What Are Your Constitutional Rights When it Comes to Your Health and Mandates- Interview with Jonathan Emord, Esq

Intro: 0:00

Get ready to hear the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the United States healthcare system with your host of the medical truth podcast, James Egidio.

James Egidio: 0:15

Hi, I’m James Oh, your host of the medical truth podcast, the podcast that tells the truth. The whole truth and nothing but the truth about the American healthcare system. My guest is a renowned, constitutional law and litigation expert. He has successfully stood up to the federal bureaucracy for over 37 years. He holds the record for winning the most federal court cases against the Food and Drug Administration in the history of the United States. He has authored five highly rated books. In his book, the authoritarians, he reveals the untold story and largely hidden practices of authoritarians who have worked inside the United States government to undermine the constitution and override rights protections since the earliest days of the progressive era. he’s also running for a U.S. Senate seat in the 2024 election representing the state of Virginia. It is an honor and a blessing to have on the medical truth podcast. My guest. Mr. Jonathan Emord. John, how are you doing today? Welcome to the medical truth podcast. Great to be with you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. It’s a pleasure to have you. So for the listeners and viewers of the medical truth podcast introduce yourself as to who you are and what you

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:34

do. My name is Jonathan Emord I’m a constitutional lawyer. I practice constitutional and administrative law and have for the last 38 years. I hold the record for defeating the Food and Drug Administration in federal court, which is eight times. And other than that, I write books and articles and give lectures and have been campaigning for the United States Senate in Virginia to help turn the direction of this country around and save the nation, save my state. So that we can have freedom in this country once again, and get the government out of our hair and out of our face and out of our bodies and out of our lives. Yeah,

James Egidio: 2:10

and speaking of that, speaking of freedoms and what I want to do today is just unpack and ask you some questions a little bit about some of the mandates that took place in 2020 in terms of mask mandates and lockdowns and all that and what our rights truly were as well as Even today with of course, the vaccine mandates that were implemented a year and a half ago and, the continuation of that saga with these vaccines. So my, one of my questions is in 2020, of course, we all, experienced the draconian lockdowns and mask mandates and vaccine mandates. What rights did we as individuals have Then, and even now, regarding those mandates.

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 2:56

The Constitution, as the Founding Fathers said, is verily a Bill of Rights without regard to the Bill of Rights. This is one of those instances where action was taken that both violated our civil liberties protected by the Bill of Rights. and also the structural integrity of the constitution and separation of powers and even the non delegation doctrine, which has been in exile for many years. But anyway, let me explain how it goes. So there is no power for the executive the president to act unilaterally to compel people to wear masks or to get vaccinated. There is none. President doesn’t have that power. It’s not intrinsic in the Article two of the Constitution. He had to go to Congress to get those things passed. Never did. So it was unconstitutional as a violation of the separation of powers, and that is reflected actually in some of the decisions that were reached by the Supreme Court. For example, in his employee mandate, employer mandate case, where he said every company of 100 or more employees would have to compel everybody to be vaccinated or tested weekly, or they’d lose their jobs. And he insisted on that as an executive order. And that was unconstitutional. The court found rightly so because it violated the separation of powers doctrine, but also he violated our rights individually when he compelled us to wear a mask or be vaccinated. And the reason for that is including in the military and including in the whenever we will go to some public place and that violation violated our 14th Amendment and 5th Amendment rights to individual liberty, and also to life in some instances, because we were denied the right to pursue early treatments and options that could have saved a lot of people’s lives. So the mandates violate also our individual liberty. We have a right of essentially personal autonomy, which arises from our right to life and our right to liberty. No one can compel you as an American citizen, justly. Consistent with the Founding Fathers conception of the Constitution and the founders of the 14th Amendment’s conception where government could compel you, essentially enslave you and force you to be vaccinated or masked to go to school or to go to work or to get on a bus or a train or whatever. So those are some of the instances and rights that are violated. There were other rights violated, too, such as our freedom of speech. They through SISA and through the White House and through the FBI, they colluded together with big tech to render big tech, an agent of the government engaged in censorship. So they censored our right to criticized government related to the policies that they favored and their position that the vaccine was safe and efficacious, which is a lie. But they pushed that propaganda to us over and over again. And also the propaganda associated with the idea that the vaccine would provide you with fulsome immune protection better than natural immunity, which was a lie, or that you if you’re vaccinated, you don’t have to worry about getting covid, which was a lie. Or that if you are vaccinated, you wouldn’t transmit covid, which was a lie. And on the same thing with the masks. The idea that the mask would provide you with protection was a lie. The idea that the mask would prevent you from contracting. The disease was a lie. The idea that masking somehow. would provide you with an ability to be in the presence of others who had COVID and not experience a high risk of COVID, utter lie, other innuendo that was false. This is, this came with heavy censorship. So if you tried to say that masks didn’t work, you were censored, doxxed, kicked off the air, kicked off the platforms on the web. If you attempted to say that the vaccine didn’t work, you were attacked. All of these great scientists like Dr. Robert Malone, who came out and criticized the vaccine and the mRNA platform for creating such enormous health risks and adverse effects, they were kicked off the web and all of that violated the first amendment. Your first amendment right to receive information was violated. And the first amendment right of the speakers to communicate information was violated.

James Egidio: 7:15

Yeah, and you answered a lot of the questions I was going to, I’m going to ask you, but before I do that, I wanted to show the listeners and viewers of the medical truth podcast, a couple on a state level. Video clips of some of the things that had occurred and get your take on that. So just for this one right here,

video: 7:36

19 was declared over the head of the world’s health organization is urging countries to make changes and start preparing for the next global pandemic. When the next pandemic comes knocking and it will, we must be ready to answer decisively, collectively and Equitably. The 194 member states of the World Health Organization, including Canada, are currently negotiating reforms to the binding rules that help the organization respond to international threats. Countries are being urged to boost funding for the UN Health Agency and to ensure smaller nations are not left behind during future pandemics.

