Ask Dr. Drew - Brazil’s “Extreme Censorship” Of 𝕏 And Rumble Is A Threat To Truth & Freedom Worldwide w/ Tom Renz & Jeremy Tedesco – Ask Dr. Drew – Ep 399

Episode Date: September 8, 2024

“From media reports, Brazil no longer has Elon Musk’s X due to attacks on free speech by Alexandre De Moreas, a justice of Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court,” writes Chris Pavlovski, CEO of Rumble. “They want to control information, but our companies won’t let them.” Even journalist Michael Shellenberger says he is “being criminally investigated by Brazilian authorities for exposing their attempts to censor.” Is this style of authoritarian censorship creeping into America’s future? Tom Renz is an attorney from Ohio conducting ‘Lawfare for Freedom’ by fighting corruption surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic at state and federal levels. Find out more at https://renz-law.com and follow him at https://x.com/RenzTom Jeremy Tedesco is senior counsel and senior vice president of corporate engagement for Alliance Defending Freedom. He leads efforts to address corporate cancel culture and promote business ethics respecting free speech and religious freedom. His legal career includes arguing before federal appellate courts and contributing to U.S. Supreme Court cases like Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. Tedesco earned his J.D. from Regent University School of Law in 2004. Learn more at https://adflegal.org and follow at https://x.com/ADFLegal 「 SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS 」 Find out more about the brands that make this show possible and get special discounts on Dr. Drew's favorite products at https://drdrew.com/sponsors  • FATTY15 – The future of essential fatty acids is here! Strengthen your cells against age-related breakdown with Fatty15. Get 15% off a 90-day Starter Kit Subscription at https://drdrew.com/fatty15 • CAPSADYN - Get pain relief with the power of capsaicin from chili peppers – without the burning! Capsadyn's proprietary formulation for joint & muscle pain contains no NSAIDs, opioids, anesthetics, or steroids. Try it for 15% off at https://drdrew.com/capsadyn • PALEOVALLEY - "Paleovalley has a wide variety of extraordinary products that are both healthful and delicious,” says Dr. Drew. "I am a huge fan of this brand and know you'll love it too!” Get 15% off your first order at https://drdrew.com/paleovalley • THE WELLNESS COMPANY - Counteract harmful spike proteins with TWC's Signature Series Spike Support Formula containing nattokinase and selenium. Learn more about TWC's supplements at https://twc.health/drew 「 MEDICAL NOTE 」 Portions of this program may examine countervailing views on important medical issues. Always consult your physician before making any decisions about your health. 「 ABOUT THE SHOW 」 Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Kaleb Nation (https://kalebnation.com) and Susan Pinsky (https://twitter.com/firstladyoflove). This show is for entertainment and/or informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Yes, we have some very interesting guests again today. Of course, the salt will flow next week. Is it next week? Help me, everybody. Tomorrow. It's tomorrow. The salt will flow. You're right.

You're right. Today is Tom Renz, attorney from Lawfare for Freedom, fighting corruption surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic at state and federal levels. You can follow Tom at tomrenz.com, T-O-M-R-E-N-Z, and tomrenz.substack, and renztom on X.

Then we'll be joined by Jeremy Tedesco. He is from the Alliance Defending Freedom. Freedom will be a key subject today, which I think we should all keep our sights set on freedom, free speech, religious freedom. His career, he's been arguing before federal appellate and contributed to U.S. Supreme Court cases like Masterpiece Cakeshop versus Colorado Civil Rights Commission. JD from Regent University Law School. You can follow more at adflegal.org. And we'll be back with Tom Renz after this. Our laws as it pertained to substances are draconian and bizarre. A psychopath

started this. He was an alcoholic because of social media and pornography, PTSD, love addiction, fentanyl and heroin. Ridiculous. I'm a doctor for f**k's 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 want help stopping, I can help. I got a lot to say. I got a lot more to say. Joint and muscle pains are exhausting and frustrating, but I've got an over-the-counter medication I want to introduce you to that provides great relief using the power of, check it out, chili peppers. Capsidone is made with a proprietary

formula that contains no non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, no opioids, no anesthetic or steroid, nothing, no chance for addiction, no side effects, no chance it's going to interact with other medication you might be taking. Capsodin contains capsaicin, which is the substance in chili peppers that burns your tongue. It gives you that burny feeling. And of course, I've recommended capsaicin creams to patients over the years, but other capsaicin creams burn your skin. That's what makes capsidin so unique. In clinical trials, capsidin has actually been demonstrated not to burn. I've been using capsidin to relieve my pain in my hands and my wrist from carpal tunnel syndrome and arthritis. The results have been amazing. I use it every day during my show, and I highly recommend it.

Get the pain relief you need from various sources, even backaches, sprains, bruises even. Order now at capsidin.com slash drew to get a 15% discount plus free shipping. That is C-A-P-S-A-D-Y-N capsidon.com slash D-R-E-W and as I said we're going to have a command performance here

I don't think my mic is on is my mic on our side? can you guys hear me at your end, Caleb? yeah, I hear you but something happened to your camera I'm going to fix it

okay, something happened to the camera also okay so fair enough we are good here we are going to bring our friend tom renz back in just a second you can follow him and on x at renz renz tom r-e-n-z-t-o-m and tomrenz.com and also tomrenz.substack.com he has been looking on looking carefully at the issue of freedom and corruption surrounding COVID-19 pandemic.

And as he will always be certain to tell us, he's just some poor schlub from Ohio. I believe those are his words. Some poor country attorney doesn't know too much, but you've judged for yourself. Tom, welcome back. Glad to be here, Doc. Thanks for bringing me back. So it's always interesting to hear what you're fighting for and on. What is in your crosshairs now? So, you know, when we went through this whole COVID thing, the thing that I kept coming back to is, you know, if Fauci's a

crook, if our FDA, if HHS, if these guys are all selling out and doing bad things, if governors, if state elected officials, federal elected officials, everybody else, if all these people are doing this, who's paying them, right? Because this is a coordinated thing, and cro they don't go crooked for no reason. The one common characteristic of every crook is that they're very self-interested, right? Now, there are people who commit crimes for altruistic reasons. I stole money to feed my family, but that's not what we're looking at here. When we look at COVID, this was done by people who were very self-interested. There was $14, $15 trillion with a T dollars to change hands in the United States alone based on COVID.

We now know, and it's been admitted that Fauci said, hey, I lied. There was no science behind social distancing. Hey, those mask things, yeah, maybe they didn't work. A lot of this stuff was garbage. So the question becomes, who would fund this? Who would pay for this? Who would facilitate this? And so a lot of my efforts right now are really surrounding that. Who did this? And as I've dug into that, the thing that's really been shocking to me is the connections that I'm finding. The connections between COVID, there was a lot of talk about the allegations of election fraud in 2020. And who was behind that, if you believe it. If you don't, we can talk about that too. But essentially what I've done is I've looked around

and I've found some common cores of corruption. And so I've been kind of tracing that up and following the money and following everything and trying to see what's happening next and really trying to predict where we're going. There's all the talk of disease X. We see the monkeypox. We see the bird flu

we see all these things we get the international health emergency on monkeypox so they're not done with the health issue and it seems like the same people who were involved with monkeypox who were involved with disease X are the same people who were behind COVID and who are involved with a lot of other things too. Pick your issue. Maybe you don't like election fraud, but I think we can all agree that there's

