights.
And they said, what the hell are you talking about?
And he came up with privacy.
He made it up.
There's no privacy anywhere.
It's a good idea.
I believe in privacy.
I believe in happiness.
And I believe in love.
But it's not in the Constitution.
Okay.
That became the law.
1973 comes along and Roe against Wade.
What do they do?
Roe is the worst.
No decision you'll ever read.
No law.
None whatsoever.
Harry Blackmun, appointed by Nixon, said, hey, it was a thing called, oh yeah, privacy.
And he resurrected with this thing called substantive due process.
He took due process, which is a procedure.
He says, you know what?
Sometimes there are some rights that are so important, we just can't take them away.
And he made it up!
Now, let me go back.
I believe in pro-choice.
I believe that a woman, that no state, the state, don't ever ban it, but don't go to the Constitution.
Conversely, I'm against the death penalty.
I'm against it.
And it doesn't really matter why, but we're going to kill the wrong people in half.
But in the Constitution, it's very constitutional because it says life, liberty, and property.
So here's what I'm saying.
I'm against the death penalty, but it's in the Constitution, and I would uphold it as a judge because it's constitutional, even though I'm against it.
And I'm for abortion in practical purposes, but it's not in the Constitution.
So I would strike it down.
I've got news for you.
In the Constitution, nothing about the Air Force, nothing about marriage, nothing about voting, nothing about how many justices there are.
Filled with stuff that's not there.
And what happens is sometimes courts, and this is where it gets scary, sometimes they legislate.
You want a judge sometimes to be a surgeon who says, I don't want to cut yet.
I don't want to, I know this is too risky.
There's nothing there.
People have got this crazy idea.
You know the Dobbs case, the memo, the memorandum that was stolen from...
Alito, we still don't know what it is.
There's only a couple of clerks.
They know.
They're just not interested.
They look the other way.
And what they're going to do is, let me say something, whatever you want to think about the Democrats, they're good.
They want to do one thing.
They want to get rid of the filibuster.
They want to pack the Supreme Court and they want to make D.C. a state.
And you know what?
If they get their chance, they're going to do it.
Because, by the way, I am a registered independent.
I am a political atheist.
Republicans, they don't do anything.
They tweet.
They go on Fox.
They talk about Hunter Biden's laptop.
They do all kinds of stuff.
But the Democrats, let me tell you something.
They steal elections fair and square.
They will do it every time.
They go out there en masse and the Republicans sit back and they go on Hannity's show and they go, hey, this is great.
We're Americans.
You're worthless.
You don't do anything.
So, I want people to understand.
Throw politics away.
Ask yourself, start off with every day, Dr. Drew.
Ask yourself, what do I feel about this?
Independent of history or politics, what do I feel about this?
Is this something that I think is right or wrong?
Work from there.
But don't say, Barry Goldwater.
What would, I don't know who.
That's where they are today.
We are both here independent.
I don't know what Caleb is, but we're independents.
I'm a libertarian.
He's a Republican who wants to smoke dope.
I don't want to smoke dope.
I just like vodka.
But I think we've got to kind of roll to a stop right here.
I think we've...
Covered a lot of territory.
I've tried to get back.
I think we got most of the things out that I wanted to get to.
I'm sorry I didn't get to any calls.
Josh, I tried to get you up like five times.
There was something wrong technically going on here, but we'll be back on Tuesday.
Maybe the ghost is back.
Something weird is going on with the phone.
But on Tuesday, who is...
Oh, of course.
Thank you for being here.
It's been a nice little romp.
And Tuesday, Caleb, again.
There we go.
Tuesday is Reggie Littleton.
Oh, we won't be here.
That's right.
Kelly's going to do Tuesday.
Little John.
Little John.
And then...
Wednesday, October 4th, Kelly will be here and so will I. And I'm hearing rumors of Naomi Wolf.
And then on Thursday, Jay Bhattacharya comes back.
And the following Tuesday, Rob Schneider.
And then Wednesday, Peter McCullough is back.
Excellent.
He's on a warpath.
Look at Rob Schneider's Twitter.
Yeah, Rob Schneider is on a warpath against the New York Times.
Oh, no!
He is a good guy.
And I share...
I shared with him some of the...
He and I were together as targets of the New York Times on a couple of occasions.
That was the last time he was on the show.
We're going to try to get a comment from the New York Times.
Really?
You are?
Oh, they're going to say whatever.
They're going to say fuck off.
Yeah, good luck with that.
So, Lionel, any final thoughts?
And keep them short before I sign off here.
Question everything and then question it again.
And on behalf of the Grateful Nation, Dr. Drew, thank you not for what you do, but for what you appear to do.
And I mean that sincerely.
Leave it at that.
We love you.
Hope we can see.
We go to New York a lot.
Hope we'll have lunch or coffee or something there in the city.
Please!
That'd be really fun.
Yeah.
Are you in the Upper West Side?
Is that where you were?
Up East Side.
Hell's Kitchen!
Hell's Kitchen.
That's close.
Yeah, that's not far from us at all.
We're at Hudson Yards, so we will look for you very soon, maybe in a week or two.
All right, thank you, everybody.
We'll see you...
Oh, wait, wait.
We have to talk about the Skank Fest that's coming up.
Go ahead.
I don't know if Lionel really wants to know about this.
All right, let's let Lionel go.
▲
Export Selection