James Egidio: 8:20

I’m getting a little ahead of myself. This has to do with the World Health Organization decision with the pandemic response. I didn’t want to actually show that one, but I got a little ahead, like I said. What impact, if any, does the World Health Organization, the World Economic Forum, the CDC have on the U. S. Constitution when it comes to this pandemic response treaty that is going to be soon signed? To control the narrative on future pandemic responses and even climate change for that matter

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 8:49

people need to understand that the world health organization through tedros is essentially a patsy for the communist chinese what you have is an advocacy of central government control and international control which would effectively give the chinese the ability Through the world health organization to replace independent professional judgment of physicians by having the federal government in the United States through the Biden administration implementing the same directives that came that come out of the World Health Organization that China wants. This is antithetical in any event. from the model that is the brilliant model in the United States of decentralization in medicine, which has been eroded away by the federal government over the years, but would be completely usurped and eliminated if we go for this. Now, the administration wants to go for this, where it would just implement The World Health Organization mandates both as to what treatments can be available and as to how we are to deal with any medical emergency, not just COVID. And this is an abomination. I’ll tell you why, because Our whole premise in this country is based on individual liberty and they’re attacking it with this. So let me give you an example of what this would mean. This actually happened to us during the pandemic when the CDC adopted the international requirements of the World Health Organization volitionally. And that caused such a tremendous havoc. With both the mandates for schools and for work, the workplace. And Biden was wholly for this when he imposed that mandate I mentioned earlier in the show for a hundred or more employee companies. This invades the province, the sovereignty. of patients and their and the health care providers they wish to have served them with disease problems, not just the pandemic. It invades it and denies you the freedom of choice, freedom to choose the kind of treatments you want with the health care practitioner that’s dedicated to pursuing your interests. Instead, it promotes a one size fits all approach dictated by an authority, not the United States, the World Health Organization. and denies us sovereignty in a very critical area. It would affect our resources. What money is expended for what kinds of things to treat the disease would determine how the disease is treated. This is what really resulted in over a 1,100,000 deaths during the covid pandemic in the United States, there would have been far fewer deaths if we didn’t have this kind of centralized control. If we have freedom of speech reigning and we had doctors and scientists communicating their criticisms of the vaccine and the options available that were alternatives, such as ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine for early treatment at tailored treatments that they recommended instead of a one size fits all approach. Didn’t try to run everybody through the vaccine mill, but instead tried to cope with the disease on multiple levels. Giving the patient the ultimate decision making power. This would take away your freedom of choice as a patient and would invest it in an international organization. So you would be told what to do rather than you deciding what you want to do for yourself. This is a road to serfdom and it is a ruinous path, and we ought to be very interested in defeating it. It should have no role to play in the United States. We successfully treat disease in America. when we allow patients to decide what’s in their own best interest with the information supplied to them by health care practitioners, not when we have a bureaucrat, this one, a distant bureaucrat at the World Health Organization, who’s a patsy for the communist Chinese, telling us what we need to do.

James Egidio: 12:41

Yeah, and from what I understand, and you can answer this This is supposed to trump the constitution, the U. S. Constitution, these decisions that the World Health Organization is going to make on pandemic treaty, because from what I understand, I think December 1st is like a deadline on this whole pandemic treaty.

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 13:02

Yeah. So what this means is that using a loose construction of the treaty making power, which they think that you can endlessly alter the nature and substance of your relationship with an international organization so long as the international organization was the subject of an international treaty without having to go back to the United States Senate as the constitution requires for treaty approval, Ron Johnson’s bill earlier this year would have compelled the Biden administration to come to the Senate of the United States under the advice and consent clause of the constitution and get the advice and the consent of the United States Senate before it bound us to any of these international accords that are coming up through the World Health Organization, the promise to take away our liberty. But the Biden administration is whole committed to doing this without coming to Congress on the argument that they’re doing nothing. But acting in accordance with an existing treaty, the fact is that this new brand new has never been a part of the treaty before. We’ve never given up our sovereignty over health care in this country ever under the World Health Organization. Never did it. Not once. And so this is a gross violation of that treaty. because it exceeds the scope of the treaty, and it enters into new territory. And it’s a gross violation of the Constitution’s treaty making clause, which is advice and consent clause for the United States Senate. So it’s unconstitutional activity. It will be challenged most likely by the states and by governors and by health care organizations that are interested in protecting patient rights and integrity. As the administration proceeds along this, so we will see what happens with these cases that come down. But as for the Biden administration, as for my opponent in Virginia, Tim Kain, they’re all for this centralized approach. He introduced legislation that himself, Tim Kain, is the spearhead of legislation he’s introduced into Congress to give direct control by both local, state and federal health public health officials of your medical records in hospitals and with your doctors so that they can access that information, profile you as to what you’ve decision you made for your health care and determine what needs to be done by the government’s mandates in the next medical emergency. It also includes a provision that would centralize government control over the provision of care so that the determined position of the federal government would be insinuated through health authorities at the state level and at the local level to compel physicians to give. The kind of health care that the federal government sets as a standard. This is also disastrous, ruinous, but it’s part of the Biden plan to centralize health care in this country so that your individual freedom is sacrificed in favor of their predilections for how to deal with the crisis.

James Egidio: 16:00

Yeah, because that was my question was… From what it sounds like, what you’re saying is that cause my question was going to be, is who and how is going to stop this this whole debacle, but from what it sounds like, you’re saying, it sounds like it’s going to trickle down to the state level. So individual states will have to say, okay we have to put the brakes on this. We’re not going to, and when I say even the state level, I’m even talking counties and townships and whatnot are going to have to. Put the brakes on this kind of a out of control legislation. Is that correct?