some issues with the Southern border and the illegal immigration that's occurring. Always, again, when I follow the money, the money keeps going to the same people. So that's what I'm looking at and I'm trying to work through not only how did that happen, how did they do it, what are they doing, but also how do we stop them? I will, Tom,

the thing that lately has been preoccupying to me is the continued forcing of the mRNA platform for COVID, and that there's mandates and childhood recommendations, and the CDC goes on and on and on about it. And oh, by the way, under their breath, there is Novavax. Oh, by the way, Covaxin is a whole virus alternative. Isn't that odd that there's one vaccine or two vaccine producers that they push Uber Alice above everything else when there are, frankly, better, safer alternatives? And we could argue about whether that's true or not, but I would argue just the simple fact that we directed the vaccine factory that the mRNA is,

the vaccine factory to produce the pathogenic component of the virus, the part that does the most damage, as opposed to exposing our immune system to the entire virus or most multiple antigens in the virus and let our body deal with that as we build our immune system to the entire virus or most multiple antigens in the virus and let our body deal with that as we build our immune response has to be a broader, maybe better immune response without the massive production of a pathogenic protein. What is going on? And by the way, they did just approve Novavax for the FDA. I think it's an EUA again, but it might be a regular approval. But nobody mentions Covaxin because it's not made by a U.S. company. Yeah, well, I'll one-up you.

Let's look at the massive, massive, and I believe it's over a billion dollars of federal money that's gone into mRNA vaccines for cancer. How about integrating mRNA into the shingle shot, into RSV, into the flu shots? I mean, these are things, some of these things, shingles have been out for a while. I mean, we've had flu vaccines forever. Why suddenly do we need mRNA and everything? Now, Doc, you and I have had kind of some back and forth on this a little bit. And, you know, I'm a dumb kind of some back and forth on this a little bit. And, you know, I'm a dumb lawyer, so you're a lot smarter than me. I know you love that. I don't know anything. Yeah, yeah. Okay, here we go.

But I'll tell you. Oh, no. The internet. One of the things that you and I... You froze for a second there. The internet doesn't like it either. You know, it's okay. So, when you look at mrna right so that you are literally injecting genetic material into your body for therapeutic purpose now i don't know how that's not a gene therapy i mean if it literally is the definition of the word so you take these gene therapy drugs and they seem hell-bent on getting these into people when it's unnecessary. And we've never needed gene therapy drugs.

We've had all sorts of vaccines, all sorts of other things. And, you know, I've gotten to the point where I've become a little suspicious of all the vaccines. And by a little suspicious, I mean I really don't trust any of them, which is probably a natural evolution given what we've found with COVID. But why do we keep pushing this gene therapy platform? Why do we keep pushing something that has the capacity to create genetic changes potentially in a human, potentially? I recognize that they claim that the mRNA, except for in rare cases, doesn't integrate into the DNA. But I would also ask when people say that, well, do you trust that that's what's actually occurring? Do you trust that that's what they say? I mean, at the end of the day, you have these gene therapy drugs that they're pushing out, and why? Why are they doing

that? And is it part of a larger agenda? What is the value to this? What is the purpose? And we're funding it on a massive, massive scale. Beyond the government funding, there has literally been over a trillion dollars with a T worth of investment globally into mRNA gene therapy type platforms. Why? Where are they going with this? And why are they so hell bent on messing with genes when we have never needed that? Still there with me.

Caleb, at this end, Caleb, can I ask you, are you getting litch Caleb at this end Caleb can I ask you are you getting litchy at your end no everything's going fine from Tom's side and everything your internet keeps stuttering I think probably because of the new router but I'm going to try to fix it remotely okay so I can't catch about

60% of what Tom says unfortunately but that's not going out over the internet right that's just coming this way no no everybody can hear it can hear it. No, he's, he's all fine. You're fine. We can also hear and see you clearly. Just not me. Okay. So I got a piece of what you're saying, Tom. And so Mike, that you, I don't think you answered the question though. What is, and I, you know, I actually was looking forward to the mRNA platforms for cancer. I mean, look, when you have somebody that is going to die, you take all kinds of risk. The risk-reward analysis is totally different than, say, a 22-year-old male with zero risk from Omicron taking a vaccine with a non-zero risk. That's one risk-reward analysis.

Another is I'm using a new platform that may have some adverse events. I'll find out soon enough some adverse properties to it. But it's going to be used to treat a patient with a 95% chance of dying in the next 12 to 24 months. Very different situation. And so I was looking forward to these mRNA vaccines for all sorts of things as it pertained to cancer. Is it about cancer that they are trying to bring these platforms in on all fronts? And to just use it as yet unthought of therapeutic for so many different illnesses, we don't even understand what's coming yet.

And just vaccine is the first wave, do you think? No, I don't think that's correct. And I'll tell you why I don't think that's correct. And I'll tell you why I don't think that's correct. Here's where you and I differ. Y'all doctors tend to approach things from a very altruistic perspective. Lawyers, we don't trust anybody. Everybody's a liar, right? Because that's what we deal with. So from the lawyer's perspective, okay, let's say that they have an altruistic purpose for mRNA and cancer. Then does that mean that we're going to undergo the 20 years of testing that we should do to determine its actual safety and efficacy?

Are we going to look for long-term testing, or are they going to shove this through with some more EUA nonsense? I mean, if, in fact, they intend to do this, we never really even tested them on a platform until 2020 at the very end of it. So that would mean that at the earliest, we would expect a 2040 rollout of this for cancer. But I don't think that's going to happen. We've all heard that they plan on rolling this out real quick. Why the legal duplicity? Why are they playing all the games with the law if this is actually safe and effective? Why not give it the 20 years of testing? Because we don't know. I have the FDA industry guidance documents where they recognize that mRNA vaccines such as these have the potential to cause cancer, have the potential to cause autoimmune issues. I may not be able to make the arguments as a doctor, but I don't need to.

Why would the FDA write it? Do we trust them or do we not? And since the FDA has put that on paper, why then are we not doing the proper studies to determine whether the long-term impacts of mRNA are cancer? I mean, we not only threw mRNA out there, remember, but we also threw out the lipid nanoparticle. I mean, all the components of this were all just thrown out at once. We didn't test them individually. There were no long-term tests. And, you know, to me, I don't at all look forward to this as a mechanism to deal with cancer. My wife has stage four cancer, of course. And yeah, I'm going to tell you that

hell will freeze over before I would stand by and allow them to put an mRNA injection into her arm for the cancer in light of all the turbo cancers I'm seeing that were caused by the mRNA from the COVID vaccines. It makes no sense to me to even consider that. I understand what you're feeling about it. And breast cancer wasn't one of the cancers I was thinking of in terms of vaccine therapies. But there are plenty of things that doctors use that when they backfire, I mean, CAR T

cells, that kind of stuff, these things are wonderful when they work and they are nasty when they go the other direction. So again, medicine is, you have to understand that this is the biological system. That's my main complaint is this thus sayeth the Lord. It has to be this way or the highway. Just trust the science. All this nonsense has been deeply, deeply disturbing to me because it

ran exactly amok of what science is, which is a process. I said 40 years ago there should never be a headline in science because even the Salk vaccine wasn't a headline. There's no such thing as a headline in science because there's even the Salk vaccine wasn't a headline. There's no such thing as a headline in science because the entire endeavor is a process. It's a process of getting an approximation of the truth, moving towards an understanding.

There's never a just, it is just so. Never on anything. It's always an evolutionary process. And so when people are confused, when the public is confused now, well, why should we believe this? Why should we believe that? Because you shouldn't believe any of it

because science is a process of continued evolution. However, nor should you be the Spanish Inquisition when a Galileo steps up and goes, hey, I've got an idea. There's something totally different going on here. I think the earth revolves around the sun. You need to shut up. I get it. It's very threatening when somebody says something that runs contrary to the entire infrastructure. I get it. But that's science. That's how it works. And unfortunately, because everyone has an outlet in their phone and can declare the truth, we have a problem.

So what do you think is happening? Who is at fault? What were they doing? Is it all just money? I mean, trillions of dollars had to change hands for people to be happy. What do you think? What's your sort of, when you put the story together, what do you think happened here? Is it just money adulterating people's judgment or is there something more comprehensive going on

well i got to be honest with you and we've talked a lot about uh you know the origins of covet and you know i had you know i filed suits on this i've worked on this i've testified on this and you know this was i i don't know how anybody can argue this didn't come out of the Wuhan lab. Okay. I don't think that any credible person can say that at this point. And it was created with government funding from the United States. It was created with public-private partnerships all over the place. And that's what I want to focus on, right?

The public-private partnerships. So, what I've found is, and I know that you've been talking a little bit about censorship lately, right? So, what I've found is there's this new concept in the law that's being used everywhere, and it's this public-private partnership, and it's not actually new. It's just that we're now hearing about it. Our intelligence agencies, our Defense Department has used this for years for purposes that, frankly, are a little bit scary. You may recall after Gulf War, remember the waterboarding? Remember the accusations that we were torturing prisoners in Gitmo? Yeah. And, you know, a lot of that was supposedly being carried out by defense contractors, right?

Not just in Gitmo, but in, you know, they talked about this occurring in different prisons around the world. Well, that was done by defense contractors for a long time. Our government has been outsourcing things that are illegal or unconstitutional to people who they give immunity contracts to that include immunity from prosecution. The concept of the public-private partnership is a scary way to get around the Constitution. So our Constitution, structurally, is about creating limits for the government. When the government can partner with private industry to allow them to, with impunity, ignore the law and accomplish a governmental goal, that's a very scary thing. Now, if you're someone who just kind of trusts what's going on, you might say, well, listen, it's not the government forcing Facebook to censor, right? It's not the government forcing Facebook to censor, right?

It's not the government forcing Facebook to censor. It's not, yeah, it's not any of that. But yeah, to a lawyer, to me, when I look at these fact patterns, yeah, I see something that there's absolutely collusion here. I see they're absolutely working around it. And I have a lot of evidence on this. I've really started to see and started to understand this concept. And the public-private partnership is something that I'm seeing that could be a wonderful thing if used properly, but is presently, I think, one of the greatest threats to our civil rights that exists.

How did we get COVID out there, the COVID vaccines out there, right? Unsafe, ineffective, dangerous diseases. We've got the AG of Kansas just filed a great lawsuit on this where he says just that. And when we look at this, how did that happen? Well, it was through a public-private partnership. Everybody knew that these weren't safe. They were untested. They were going to be all sorts of problems. So, what did they do? Well, Pfizer and Moderna and all these guys agreed to make these poisons and they agreed to sell them not to you and I, but to the Department of Defense. Well, how does that work, right? So they got waivers.

They got all sorts of waivers regarding the testing and procedures because they said there's an emergency. They said COVID was an emergency, right? And that emergency, of course, was based on faulty PCR testing where we were running the PCR test at way too high cycle thresholds for it to be effective. We're getting tons of false positives and arguably a lot of misdiagnosis of the flu is COVID. So they call it an emergency, which by the way, if the flu was being treated as COVID, well, doc, you tell me. I mean, if you have the flu and you treat it with remdesivir in a vent, is that the appropriate treatment process? You can argue with me about that. What they did was they created an emergency to justify these public-private partnerships and to justify the emergency powers that they use to facilitate these public-private partnerships. Then, through these public-private

partnerships, they create these vaccines, which I have argued and I've presented evidence actually before Congress, these vaccines were created far before 2020. I actually testified and I put my name under penalty of perjury on a document showing that we had, and Drew, I don't know if you saw this, but I actually brought into Congress my name on a declaration under penalty of perjury that I had done my best to verify the documents, official medical records of a soldier. And in five different instances in the year 2015, this soldier received, quote, Moderna COVID-19 vaccination. How did that happen? Now, no one wanted to investigate this. I don't know why it was in his medical records, but no one wanted to investigate it.

So I would argue that this stuff was all out there. But they used emergency powers to get these shoved through so they can give these to people, and then they sell it to the DOD. The DOD then grants the vaccine manufacturers complete and total immunity under the PrEP Act. And then when you get your vaccine, you're getting it from the DOD, not Pfizer, not Moderna. So if you got any problems, you have to sue the DOD before you can even get to Pfizer and Moderna, which is impossible. I mean, the whole thing's impossible. So you had something that they knew was risky.

Otherwise, why would they take so many steps to make it impossible for people to be made whole for this cure? It seems more than a little fish. Are the other vaccines also being produced for the Defense Department? I would have to look to see which new ones are. For instance, was Johnson & Johnson before they canceled that appropriately? Yes. So I'm guessing Novavax has something similar.

We don't have all the contracts not all of them are available but the contracts that I've seen they were all given basically the same deal and uh you know why why do you need so much immunity if you're putting out something that's so safe and effective why would you need to build all those layers that isn't how you normally do it I I mean, normally if you get a vaccine, you get the vaccine act that protects them, but you don't normally have that many layers. Why so many special layers? Why is that necessary? It just seems a little fishy to me. Yeah. There's a lot of fishiness. I agree with you. And actually, the public-private partnership, I mean, my understanding was we used to just call that allowed the three-letter agencies to turn their anti when they declared that the that domestic terrorism was the greatest threat to the country they could

then turn their terrorism operation inward to this country and now we have a situation where the intelligence agencies have turned on the people. In addition to these private-public partnerships, how could you ever get at them if the intelligence agencies are there protecting it? Am I on to anything with that? You're absolutely on to something. The entirety of the U.S. military-industrial complex has been turned against the American people, in my opinion. I mean, listen, so we found, I've done some work on this. There was a pretty clever way. So, CIA is not supposed to work in the U.S., right? Now, yeah, NSA, through some of these things, you know, we can turn our federal agencies against American people if they're viewed as terrorists, sort of, kind of, right?