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 16:33

That’s true. It’s also true that the, very reason why I’m in the United States Senate in part is to end this, to prevent this from happening and to use my position as a United States Senator, a fight like the Dickens against it. Sure. If we had a Republican Senate, I think we could stop it. But here’s the thing. If we can’t stop it, if there isn’t a Republican Senate, if there’s not the ability to do that, and I think very strongly the American people are moving in the direction of giving us the control we need to stop it. But then the states are the last resort and the states can use the power in the governor’s offices and and even with local authorities to refuse to implement these mandates and to protect the people’s liberties and freedom of choice against any effort by the federal government to impose this power, and that’s something that has to be done. The states need to recognize that in the Constitution, under our constitution, if a law or directive is unconstitutional, and in this instance, it would be a violation of the treaty clause. They would be acting under. They would also be acting without just the separation of powers is violated too. They can seek relief in court, but they can also refuse to implement an unconstitutional mandate, and that’s what they should do.

James Egidio: 17:47

Yeah. And these, of course, are, these are not laws. These are mandates that have been implemented in this treaty is just what it says. It’s a treaty. So does that trump constitutional law or no?

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 18:03

The Constitution makes treaties part of the supreme law of the land. However, the contemplation of what a treaty is is quite different today than what the Founding Fathers understood the term treaty to mean, and they did not understand the term treaty to be a vehicle by which you could completely undermine a republic or deprive people of their liberties. They would never have agreed to that as a treaty. I don’t believe that the treaty power can trump your civil liberties or can fundamentally alter the nature of the government, transforming it from a republic into a dictatorship. That’s not the plain or intended meaning of the treaty power. The treaty power had as a. necessary component to it. The advice and consent of the Senate, which enabled the people’s representatives to have a check on the executive power to engage in treaties with foreign powers on with foreign entities. And so that power has consistently been eroded away over the decades and the executive acting unilaterally without even declaring his action a treaty, but acting by accords or by other things that he’s referred to presidents referred to as agreements has undermined the treaty power. We’ve got to restore the treaty power. We have to make sure that the people’s power to guard against abuses of their liberties and undermining of the constitution is robust so that people like this president and this Democrat Congress, Democrat Senate cannot deprive us of our liberties just based on their wish. See, you could completely destroy the Constitution otherwise, couldn’t you? You could have a treaty that would wipe out the United States government and replace it with an entity that was, say, controlled by the Communist Chinese. You’d transform the United States by treaty into a mere vassal of some international governing body. That’s not consistent with anything that the Founding Fathers intended. And so the treaty power needs to be restored to its plain and intended meaning, and this government needs to be restrained so that it doesn’t use treaty to deprive us of our rights.

James Egidio: 20:13

Yeah, this is also, it seems like a multilayered issue with not just a pandemic response with disease, but they’re talking about climate change. They’re talking about gun violence being constituting a medical emergency. So this sounds like it’s a grab for 2nd amendment. It’s a grab for again, like you were saying earlier, censorship on First Amendment expression of your health, your right to your health and whatnot. So it seems like they’re looking to go after pretty much, again, the elements that are in the Constitution.

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 20:50

Yeah, these people have no respect for our rights and liberties, obviously, as you’re pointing out. And they want to take them away because it interferes with their desire of how to structure society. They don’t want you to have a right to defend yourself with a weapon. They don’t want you to have the freedom to decide what medical care you’ll have. They don’t want you to have the freedom to purchase a fossil fuel vehicle. When they say that you should only have windmills and solar panels as your source of power, and they don’t care that it’s intermittent. They don’t care that it’s unreliable, and they don’t care if you’re in brownouts or blackouts most of the year. That will achieve their political and personal objectives. This, by the way, this climate change agenda would give China even greater power. So look at the big picture here. If we go the route that they’re asking for the World Health Organization, And even in international governance with the efforts at a central digital banking currency, all of these ideas originate largely with proxies from communist China. It’s a way by which China achieves an overthrow of the United States from a system of protection of individual liberty into one where there’s a dictatorship that is in alignment, complete alignment, with the goals of the communist Chinese. So it’s a revolution within our country. That’s silent, achieved by a change in the law. And all of these things you’re talking about serve the communist Chinese. If we’re deprived fossil fuels and we are dependent upon windmills and solar panels, then where is that coming from? The overwhelming market for that, upwards of 90 percent, is Chinese. It’s a, it’s multi billion dollars, hundreds of billions, being transferred from the United States to China. for this system that we’re watching. Chinese are acquiring all of our farmlands, not all of them, but a substantial amount of farmland for the purpose of promoting the same agenda of solar panels and and windmills. And likewise, when you have the efforts for central digital banking currency, that’s another big positive for China. China wants to control the international banking currency. Central digitalized banking currency achieves the ability to deprive us of our individual liberty at the same time that it gives greater centralized control over the currency worldwide. That’s what they want. They want that through World Trade Organization, for example. They have proxies there that are controlling. So this is a mass movement, as you’re pointing out. that is designed to deprive us of our liberties. We need to be on alert. We need to defend our liberties and take whatever action is necessary to keep us out of these situations. Keep us out of the central digitized banking currency, both domestically and internationally. Keep us out of the World Trade Organization. We shouldn’t even, or the World Health Organization. We shouldn’t even be in the World Health Organization. The World Health Organization is an enemy of the United States. Likewise, the United Nations. The United Nations has never done us a favor. The United Nations is a big advocate of, for example the Palestinian cause, the Hamas and and Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. They all get sympathy. From the United Nations, and we are routinely condemned with Israel and this is there’s no need for us as an independent nation, sovereign people to have an international organization dictating to us how we should live, how we should relate with our neighbors, and what the laws of this country should be. We have to control all of that.