There's supposed to be some checks and balances on that. Not sort of, kind of. Yeah, sort of, kind of. For reals, as they say. And yeah, I think this is, I, by the way, want to apologize. I look for opportunities to apologize for where I was wrong. I was very critical of people

that were skeptical about the Patriot Act. And I was like, well, I got nothing to hide. What's the big deal? I'm wrong. I was very critical of people that were skeptical about the Patriot Act. And I was like, well, I got nothing to hide. What's the big deal? I'm sorry. I never imagined our government would turn on us. But if I were a good enough student of history, I would have said, of course, they're going to abuse it and turn it on the people. That's the reason for the Constitution that now is also under assault. Absolutely, it is. By all the same people, right? So when we look at this, by the way, you want an interesting little tidbit? You know where some of this started? So there's a couple different pieces of software that our federal government's developed. We're working on this. Privacy's dead. Your metadata, everything that you do is collectible. And they can now analyze it with AI and determine anything they want to know about you. The idea that you have privacy is absurd. And they did that through the public-private partnership, right? I mean, the private

entities collect all sorts of data that the federal government never could. And then through some shady contract stuff, which, by the way, you get a new cell phone. What is the first thing you do? You agree, you agree, you agree, you agree to 300 different contracts that nobody ever reads. Well, those contracts are all about data sharing, right? That data is then collected and analyzed. with ai and some analysis tools they have they can tell you anything that they want to tell you about how do you think they figured out that the guy who tried to shoot trump yeah they collected his metadata they knew that he was at that building next to the fbi they knew who was talking to him how do you think they did that

you can do that for anyone in this country. People don't realize how dead their privacy is. All done through public-private partnerships. The whole, the entirety of the internet is based on this public-private partnership concept. It's a data collection tool. So privacy is dead. And what you see, and another interesting thing. And it's, again, following the money. Follow the money. That's what has value, has monetary value. That's why it really got going. Do you want to make one one last comment then I've got to take a break yes sir well I just wanted to let you know this so one of the interesting ways that they initially got around you know taking deep investigations into Americans is our CIA partnered with the number of intel agencies from around the world.

And what they would do is they would tell MI6 to spy on a specific American. And they couldn't spy on a specific American. But when MI6 did, they could access MI6's data. Interpol, some of these other international police organizations. Basically, the entirety of our intelligence community is just as much a danger to an American as they are to a foreigner at this point. With that good news, we'll take a little break here. I want to talk a little bit about the untangling of the public-private partnerships, or if there's anything to be done about that and the oversight by some of these international intelligence agencies and our own tom renz is with us uh at the top of the hour we'll

welcome uh whoops hold on one second we will have jeremy in here jeremy tedesco who's the senior counsel and vice president of alliance defending freedom he's got some issues similar to what Tom is talking about. Follow Tom at RenzTom on X, also TomRenz.com, Substack.com for more of these thoughts. And we'll be right back with more Tom right after this. I'm excited to bring you a new product, a new supplement, Fatty. I take it. I make Susan take it. My whole family takes it. This comes out of, believe it or not, dolphin research. The Navy maintains a fleet of dolphins, and a brilliant veterinarian recognized that these dolphins sometimes developed a syndrome identical to our Alzheimer's disease. Those dolphins were deficient in a particular fatty

acid. She replaced the fatty acid, and they didn't get the Alzheimer's. Humans have the same issue and we are more deficient in this particular fatty acid than ever before. And a simple replacement of this fatty acid called C15 will help us prevent these syndromes. It's published in a recent journal called Metabolites. It's a new nutritional C15, pentadecanoic acid, it's called. The deficiency that we're developing for C15 creates something called the cellular fragility syndrome. This is the first nutritional deficiency syndrome to be discovered in 75 years and may be affecting us in many ways, and as many as one in three of us. This is an important breakthrough. Take advantage of it. Go to fatty15.com slash drdrew to receive 15% off a 90-day starter kit

subscription, or use code drdrew at checkout for that 15% off, or just go to our website, drdrew.com slash fatty15. Many of us have not gotten over COVID. I'm not talking about the virus itself, but the response. We were flabbergasted by what the government could do to us. There is no telling what they might pull next time. And it's looking more like there will be a next time. So we all have to be what I call rationally ready. That's where the wellness company comes in.

TWC is about access. Access to physicians via telehealth. Access to potentially life-saving medication. Years ago, having access to medication and telehealth might have seemed crazy, but now it seems crazy not to. Now, with claims that gain-of-function research have been done in the bird flu, I urge everyone to take control of their healthcare with the help of the wellness company. Go to drdrew.com slash TWC for 10% off all their products, including the four medical kits, each of which has a different purpose. And we've added Tamiflu to one of them in case the bird flu does become a problem for humans.

Be rationally ready. drdrew.com slash TWC for 10% off. That's brilliant. And thank you, Drew. Who's Dr. Drew? Where is he? Dr. Drew. Dr. Drew. Who's Dr. Drew? Where is he? Dr. Drew. Dr. Drew. And one more thing, whether you're headed to the office or the gym, I want to remind you about our friends at Paleo Valley. Again, they have superior products, nothing like starting your morning with the caffeine and the protein.

At least that's how we see it. I put the Paleo Valley grass-fed finished chocolate bone broth in our coffee. Superior by every metric, delicious, high in collagen, low in calorie, great taste, made from bones, not hides, and grass-finished means the cattle are grass-fed their entire lives. Paleo Valley's bone broth helps in the battle against sarcopenia, losing muscle mass as we age. So it's an integral part of any weight-bearing workout regimen. Get adequate protein. Make it part of yours today. drdrew.com slash paleovalley for 15% off your first order

or subscribe to save 20%. You do not run out. You do not want to. You will love this stuff. It is drdrew.com slash paleovalley. And don't forget our friends at Fatty and True Niage and other things I do on a daily basis. So we have Tom Renz here.

We're going to talk about untangling. And capsidin. And capsidin, of course, which Susan now uses on bug bites too. You want to talk about that? Yeah. I had a bee bite on my finger and a couple of, I got a mosquito bite last night too when I was out on the porch. And I just put a little capsid on it and it helped the inflammation and the itchiness. You announced it right then.

I did. So I want to talk to Tom about untangling with his Lawfare for Freedom Alliance the issues around the public-private partnerships and the cover by the three-letter agencies. So what do we do about this? Well, the first thing we got to do is we have to understand where it's coming from, right? And I don't think it's from any one spot. You've got to remember, I mean, a lot of people made a lot of money off of COVID. A lot of people made

a lot of money off of censorship. A lot of people, I mean, there's money to go around, right? So you've got all of these different giant megacorporations making all of this different streams of income. And you've got to ask yourself how and where, right? So let me read to you this direct quote. This is from the World Economic Forum's mission statement. The World Economic Forum is an international organization for public-private cooperation. It provides global impartial not-for-profit platform for meaningful connection between stakeholders to establish trust, maintain initiatives for cooperation and progress, right? So, the World Economic Forum is essentially a trade group for the megacorporations of the world,

right? Now, they have numerous things that they're pushing for, including these public-private partnerships as solutions for everything, which you so eloquently pointed out before used to be called fascism. So one of the things that's interesting when I looked at this, Drew, was, and we can go right into COVID on this and censorship. So Yuval Noah Harari, who's getting a lot of fame, he's got all sorts of books out and everybody talks about this guy, and I think he's kind of a whack job to my mind. Let me read you a direct quote from him. National surveillance must be done by an independent healthcare authority which is free of political and commercial interests.

Now, Yuval Noah Harari is the same guy that said free will is bogus, that humans were hackable creatures, the human mind is hackable. I mean, he's made all sorts of crazy statements. Now, he is the number two at the World Economic Forum, right under Klaus Schwab. Now, when I look at this, national surveillance should be done by an independent health care authority free of political and commercial interests. Well, if it's not accountable to the body politic, who are they accountable to? Who should be doing this? Right.