James Egidio: 24:12

Where do you think this is going to lead all to? Because this is a multi, like I said, a multi layered issue. It gets into the economy, it seeps its way into the medical industry. It seeps its way into pretty much everything, for that, for the most part. What do you think? What’s the goal and objective? Is it just totalitarian control? Yes,

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 24:35

it’s centralized control over every aspect of our lives. These people are rapacious. They’re also unrelenting in their pursuit of these things. As a result our freedoms are very much on the line. And our ability to survive as an independent people is on the line. Our republic is on the line. The constitution is hanged by a single thread. And they’re interested in snipping that thread as soon as possible. So we have to restore our Republic. We have to restore protection for individual liberty. We have to insist on constitutional limits on power. George Washington said something many things, but one of, one of the things that’s profoundly astute, he said let there be no change by usurpation. By that, by the accumulation of power, in other words. Let there be no change by usurpation, for though in one instance it may be an instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. So don’t let them dangle in front of you what is oftentimes a false shiny object. Wouldn’t we like to have a better world this way or that way while they use as means techniques that deprive you of your liberty, which they say is necessary to achieve that when government is engaged in that business, you should both hold on to your pocketbook. And also bar the door because they’re out to take your liberties away, right? Your money

James Egidio: 26:04

too, right? Yeah, because they, they started with the COVID thing with the fear, false events appearing real, the fear, and then it was for the greater good of everyone, including the mask mandates and the vaccine mandates was, it was all for the greater good. And with that, speaking about the vaccines with all the evidence of death and injury, yeah. That has occurred with these, I call it the bio weapon and I interviewed Edward Dowd, who wrote the book cause unknown. And there’s so much evidence right there. If you were defending a client based on. Injury or death and you have all this evidence right there showing that these vaccines have created a lot of injury caused death. What recourse if any, does any, does an individual have from this?

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 27:00

We need to get the rascals out. We need to get people in the government like me, who believe strongly in individual liberty, and want to protect your rights. We also need to go to court. And that’s happening, fortunately. We need to go to court at every turn, and fight for our rights. Not that the court is a panacea. It’s not going to get everything right. But, fortunately for us, the Supreme Court is presently composed of a majority that are interested in defending individual liberty. And they frequently get it right. As a result, the courts are a backstop that enables us to save our rights before a complete ruin settles in. Can you imagine if that mandate that Biden had? had stuck. And if every company in this country at 100 or more employees had to follow through with vaccinating every employee or have them tested weekly. And if the administration’s position that the unvaccinated were a pariah gained the force of law. By the way, they wouldn’t have stopped at 100 or more. If they got away with that, they would have gone to 100 or less. They would have had every employee in this country subjected to these requirements, and people would have been forced into being vaccinated to keep their jobs while they said you’d be tested weekly. The reality is that employers in implementing this, they full well know would be pressuring people to get vaccinated at every turn. So the point is we have saved ourselves from draconian and tyrannical measures of the government by going to court, but it’s not sufficient. It’s not sufficient because in the first instance, the government through the Biden administration by executive order can impose all sorts of. of limitations on us before you get to the courthouse. And so what we need is a Congress that is composed of individuals who stand up for the Constitution, stand up for individual rights and fight like the Dickens against this administration and against the bureaucracy. I wrote a bill many years ago for Ron Paul, who fortunately for me has endorsed my candidacy and that bill is called the Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act, and it would have prevented any regulation from having the force or effect of law unless passed into law by Congress. And I also wrote for him a thing called the Access to Medical Treatment Act, which later became known as the Right to Try Bill that ultimately was signed into law by President Trump. And before that became law, every time you’d have a critical, serious illness and an FDA approved drug didn’t work, which is every terminal illness. Every terminal illness, you could not get access to experimental drugs without the FDA approving it, and many times the FDA did not approve it. And the result was, as in the case of a boy who I represented, 8 year old boy Zachary McConnell, who was dying of a glioblastoma, massive brain tumor, and had accessed been invited to participate in a clinical trial in Texas with Dr. Brzezinski’s antineoplastins, and saw that tumor being reduced in his head. on the M.R.I.S. The FDA came in and said, No, the boy has to be taken off the treatments because they’re not FDA approved and because he doesn’t meet the protocol for the treatment in our judgment. And I argued, vigorously for him at the FDA to no avail. And then I went before Congress and testified before Dan Burton’s committee, the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, and Burton was all with us. And we finally got the FDA commissioner on the hot seat and pressured him and let him know that he’d be personally held responsible for the TV cameras and burdens committee if he didn’t capitulate and allow the boy to have access to the treatment. And, of course, he did capitulate and allow the boy to have access to treatment. But you shouldn’t have to go through all that. If you’re a citizen in the United States to get access to an experimental drug when you’re dying, and this boy, sadly it was so took so much time to convince this turkey was the commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration to do the right thing. It took so much time that unbelievably this boy. Who had been denied access to that drug. His tumor then had grown and had grown so much that when they put him back on the drug, it was too late and he died. This is the kind of barbarism that, that centralized government control. When you call these people experts and you invest in them unbridled power they, they get extremely interested in protecting their turf, their future job prospects, and the economic interests of those that they favor. who are essentially, they’re captives of them, that they are willing to destroy people’s lives to further that agenda that’s personal to them. And so we have to realize that we have to be smart. We have to insist that we downsize, decentralize, and return to the people the power to control their own lives and what goes into their bodies and how they treat disease. And that’s absolutely critical for us if we are going to be prosperous, if we’re going to be a free people. If we’re going to have ultimate control over our bodies and our lives and not be a slave to the state, the whims of bureaucrats, it

James Egidio: 32:08

just seems like they just keep pushing and pushing the narrative each and every day do you see a way out of this? Yes, I