And so we look at the World Economic Forum and I started looking at a number of things related to them. And it's frankly a little bit creepy, some of the stuff they're pushing. I don't disagree. Now, we do have to recognize when we look at the World Economic Forum, they're out of Europe. So they have a different cultural approach. As an American attorney, I'm concerned about my constitution, my freedom, and then we can get to the rest of the world after we preserve ours, right? You can't clean someone else's house until you've cleaned your own. So, you know, when I look at this, I make for some cultural allowances. But when I see this guy talking about humans as hackable, humans as this, humans as this,

and I look at the Agenda 2030, which the World Economic Forum, actually there is a contract or an agreement between the World Economic Forum and the UN. Agenda 2030 is thought to be a UN initiative, but the World Economic Forum is greatly and deeply involved into it. They're also deeply involved with a lot of what's happening throughout this country. Now, understand that the World Economic Forum is a collection of its corporate stakeholders, right? So, I mean, when we talk about this, we're not talking about a single entity. We're talking about numerous multi-billion

or trillion dollar entities working together collectively. And so a lot of what's happened seems to be, when I trace the money, related to various stakeholders within the World Economic Forum. Now, when people talk about this on the right side of things, a lot of them kind of, they paint it with very broad brushstrokes. And Drew, you're too smart to let that happen.

So I'm going to try and be a little more succinct about a few things. The World Economic Forum is, they're made up, they have a number of goals and initiatives. Within those goals and initiatives, they take different mechanisms to promote them. And the stakeholders within those different goals and initiatives either support them or they don't. And if you're working in biomedical and you're working on an initiative related to the WEF, and you want to make sure that your message gets out and someone else's doesn't, well, you're going to probably reach out to, say, I don't know, like a Facebook, one of the tech people who are members of the WEF and say to them, hey, we're helping you on

this. Will you help us on that? Make sure that your message is censored. That seems to be the common core of what occurred during COVID, right? Hey, big pharma over here. Hey, we need some help, guys, because there's going to be bad press about the people dying from our COVID vaccines. Can everybody kind of, you know, our other WF partners, can you guys pile on and help us make sure that, you know, that message isn't getting out too much? And by the way, we'll back you on another issue. And, you know, hey, we've got a lot of lobbying money and a lot of lobbyists.

So, you know, if we throw support behind you, it'll be useful, right? There seems to be this tit for tat going on. And if you follow the money, you can see it. You can see where it goes. It's complicated. It's convoluted. But it's actually pretty straightforward when you really start digging into what's going on. And I think that the first step in untangling

this is understanding where the corruption comes from. It's not one person. It's not one entity. It's a little bit of corruption from an awful lot of different places. And those places are collectively working together through the WEF and through different groups. But they're not really working together for the betterment of humanity. They're working together for the betterment of themselves. And that seems to be where a lot of these issues are coming from. Tom, would it not be the case that they're telling themselves that they're working for the benefit of humanity? Whenever you have human beings involved,

I mean, this is what the founding fathers were worried about, that you have human beings with unrestrained authorities of various types or ability to carry out massive uh anything over a relatively uh unsuspecting or weaker populace i mean that's the problem is that there's a wisdom in crowds that and that there's there's always excess in leaders the more power they get. And that needs to be checked. Is it just that we have a whole new version of this now? We think of it as something that needs a formal government to require a piece of paper that checks them. And it's not just a

piece of paper, by the way. I found that a disgusting statement. Thank you, New York Times. Nor do I think the First Amendment is a, quote, threat, unquote. But do we need some sort of... I don't know how you do it, because it is an international body, an international court or something. Are you going to have to go from Congress

now to the Hague to sort of try to put some restraints on these people? There's a lot of policies that we could put in place, a lot of laws that we could either enforce or change that would really get us back to the core of the Constitution. I don't think that we have to look externally. And, you know, there's a great danger to allowing external law to impact our country, right? We have the Constitution. And interestingly enough, and I'll throw this at you on the lawyer side, right? Some lawyer nuance.

The Constitution is the document that empowers the government to exist, right? It's the creation. The government's a fiction. It's the group of people who sit in Washington. They have their power because we've agreed to follow that founding document. So understand that all power necessarily flows from the Constitution to anything. Our government has no power except for the power we assign to it. That Constitution is key. Now, let me give you an example. If everybody's on the freeway driving 70 and the speed limit is 55, who gets a ticket? Nobody. The guy who's driving 80, right? So a law is meaningful only so long as the people

governed by it are willing to follow it. The problem that we have is when we see the attacks like the New York Times on our constitution, what you're having is you're having people try and discredit the origin document. They're trying to get rid of... See, the origin document in our story, in the story of the United States, is one that was not a document that empowered a government, but limited it. The entire purpose of the Constitution was to limit powers. To protect the...

Now, I would go further and say protect the people from the government really yeah i mean that certainly the the bill of rights is that i mean it's it's they they the founding fathers had uh a thousand years of government's excess uh and examples of where they could be balanced and work better. And they put it in place to protect the people, given the endowment that the people gave the document. Yeah, absolutely. And you have to understand, we have gotten so far from the origins of the Constitution

that we really, it's unrecognizable. You have a group of people who started a revolution and kind of one of the major triggering events was a tea tax that resulted in a tea party. I mean, that triggered a revolution. Now, we have the President of the United States allowing his Justice Department to literally investigate and target mega, or worse

yet, Catholics. Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? Can you imagine the guys who started a revolution over a T-tax? Can you imagine what they would say if the government that they founded, that they realized that that government is now going after and investigating people? Listen, Drew, I know that you lean farther left. I lean a little bit right. Here's the deal. If we can't come together as Americans under the banner of freedom, right? I don't care. Maybe you like higher taxes. Maybe I like lower taxes. That's policy. I'm talking about the ideal of freedom. We should all be allowed to have equal opportunity under the law to live our life however we choose to live it. So, for example, I'll take a hot button issue here, right? So that I can make everybody fussy at me because I like that. I don't agree with

transgenderism. I view it through the old lens, you know, it was a diagnosable mental illness for a long time. I don't agree with it, especially in children. If you want to live though as a transgender person, I would fight for your right to do that. If you're an adult and you choose to do that, I would fight for your right to do it. I don't agree with the lifestyle, but I would fight for your right to live it because that's freedom, right? Freedom is a universal concept that right, left, or middle, we should all be able to come together under. But you see, that's really what's under attack when you see the New York Times attacking our constitution. The concept of freedom is under attack. They're saying that freedom is somehow a threat because I disagree with your ideals and my disagreement with your

ideals is somehow a threat to them. Well, listen, there is no law or way for you to mandate me to say, you know what? I love that you're trans. You can't do that. I'm allowed to have my opinion. And you'll never find any happiness in your life if you're looking for approval from outside of yourself. We used to teach that. But we've gotten to a point now where it's my way or the highway. And that's what the left is pushing right now. The old liberals, the classic liberals, the Kennedy liberals, they're gone. They're not a part of the Democrat Party. Now you have a group of people who are rabidly pushing a set of ideals. And if you aren't lockstep with their ideals, there's something wrong.

Now, the problem is that people like me, I'll defend their right to be stupid. I would defend your right to be stupid. I'll defend your right to live differently from me. What I will not do though, and this is the thing, we need to unify under the banner of freedom in this country, but we must unify with strength. And what I mean by that is I will back you having the freedom to live your life however you want to live it. My line in the sand though, is if you don't believe that I should be able

to live my life however I want to live it, we're gonna fight, I'm gonna fight. And that's what I'm seeing because it appears when we look at the money and how it went up through COVID and we look at the people who, they know, they were censoring free speech. They were forcing vaccines. They were telling you that the science is settled, which, as you so eloquently pointed out, is the opposite of science.

When we see all that was occurring, all the attacks on our freedom, therein lies the problem this group of people this same group of people they're trying to impose their ideals rather than trying to impose freedom if you want to impose freedom right we're good if you want to impose your ideas over mine we got a difference yeah protect for you and to me the easiest uh battle line can be drawn around free speech because the fact it's such an astonishing turn of events that free speech would be under attack that that's i can't even believe i live i'm i've gone through the you know i'm alice in wonderland when it comes to that that's just unbelievable to me but it's an easy thing to keep going after and now we do that my next guest we're going to talk a little about what's going on with el Musk and Brazil and how we have to fight, fight, fight. And you

have changed guys like Elon Musk, why people would undermine somebody who is championing their right to express themselves and call that out of like, I don't know what to say about that. But before I get to Jeremy, tell me what's ahead for you. What are you looking at? What are you doing? What should we read about in your sub stack? Well, what we're doing right now is there are some extremely complicated cases that we're prepping, right? So we know that, you know, you've got the monkeypox, you've got disease X. We're spending billions of dollars preparing for disease X. We know that it's going to hit, right? The question is when, not if. They've told us, they're running the games, and disease X will be a replay of COVID, right? Now, I will tell you, there's a

really interesting development on that. It looked like we were really heading hard towards a bird flu disease X. Then the Loper decision came out of the Supreme Court, which was probably the most important decision to come out of the Supreme Court this century. The Loper decision overturned what's called the Chevron Doctrine. The Chevron Doctrine was what made it so that lawyers like me couldn't sue some of the administrative agencies for certain reasons when COVID hit. Now that that's gone, the shackles are off, right? So, you know, I'm looking at what I can do with that. Now, when they launched Disease X, I'm working on what I can do there, what I can do with that. Of course, you know, I'm trying to keep the wheels running on the day-to-day basis. We're fighting the

corruption anywhere we can. You know, I do a lot of, you know, anything that we can. We're working right now to try and make sure that we have free and fair elections. I got an issue with people who are here illegally voting. I don't know why that's a contentious issue, but I mean, it's happening on, it looks like it's going to happen on a pretty massive scale, this election. I don't know why there'd be any opposition to adding to the funding bill, the SAFE Act, to prevent that. So, I mean, I'm working on different things. I'm doing a lot of behind the scenes political work. We're fighting for freedom basically wherever we can. If it's high profile, that's fine. If it's not, it's fine. My goal isn't to be, I mean, I do the show. If you want to see what I'm doing to have my face out there, it's on the show. My work is going to go wherever it's going to be effective to get

freedom and that's that. And so a lot of it right now is kind of behind the scenes, a little bit quiet because we know we've got some massive intel, not only on the disease acts. We've got some intel on the privacy issue. We've got some intel on, you know, how that's being used. We're following, it was just really following the money. And you can get where I'm at. Yeah, you just got to follow the money. So we're going to keep leaking out information as frequently as we can.

I will tell you, I got one last, oh, I will drop one last thing for you, Doc. We talked, going back to COVID, I've got whistleblower info. Would you like, you know, when we look at the creation of SARS-CoV-2 in the lab, one of the most profound partners in that was a guy named Ralph Baric out of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, right? He seems to have had some consulting hand in the vaccines as well. Now, you know what else he invented that no one's talked about? Remdesivir. I've got whistleblower information now, and it's not controvertible, that he was one of the primary inventors behind

remdesivir. So you have the guy who created the disease, creating the cure, probably making money off of both. I mean, shady as can be. So we're just working to make sure that we're ready to stop that. We're actually, we're fighting behind the scenes to stop that. Some of it will be in court. Some of it's in legislative sessions. Some of it's just through waking up the public, coming on and talking to you and, you know, trying to convince, you know, the mainstream people that, hey, I may be, you know, some crazy schlub lawyer from Ohio, but, you know, I might have a few good points, right? It's just getting the word out. You know, we at the wellness company, the medical board has taken the position

that if monkeypox or bird flu becomes a pandemic virus, it must be because of gain-of-function research. It makes no sense in terms of natural evolution to leap like that. And with the sort of the powers that be ready at hand with their therapeutics and their lockdowns. It has to be the case. That's why we want people to be ready.

There are some simple antivirals you can take. You don't have to cave into their nonsense. There are things to be done. But if they have screwed around with the virus, then we'll be in a position where things are getting a little more active. Well, I can fill you in on that already, Doc. I just put it on my sub stack and I'll share it with you later. So in 2015, Anthony Fauci approved a gain of function project on monkeypox.

The gain of function project, interestingly, combined CLAD2, CLAD to to have pretty much exactly what we have now and approval was only withdrawn in 2023 so you know uh this was the bird flu was made and i'm hearing that the monkey pox the people people's liberation army is working on one it's just it's this whole thing this this viral military complex needs to be exposed and unraveled, it seems to me. The fact that we're allowing this as an international community, that's one of the great scandals of our time. But Tom, I always appreciate you coming in. Tell people where they go for the show. Please check us out on Rumble,

on X, on Locals, TomRenz.com. You can find links to everything. We do need support. Give, send, go slash RenzLaw. Give, send, go slash RenzLaw. We do as much as we can for free. Three years of work

I didn't charge a dime for on the COVID stuff. I did it all out of support from the public and wherever we could fund it out of pocket. I can't do that anymore. I've used up the resources. So any support we could get, we'd be grateful for. And hey, we would like to be big shots like Drew here someday. So if you're real bored one day, you might want to check out the show. Thank you, Tom. We appreciate it and keep up the great work.

Thank you, Tom. We appreciate it and keep up the great work. Thank you, sir. All right, Tom Renz, everybody. So we are switching gears to another attorney. This is Jeremy Tedesco. You can follow, let me get you all the Jeremy's particulars. It's the Alliance Defending Freedom. So it's adflegal.org and also an XADF legal. And we're going to get a little bit into the situation in Brazil with Jeremy. Jeremy, thank you and welcome to the program. Thanks for having me on, Drew. So it seems to me humbly that the Brazilian government wouldn't get away with this unless the American government were sort of allowing it in some way

or maybe even directing it, would I dare say? And wouldn't they have some remedies if indeed they were on the other side of the Brazilian behavior? Well, I think the crickets from the State Department and other public officials, and not just in the U.S., but across the world, really, on what's going on in Brazil with X being completely suspended through an order that's clearly sensorial in nature, aimed at trying to shut down free speech in the country, is jarring. And I think people ought to pay attention to what's going on in Brazil. I mean, I think a lot of people probably think, well, you know, why do I care about a country that's not the United States? What does it matter if this is happening in this country? We think it's really a test case.