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 32:16

do. I think sooner or later. In the end, I’m an optimist because I believe that the future of the world is in favor of freedom over time. The history of communism, of centralization, of authoritarianism has been an utter disaster, a horrific, calamitous disaster. More people have died under communism than any other. Disease or pandemic or anything, communism has been the most vile and ruinous thing for the spirit of mankind and for our lives and for our liberties. And I think that truth always comes out. What I’m hoping for my own country, for the United States, is that we don’t fall ultimately into the bottom of the abyss of socialism and communism before we come to the realization that our freedoms are far more precious. Then we had imagined. I want us to appreciate those freedoms right now, and I think that the American people are largely sick of what’s happening to them. I think they’re sick of the inflation. I think they’re sick of the violation of their freedoms, and they’re sick of the mandates. They’re sick of government lying to them. They’re sick of the government right now. Engaging in these treaty practices you’re talking about where they try to steal our sovereignty. They’re sick of government. And I think the solution to that is for them to be vocal. They’ve been silent for too long. The majority that I think agrees with us has been silent for too long. When they become vocal, when they get out there and insist on their rights being protected, I think we are going to prevail and I think we’ll do what we have to do to save this country. So I think the next couple of years will involve the critical test. And I believe the American people will rise to the occasion, kick the bums out, let us get in there, those of us who want to save this nation, our people and our constitution and our rights and get in there and let us get to work because this can be done. It’s not a foregone conclusion, despite what the other side says. The other side wants you to believe that there’s nothing you can do. That’s absolutely not the truth. We have it in our power to save our country. We can do it. We just have to get to work.

James Egidio: 34:18

And I take it that this is what inspired you to run for U.S. Senate, correct?

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 34:23

That’s true, absolutely. I want for my children and for your children I don’t want them to live up as servants to the state. I don’t want them to have the horrors of communism visit upon them. I don’t want them to be, their children also to be indoctrinated in public schools from the Time there in preschool all the way through that America systemically racist, a big fat lie. And that is that this whole lie that, because you’re of color, you can never succeed in America. Utter nonsense is the greatest opportunity in the world. Or that if you’re white, you. are hopelessly predisposed to having a white privilege and to being an abuser of everybody else. This is utter nonsense and it tears apart the fabric of our country. We really, truly should be regarding ourselves as a colorblind society. We shouldn’t regard race as anything other than a mere. Pigment, right? It’s superficial. It doesn’t define who you are. The Dr. Martin Luther King, of course, had it right and brilliantly so when he said that that it’s the content of your character, not the color of your skin that defines who you are. And this is something we all accept. I don’t think anybody. Who has a rational brain doesn’t view that as a truth in this country. We largely eradicated the concept of racism in this country, which we regarded as vile and vulgar after the civil rights revolution succeeded. And yet here it is visited upon us again, both in public institutions and in the military and elsewhere, where they’re dividing us based on race again. Are you kidding me? And that, all the achievements that we made are being just stripped away. We have got to get past both slavery and racism. They are both dead end, horrible institutions, and we should not be reinforcing them. We should be… Destroying them. And we should be building a nation of United Peoples defined by their love of liberty. That makes us American. It doesn’t make you an American because of your race. Doesn’t make you an American because of your ethnicity or your national origin. If you are a citizen of this country, you are an American and you’re an American because you are united in your love of liberty and your willingness to abide by the constitution and the laws that are under the constitution in this country. That’s, we’ve got to get back to that. We’re a great people. We are unapprovable in the world. The history of the world has never seen a people like the Americans because we grew up under a constitution of liberty, never before seen in the world. Triggered by a declaration of independence. The second paragraph of which created the definition of America never before. Was has any other country and never since has any other country been able to do duplicate that? So this isn’t truly as abraham lincoln said we are the last best hope for freedom on earth we are here. You can go nowhere else There’s no other place on earth that is as free as this country and if they steal the freedoms we have here There’s nowhere to go. There’s no place left for us on earth

James Egidio: 37:18

I have to agree with you a thousand percent on that. My wife is from Italy and as beautiful as Italy is they don’t have the same freedoms that we have. And I, and I keep telling my wife that same thing. I says, we have freedoms here that no other country enjoys and I always said United, we stand divided. We fall. And when you get back to this whole thing with the vaccines and you look at the mandates with the mask and all that, those were all instruments of division. So again, United, we stand divided. We follow the more you can divide. And this is what their strategy is for this. These totalitarian monsters is the more you can divide people, the more they’re not cohesive and they’re not sticking together. And that’s the biggest fear of the government on both sides. And I would have to say that both the Republicans and the Democrats have been guilty of this over the last. 30, 40 years, at this division,

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 38:17

it’s been too much on the Republican side. There is a a body of Republicans who are an old guard that favor protectionism. They favor government protecting industry and this new guard in the Democrat party. does not believe in the Constitution, does not believe in rights, does not believe that America should be under any system of government other than a dictatorship, frankly. And they believe in a socialist or communist government that is, controls every aspect of our lives. Now, there is an alternative to this type of thinking, and that’s what is really a allegiance to the original Constitution of the United States and its founding principles of this country, Which were brilliant and which served us so very well for over 200 years, enabling us to become the greatest nation on earth and the freest nation on earth. And if we were turned to those principles, it’s not like something new has to be done in point of fact, if we just return to those principles and limitations. Our old constitution ends up being the greatest safeguard for liberty and for the enjoyment of our lives, freedom and prosperity. Thomas Jefferson put it this way about our government, which he referred to as a good government. He said A wise and frugal government shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. He defined that as the sum of good government. And it is the sum of good government then, and it is the sum of good government now. And it’s not a, it’s not an unbelievably complex solution. To our problems, it’s a simple solution. Trust in freedom. Trust in individual liberty. Trust in the American people. Don’t trust in big government. If you do that, if you trust in big government to the sacrifice of our rights and liberties, then really don’t complain down the road when you find yourself in a state of servitude where you’re poverty stricken, miserable, like nine tenths of the rest of the planet that has experienced that type of dictatorship, fascism, or communism. Yeah.

James Egidio: 40:30

Yeah. Another thing I wanted to mention to you is how can big tech and the mainstream media get away with the censorship that they do in violation of the first amendment, because again, that kind of spills over into politics it spills over into narratives that are being led for instance, with climate change, 2nd amendment, our health. How can they get away with violating the 1st amendment like they do?

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 40:59

It is a situation where government has engaged in a series of power grabs in service of those in power and of those who want to be in power. We watched a candidate for the United States being condemned as a party that colluded with Russia to thwart an election, a federal election. It was an utter lie. They had no proof to support it. They invented the evidence. They paid for a foreign party to actually come up with the evidence, the Steele dossier, which was completely absurd. It had no factual foundation. It was known by the FDA to be false. And yet Operatives within the FDA presented it to the FISA courts, got clandestine warrants issued, wiretapped people, invaded their civil liberties with impunity, and then they went on, even when this person was elected President Donald Trump, and then they attacked Donald Trump when he was in the White House, relentlessly, all on the… false, and they knew it to be false, Adam Schiff show, which was that Donald Trump had been colluding with the Russians. They held these meetings in the skiff. They interviewed witnesses and it was appallingly inadequate. No evidence was ever found. They pay, had us pay tens of millions of dollars for an independent prosecutor to investigate the whole thing, special counsel to investigate the whole thing, coming up with a report in the end that said they had nothing. Now, this is called an abuse of power. This is an attempted coup d’etat. This is what happens in third world countries and it now happens in the United States. This is a violation of the rule of law. We have a two tiered system of justice in this country. It seems that every Republican can be subjected to endless investigations and accusations that are utterly false. And every Democrat, even ones that are engaged in gross criminal activity, like the president and his son, Hunter Biden, get off scot free. They aren’t subjected to an independent counsel. That investigates the president, even in the presence of an independent counsel for Hunter Biden, there’s no aggressive movement to investigate. There’s no massive media coverage of all of the horrendous things that are available on his laptop. We don’t have to go too far to see all of the horrible criminal activity that he engaged in. And now we have all this information showing that the president with his son engaged in this massive influence peddling scheme where he sold out the United States for personal profit. And where he used the monies that were obtained by his son in a joint bank account with his son to pay for all manner of personal things, including mortgages that he has on his properties. This violated the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, patently unconstitutional, to accept money from a foreign power when you’re vice president or president of the United States. He was vice president at the time, now president, and this, these monies are there. Where is the… Interdiction of these funds. Where’s the freezing of those accounts? Where is the effort to ensure that the rule of law is upheld? Not at all. And so you have one standard of justice for Democrats, one standard for Republicans, and they differ fundamentally, and it’s a violation of the equal protection of the laws. And we need to have a wholesale revision of the FBI. The intelligence services in this country, we have to end the collusion between the White House and big tech. We have to make it a crime. Rand Paul introduced the bill. Unfortunately Bernie Sanders killed it in the Senate, but that bill would have made it a felony for people to collude with within the government, with a big tech or the media. In censoring individuals. So we need to take aggressive action to re form the FBI, the intelligence services, to put back in place very strict standards for governance under the rule of law. and to have in place means by which those whose rights are violated can receive swift justice that attacks not only the institution, but also the individual actors. So the law needs to be focused. If you’re in these positions and have an opportunity to abuse power, you need to be personally held responsible for those abuses. You need to have stiff criminal penalties associated with any violation of the public trust. The results in these abuses.

James Egidio: 45:12

Yeah I don’t get too much into politics with this particular podcast because it is called the medical truth podcast But I want to get your take on and how you envision Cause we have what, 13 more months till there’s a presidential election in this country. And they say presidential elections don’t mean much and maybe they don’t. But how do you envision a continuation of a Biden administration versus let’s say Donald Trump, if Donald Trump gets elected, what, how do they look? Let’s start with the Biden. If Biden gets reelected, or if he makes it through the next 12 months, what are things going to look like going forward in 14? And if Trump gets elected, of course how would that look? But we’ll start with Biden.