Brazil is a vibrant democracy, at least it was for many years. And the fact that these kinds of sensorial actions are happening and may go unchecked, if they go unchecked, I think could spell some real problems for the rest of the world, because I think a lot of people will be emboldened in other countries where we see kind of an authoritarian streak rising when it comes to trying to suppress speech that people in positions of power don't want to hear or don't want people to be able to hear on these kinds of platforms. So I think it's a really important issue. The fact that it's happening in Brazil, it just happens to be the latest flashpoint

in a global rise in censorship. And I think I was hearing, maybe I'm sensitive to this because free speech, I feel, is such a vital thing to protect. The EU and Canada were sort of, on the DL, applauding it, it felt like, or some of the commentary I was seeing. It makes me worried about what the Assemblée Nationale is going to do in France

with that goes the wrong direction. They'll be on board with this too. How do we understand that? How do people in Europe fight it? It seems like it's out of hand everywhere. Yeah, well, certainly in Europe, certainly in Canada, we've seen it. You know, just a few weeks ago, a commissioner in the EU sent a letter to Elon Musk telling him to watch out for misinformation and other dangerous content when he was planning on hosting Trump on an interview on X. And so we know they're already willing to kind of throw around their weight to try to impact the kind of views that are being expressed on these social media platforms. France just about a week ago arrested the CEO of another major social media platform called Telegram. And so we're seeing this continue to tick upwards when it comes to censorship, but we're seeing it in the States as well. So, you know, I think that's one of the things that people really need to do to connect the dots and say, okay, this sensorial impulse we're seeing in other countries in Brazil,

well, that exists here too. We've seen, you know, unbelievable attempts, pressure, coercion campaigns by the Biden administration to censor speech online that they don't agree with. We certainly saw there was a Supreme Court case, Murthy versus Biden, that was just decided a few months ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. That case was really all about the Biden administration's attempt to force private social media companies to censor ideas that the Biden administration disagreed with when it came to COVID and other information like the Hunter Biden laptop story. And so we already know that the government is interested in using these private companies to do their censorship bidding. But we've seen it in other places too, in finances as well. I think

this is something that may be not as clear to your listeners, is that even in financial institutions, we've seen the government try to force those institutions to surveil their customers' private data to determine whether they are threats to democracy. And what they're asking them to surveil is basic constitutionally protected activity, like do you shop at Cabela's? Do you shop at Bass Pro Shops? Do you buy religious texts, including the Bible? And so these are the kind of things that the U.S. Treasury Department, the DOJ, the FBI were telling the biggest banks in America to look at their private customers' data,

flag, and then send to the feds to determine whether people were threats to democracy, to our democracy. So we see the government trying to use these private institutions and some kind of unholy alliance to kind of surveil or censor American citizens for their speech. And so the problem is present here. The problem is present overseas. And I think it's really incumbent upon us to push back in Brazil because we don't want those test cases to prove out that censorship doesn't come with consequences. And did I see, I'm looking at a post from Michael Schallenberger, I am under criminal investigation in Brazil for telling the truth. He's still going to go down there.

Are you familiar with his situation? Yeah, I have followed his situation. I don't know the details of it, but I know that he has been very engaged in Brazil, and he has said that he's under criminal prosecution there, or at least investigation. And I think one of the things he's saying there was so interesting is that a lot of these government officials are acting like they are the arbiters of truth. And that's a real big concern when the government starts deciding, well, we're going to decide what you can hear. We're going to decide what views can be expressed. Then you've got a government that is an enemy of free speech. And look, if you live in a country where you can't criticize public officials without fear of retaliation from the government, then you don't live in a free country. And look, if you live in a country where you can't criticize public officials without fear of retaliation from the government, then you don't live in a free country. And those are the kinds of things that I think Americans really up to.

I must tell you, we, the cancellation was clearly something with the government working behind the scenes for many, many of us. So we already live in that country where the government goes out. Look at Jay Bhattacharya, Michael. I mean, there are peoples whose careers were upended by things the government were doing. And we have, and even just the principal plaintiffs in the Missouri versus Biden case. I mean, Aaron Cariotti was destroyed because he dared to say, hey, we don't have the bioethical standing to have a mandate. And I'm the head of the bioethics department. Oh, good.

Thank you, Dr. Cariotti. You're fired. Caleb, what did you put up there? What was that ex-post you had? A recent tweet that was posted by Chris, the CEO of Rumble, who is saying that Brazil no longer has access to Rumble either, according to media reports. I saw that. I saw that. I saw that as well. Very unfortunate.

And it just... What about YouTube? What's that? How about YouTube? Of course, YouTube's fine. Are you still allowed to have YouTube? Of course, YouTube sensors everything. YouTube, it's the free platforms

that are under pressure. And this idea that somehow it's the government's business to control public sentiment, we really think that's true? It's one thing to... And by the way, the government was the one that created the delusional hysteria around COVID.

You want them in control of your... You're pulling the ropes on how you're feeling about a topic that is just it's really mind-blowing. I don't know where I am. Where do I live? And are we going to get this back and how?

Yeah, well, a lot of the terms they use, right? Misinformation, fake news, hate. You know, these are completely elastic terms that really mean nothing except for whatever the person, whatever the censor disagrees with. And, you know, even the idea that, you know, these platforms have to be controlled, the speech that's allowed has to be regulated to protect democracy, to keep people safe.

I mean, these are the terms that people use when they're being paternalistic and ultimately sensorial when it comes to the ideas that you can express or even hear on these kind of platforms or just in the broader public square. And so, yeah, I think we really do have a problem. I blame Rousseau. Man everywhere in chains needs to be forced to be free. Thank you, Rousseau. Jean-Jacques, you're a genius. But he was, unfortunately.

That's the problem. Let me switch topics for a minute here. This tenant media thing, I'm completely confused by that. Are you familiar with this story? Where Tim Pool and these guys are being called Russian you don't know this story okay I'm sorry to throw you under the bus with that one

Caleb you brought I think this one to my attention it's really confusing do you want to bring us up to speed on that one yeah it just came out a few hours ago that the Department of Justice is alleging that Russia through their RT media channel, was funding U.S. media companies that are linked to, they didn't quite name them, but they really put the pieces together. And it looks like it's an organization associated with Tempool. of it if the Department of Justice is being totally truthful with all of this, then it is quite strange

that they received almost $10 million from accounts that were wired from overseas that they were kind of obfuscating the sources of the money. Someone should have been suspicious about that. But I haven't heard anything from Tim Pool yet, so I kind of want to wait to hear what they have to say. And by

the way, RT, I don't know if they're operating in this country anymore, but if you remember, William Shatner had a show on RT I was on, if they're operating this country anymore but if you remember William Shatner had a show on RT I was on and I met those people and they were reasonable people creating television in New York yeah Drew did both those shows yeah and uh I I why do we have to assume that uh they're related to Vladimir Putin and what did they put out in terms of propaganda that our own government hasn't put out? I don't know. The two people that were accused, the Russian people that were accused of this,

both of them have, of course, disappeared. They've gone away, so no one can get to those guys. The big publicity thing is that money got funneled over to this one group. But that's not saying that... It's not very clear. It's not actually very clear. So I hate to mention Tim Pool

or anything in it until he has a chance to respond. All right. Fair enough. Is there anything else that we're... Go ahead, Jeremy. No, I'm just agreeing. I'm going to have to see how Tim responds to those allegations. Yeah. And what's

up next for you? Are you working on anything in particular? Where up next for you? What are you, are you working on anything in particular? Where should we follow you? Tell me more. Well, you can follow ADFlegal.org.

That's our website. And that's probably the best place to get information on what our organizational alliance Defending Freedom is working on.