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 46:06

Biden is already operating like a potted plant. Essentially he has the chemical electronic activity in his brain of a plant, not me. And that will get worse because he is not getting any younger and his brain power, if you look at him from the start of his presidency to the present, the deterioration that has happened in that man has not been slow. It’s been rapid and he’s losing his faculties to such a great extent. He can’t even walk directly off a stage or recognize the person next to him as someone other than, a person who it’s not calling his wife, his sister, his wife, calling other people by names that they have never been known by because they’ve never had those names caught not being able to identify who your secretary of defense is by name or even by office. These things are, signs of mental deterioration that’s profound, that’ll get a lot worse. He has sold his soul to the socialists. He did that before he entered office. He met with Bernie Sanders. They had an agreement that Sanders, essentially his whole platform, the intended for the presidency would be one that Biden would implement, and he has. So that’s going to get worse. Why? Because in the second Biden administration, Biden has no political check at all. He doesn’t have to worry even in the slightest about reelection, right? He’s going to serve one remaining term. That’s all he can do. So he will sell out completely to his liberal base and he has chosen the far left of his party to become the dominant faction in governance, so that will mean. Much more of what we’re talking about, much more centralization of power, much more, many more mandates, much more control over our freedoms, much more insistence on electric cars and destruction of the fossil fuel industry, the backbone of the American economy. and completely eliminating your freedom of choice over such matters, as well as numerous other thousands and thousands of regulatory initiatives that will break the back of the economy. We will be in a very severe economic downturn in 2024. By most reasonable economist estimates that will only get worse under a Biden administration in spades. And we may well see government takeover of the means of production in the United States. I would suspect that they would declare market failure and take over the marketplace so that we’d all be basically one way or another under the thumb of the federal government in everything that we do, I don’t want to go there. What would a Trump administration look like? I don’t know, but I can tell you this, that it’s likely to look like his prior administration. And what did he do there? Several remarkable things. In fact, he had the most productive presidency of any president in the 21st, 20th and 21st century centuries. And what was that? He reduced taxes. He reduced regulation. We had the Abraham Accords, which brought us peace for a moment until they destroyed the terms of the Abraham Accords in this administration. And we also had a nation that was becoming respected, and we had a nation that was looking for Europe to carry more of its own weight and not to have the United States be the policeman of the world. And we had nations that did not aggressively work against us like Russia has since the ignominious retreat of Biden from Afghanistan, where we left Americans behind and pulled out the military in an unceremonious and precipitous manner that. Caused us to lose over 60 billion worth of American military hardware, the most sophisticated in the world, which we turned over to the Taliban terrorists. That, that horrific thing, which every American almost condemns, that would never have happened under president Trump, I imagine. I don’t believe that President Trump as a result of that not happening under a Trump administration, I don’t think that Russia would have invaded the Ukraine. I think Russia feared Trump. I think China feared Trump. I think I think Kim Jong un feared Trump. His position on things was unpredictable for them. They didn’t know what he would do. Remember he without fanfare and very effectively before it happened. Destroyed one of the leading terrorists in the world in in Iraq when he had that, so this is a president who much as people have condemned him for his tweets and so forth, if you judge him by his actions, that president was the most effective president. In the modern era, he achieved more. He, the American economy was humming at a great rate so that people in various groups, categorization of people based on their race, or, saying minorities, one kind or another, all experienced massive economic growth, they tried to say, Oh, people who are wealthier made more money, but as a percentage of wealth increase, the people who made the most money were in the middle class under Trump. Yeah, and you have wonderful low gas prices. We can get back to 2 a gallon if we break down all this climate change nonsense. Be able to get people to have money in their pocketbooks again and be able to save and invest. I think that’s what would come from a Trump administration. Yeah. Frankly if we have a Republican control of the United States Senate a lot more would be done that would save the American people’s liberties. And people like me. Or Rand Paul or like Mike Lee we’re relentless in defense of people’s rights, and we would fight to put into place laws that will protect our rights, reduce the size and scope of the government. I think Trump would sign all those laws. I think Trump would be all for that. Now on the negative side, We did have this experiment with mandates that started during the Trump years. And I think though, to his great credit, Donald Trump has come to the conclusion that those mandates should not be imposed in future. So there is still a contrast on the medical freedom side between a Trump presidency and a Biden presidency, because Trump has determined that he was betrayed by Anthony Fauci, as was the whole nation. Yeah. And he is the biggest betrayer of the United States in our history. He sold out to our communist enemy. He is a true traitor in that sense. He took an enemy of the United States and about enemy of the United States, and he enabled them to come up with a bio weapon. He did that by providing them with a human cell line from AMRID, the American Defense Research Department. And then he also gave them, through EcoHealth and through the University of North Carolina, Ralph Baric, both research and funding necessary to do gain of function research. And this was to an entity that he knew both had inadequate security in place to prevent the leak of the virus and also was an avowed enemy of the United States that had a bioweapons program through which it used its Institutes of Virology, Beijing and Wuhan. So he knew exactly what he was doing. He was he was colluding with an enemy of the United States, enabling them to come up with a bioweapon. In 2007, he was interviewed by an astute academic at an institution, and that academic asked him, Aren’t you afraid with this gain of function research around the world that you seem to be supporting? Aren’t you afraid that a pandemic might start? And that we may, see serious consequences from that. And he said that’s the price we have to pay for scientific research. Yeah. He decided on his own that he would be able to decide for us what degree of risk we would take with our lives. And he decided that we would take a very high risk. We would be willing to risk the loss of millions of people’s lives to a pandemic. Who gave him that power? No one. He assumed that power. And you know what? He betrayed our country. the worst betrayal. So when you hear the word Fauci, you should remember, even though it’s not a four letter F word, it should be treated as a four letter F word. There’s no more disgraceful term you can use to describe another person than to call them a Fauci in my judgment. Yeah. And

James Egidio: 54:24

I have to agree with you on Trump’s performance as well as, and we Didn’t mention, or you didn’t mention was the borders to he had the borders pretty well fortified, at least moving in the right direction with putting up a wall without she and this goes back to even I believe the Obama days where they were funding that Wuhan lab. In the tune of about 4 million or more. And he did have a really good replacement for Fauci in place which was Dr. Scott Atlas, who kept getting censored by Birx and Fauci in a closed door hearings about the pandemic response the COVID task force. He was part of that, but he had to basically back away, because of. Fauci’s influence, but to me, it seems like it was more about censoring and doing away with any type of off label treatments, hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 55:27

Trump himself had hydroxychloroquine, right? Oh, I think. There, there is a misperception about Donald Trump and this whole thing. And I think Donald Trump had his skepticism about Fauci. I think that Fauci in his position had quite a bit of power. And it would require Trump to do a number of things that would have changed the entire composition of CDC and also the NAID. And I think that in the midst of the crisis with all the information he was given, he thought the best approach was to unleash, he was convinced by people, unleash industry to come up with a solution. Put, the whole warp drive initiative together. That sounded good to him. And I think in retrospect, he realizes that the whole process was manipulated by people who did not have the best interests of the country at stake. I have no question in my mind that Trump has always had the best interests of our country at stake. Yeah. He loves this country and he wants this country to prosper. And so no matter what criticisms you may have about Donald Trump, one thing that you really sincerely should not be saying about Donald Trump is that Donald Trump ever for a minute did not love this country because he really sincere. He has

James Egidio: 56:41

no question about that.

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 56:43

Yeah. And for me, that’s critically important because I don’t believe that the Biden administration, that Joe Biden, based on his actions loves this country more than himself. I think he loves himself far more than he loves this country. I don’t think that he loves this country at all. I think the real, that this country he has used for his own personal aggrandizement to become wealthy and powerful. And that is to me, disgusting. I think that the purpose of public service is to serve the people. and to be a agent of theirs as opposed to an enemy of the country or the constitution. And I think that makes you disqualified. And I think in this case he violated with founding fathers provisions, numerous ones, but he violated the foreign emoluments clause. He’s violated the separation of powers clause. He’s not fulfilled his oath, which is to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed that he has shown in spades in the case of immigration laws. So he’s eminently worthy of impeachment. and should be impeached. The question of removal. You don’t have to follow removal right away and get the disaster who’s his vice president into the presidency. But I think I would in a best scenario in this situation, I would certainly impeach him in the house. I would refer it to the Senate and the Senate should carry on. And so the end of the administration, at which point one minute before his termination in office would be complete, you would remove him from office and you would do that to establish to reestablish the rule of law and to show that in point of fact, the Congress can work, can uphold the Constitution, can fulfill its duties and can make sure that there isn’t a two tiered system of justice in America, that this president who richly deserves impeachment and removal from office did get it. Yeah.