You know, in the Musk situation, we filed a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to try to get them to conduct an investigation of Brazil over this censorship by Judge de Mores. The British people have clear constitutional rights to free speech. The actions in that country are also clearly in violation of human rights commitments that apply to Brazil. And the problem is that the people of Brazil, because this is happening and these orders are emanating from the highest court in the country,

you really don't have a legal remedy to try to solve the censorship. The highest court in the country has decided this, and there's really no avenue in the country to try to resolve these issues, except for maybe trying to overturn the power dynamic through the electoral process. So we've petitioned the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to conduct an investigation of Brazil. And we're considering other legal options as well. I think it's really incumbent upon all of us in the United States and in Western countries across the world to push back on Brazil, to hold them accountable to these free speech standards, because without them, democracy is not going to survive. Also, I read that Musk is going to release

evidence of malfeasance and illegal action on part of that judge every day going forward maybe you want to follow some of those leads and see if there's potential legal action so the upending can happen at the top i think that's brilliant strategy by musk we saw it with the twitter files too right um the way he uses the platform um to expose information and hard evidence of the activities that are going on. The Twitter files were eye-opening concerning just the scope and nature of the federal government's interest in regulating content on Twitter before it was called X under old management and how much Twitter acceded to the government's demands. And so that kind of transparency was refreshing and really critical for all of us to

understand the way in which these social media companies, these companies that control our access to information, our ability to debate the issues of the day, the way in which the government is trying to manipulate those platforms to advance their particular points of view and suppress ones they disagree with. So, you know, when we talk about this at Alliance Defending Freedom, we say this is the free speech issue of our age. The rising global censorship and especially the attempt by the government to try to cajole and push and pressure these private companies to censor on their behalf. So it's really critical that the companies be transparent about what's going on, where the censorship demands are coming from, and that they handle them in a way that protects people's rights. Because this is the best thing about what Musk is doing, from my perspective, is he's really

standing in the gap. Our ability to be free of censorship and retaliation from these authoritarian governments is in many ways dependent on whether the leaders of these companies have the backbone to stand up against the censorship demands. Musk finds himself in the situation he's in in Brazil because he wouldn't bow the knee. A lot of the other companies did. And so, you know, God bless him for that. And we certainly hope that he's successful it's it seems like zuckerberg may be shifting a little bit and uh yeah god help you are these a lot of these leaders were anti-authoritarian uh for the last 30 years but god help you when somebody who's so vehemently anti-authoritarian gets authority god help you then. Am I seeing a Tim Kupul post here, Caleb?

That is a reaction to what... Yeah, he actually did have a statement. I'll put it up on screen after Jeremy leaves, just so we can get that covered. Okay. Well, Jeremy, thank you so much for being here. We will look for you at adflegal.com

and the same on xadflegal. We really appreciate the work you're doing. It's.org. Oh,.org. I'm sorry. adflegal.org. Thank you, Jeremy. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Bye now. You bet. What do you got there, Caleb? I'm going to put that up now and let's see what Tim Pool is saying about his... You want to read that? Or read the particularly important points? It's a pretty long statement so that he's going to... They can go and read it over on X right now,

but it's basically, should the allegations prove true, I as well as the other personalities and commentators were deceived and are victims. The Culture War podcast is licensed by Tenet Media. It existed well before any license agreement with them. A lot of the stuff he's saying makes sense. That's why I was wanting to wait. This is a business

organization that had a lot of people involved. Is Tenant Media the suspect in all this? That's the cover for something? It's like a separate company that I guess they had formed together with a bunch of people in the industry that was

I guess kind of like a content creation company that's affiliated with it. But it's linked, but it's not the exact same thing. His show has been going on much longer than this. What they're going to try to portray it as is, oh, he's been a Russian agent all this time and all this other stuff. But if you look at the actual details of it, there's a lot more. And look, he wouldn't be able to say this type of stuff if he was a Russian agent. So, yeah. Right, you would think not. All right, let's

put our list of upcoming shows here. As I said, the salt will flow tomorrow as well as Susan's Calling Out program, which is going to MH 370 again with a pilot and some experts. Rob Schneider next week, Joel Pollack, who I haven't talked to in a long time, should be very interesting.

Jimmy Dore, making a comment for us. Mike Catherwood, a Loveline host. Dr. Marty Makari. And Laura Trump, scheduled for the 18th. We have a lot of cool-

Tomorrow, Dr. Drew TV is the re-place to be. Oh, yeah. I was using my re-cup, coffee cup here until just a few minutes ago. It's the free place to be. It's the re-place to be. It's the re-cup, coffee cup here until just a few minutes ago. It's a free place to be.

It's a free place to be. We appreciate you all being here today. Thank you, Caleb. Don't forget to watch my show tomorrow. We have two psychics and a pilot who thinks that 9-11 was caused by autopilot. So we're going to look into that. It'll be an especially interesting episode of calling out because we have a guy who is like a 9-11 whistleblower.

He's sort of this organization. He's a pilot that's been a pilot for over a decade that he's seen some interesting things. He has some theories that I don't actually agree with, but that's what makes it interesting. He's called out the government and they won't respond to him and we want to know why. Yeah.

Algorithm is accusing me of being in my mid-70s. If you're 19, I'll forgive you for that one. But if you're in your 30s, that was a gauntlet being thrown down. Any other guesses? Somebody else asking how old I was. Yeah, ratio, thank you. If I were in my mid 70s, that would look pretty good.

But I'm in fact, let's see what you guys guess. Well, I don't know if I can spend much time here. I'm watching on the restream. Let me see what the ranters are doing. I'm curious about something. How old my age is? No, that's easy to Google. Anyway, the- He's double digits today. Oh yeah. is? No, that's easy to Google. Anyway.

He's double digits today. Oh, yeah. Okay, well, that's the clue we needed. So on YouTube, the poll that I was running for this episode was, how should we react to Brazil's block of X and rumble? And the two options I gave are ignore because Brazil is Brazil's problem or resist because we must defend free speech for everybody. What do you think is the correct answer there or the best one? I could see where you would leave it alone

to probably be the most common answer because when you frame it as it's their problem, it's their free speech, the problem is that our government is implicitly endorsing this and allowing this. The's their free speech. The problem is that our government is implicitly endorsing this and allowing this. The EU is applauding it. Canada is applauding it. And it is sort of a test case.

And if you let this one stand, talk about the domino effect, this is a domino falling. And yes, it is Brazil's thing ultimately, but it is seriously a domino if you don't pay attention. Drew, you will be very pleased with your viewers because 83% of them agreed

with you and chose resist. Great. Well, I am proud of everybody. Get up and speak your mind. That's all. Donna Scanlon. Oh, Donna Scanlon, how are you? Good to see you. She got the age right. Nobody else.

Well, I told them on Rumble earlier so don't look on rumble oh i i already told everybody good no i told him how old you are but um yeah you look great they said you look young though thank you good it's uh it's i'm sure it's the fatty and the uh and we have some amazing lights in here the nan lights whichlights, which is one of our sponsors. So if anybody needs to light themselves for a live feed show, you can check out nanlight.com. We love them. And for me, it's the fatty. I even look young in there.

The fatty and the nicotinamide riboside. Absolutely. The trunigem. Absolutely. All right, everybody. We appreciate you all being here and we will look for you when the salt flows.

We are at noon tomorrow. Is that correct, Susan? Yes. I don't want to get that wrong. Noon tomorrow. You're not doing that thing with Dave Rubin? You told me not.

No, I don't know. I didn't know what happened. So we are not doing that, but we will have salt flowing tomorrow at noon. 12 noon, yes. We'll see you then. See you then.

Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Caleb Nation and Susan Pinsky. As a reminder, the discussions here are not a substitute for medical care, diagnosis, or treatment. This show is intended for educational and informational purposes only. I am a licensed physician, but I am not a replacement for your personal doctor, and I am not practicing medicine here. Always remember that our understanding of medicine and science is constantly evolving though my opinion is based on the information that is available to me today some of the contents of this show could be outdated in the future be sure to check with trusted resources in case any of the information has been updated since this was published if you or someone you know is in immediate danger don't call me. Call 911. If you're feeling hopeless or suicidal, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-8255. You can find more of my

recommended organizations and helpful resources at drdrew.com slash help.