James Egidio: 58:36

The other thing too, is I, what I can’t, I’m really perplexed about is that they have not implemented the 25th amendment on him because it’s obvious to the American public, whether you’re a Democrat or Republican or independent or whatever your you political preferences. This man clearly is not fit for office just based on his mental faculty. So how could they even keep him in office? I mean that even the liberal media, CNN and MSNBC have admittedly so said that this guy is not fit for office in a roundabout way, if you can say that.

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 59:11

He has loyal cabinet officers loyal to him, even to the point of excusing his gross mental. that, deterioration. Yeah, I think you’re right. I think he is incompetent. I think that he is incapable of executing the duties of his office. And I don’t believe for a minute that he is largely executing those duties. He may be nodding his head or, showing that he has a scent for one thing or the other. But as to any understanding of the details or significance or consequences of what he does, I don’t think he has much of any hope of getting that. I think his brain power is so diminished. We don’t have to go very far to see that. It’s every day happening. You Every time he opens his mouth you get some sort of gibberish or you get a strange alien kind of communication, or even sometimes he can’t even communicate in words that are discernible in any language on earth. It’ll just mumble in various strange sorts of ways. There have been many in the medical community who have indicated that they think that he is of substantially diminished capacity, and I just don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to perceive that he cannot carry on an intelligent conversation for a little more than a little bit. I wonder whether or not they’re giving him some sort of stimulant or something in advance of some of his public appearances. He seems on occasion to have a degree of coherence but that deteriorates over time. And I think readily fatigued. He doesn’t seem to be able to embrace. complex issues. When he does talk about a substance off the cup, he appears to be completely clueless and largely incoherent. So this is a person who yeah, probably meets the full definition of the, under the 25th amendment for removal from office, but you’ll never get a cabinet member who will probably come forward and say that.

James Egidio: 1:01:02

So what you’re saying is we’re seeing Weekend at, a sequel to Weekend at Bernie’s part three, I guess

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:01:11

that might be.

James Egidio: 1:01:13

You’re running for U. S. Senate and the elections coming up in November. I take it right?

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:01:19

Yeah, we have a the primaries are in June the 18th. That’s the last day to vote in the primaries. June the 18th of 2024. Shortly thereafter, we have the general election in November, same time as the presidential election. So we’ll see what happens. But I’m hoping that people will vote to save Both my state of Virginia and the United States in favor of a person who’s been dedicated to the Biden agenda of destruction of our great nation, which we’ve witnessed in spades. Can you imagine, it’s hard for me to imagine another four years of Joe Biden and another four years of those who have supported that agenda. It’s been so ruinous. And I think it’s time for them to have to take responsibility for what they’ve done. They try very vigorously to deflect and to avoid any accountability, but it’s time for them to have to account and to recognize to the American people that their efforts have all come to not when it comes to protecting our economy, protecting individual liberty, ensuring that our borders are safe. They have contributed wittingly to the destruction of our country by opening the borders with. I just came back from the border. thorough national security tour of the border through the CBP and almost all of the border patrol agents have been reassigned to human processing. And we have an open border. It’s virtually it’s virtually defenseless. We are to crime. to sex trafficking, drug trafficking, MS 13, 18th Street gangs. They’re all pouring through. There are four videos I have online on YouTube where they’re video vignettes where I’m at specific locations of the border and I’m showing people exactly how easy it is for criminal cartels to get into this country, the gangs and the drugs and. It’s amazing what’s going on the amount of intrusion and recognize this through the human processing centers. We are paying for the illegal aliens to live in the United States. And I don’t just mean a little bit. Each person coming across the border that is processed is getting cash. at taxpayer expense, is getting signed up for welfare, is getting signed up for food stamps, is being given opportunities for receipt of either full pay or substantially subsidized education. They’re getting free legal care. They are being transported after 72 hours in those processing centers by bus to either plane airports, bus terminals, or train stations at those locations, fully federally funded. NGOs, in other words, also our tax dollars, are going to pay for the tickets to take them anywhere they want to go in the United States. And far from there being 17 million illegals, which the administration admits, the CBP agents say no, that’s not true. It’s likely to be many times greater, may well be at, conservatively speaking. 30 million illegal entrants are in the United States and there’s no less, they said less than one. Per, they estimate less than 1% of criminals entering our country are interdicted now by Customs and Border Patrol. All the rest are just going right into the United States.

James Egidio: 1:04:41

Yeah, it sounds like an endorsement for For travel, it sounds like I can just jump over the board or start over again and get all these little goodies,

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:04:49

if you see, there’s a little interview I have with a guy at the border with the CPB translator, CBP translator, and he’s from Ecuador. And I asked him, why didn’t you go to the American Embassy in your country of origin to seek asylum here? Why did you come all the way to the American border to do that? And he said, oh, the paperwork and the bureaucracy there is no good. It’s much easier to get in this way. And I know he’s been victimized and had to pay a fortune to the cartels to have the privilege of being right at the American gate into the United States. But, as I talked to him through that gate, I asked him where do you want to go? And he said Manhattan. He was very sure of exactly where off the camera. We discovered that the guy has relatives up in New York already. who came here illegally. He wants right now and he knows full well what’s going to happen. He knows he’s going to go 72 hours in the human processing center. Once he gets in, they’ll have a space blanket and a yoga mat. and he’ll stay inside a human pod, they call it, which is a big aquarium like thing. And he’ll stay there for 72 hours, during which time they will process him. And what processing means is signing him up for welfare, signing him up for food, giving him cash, allowing him to state where he wants to go in the United States, directing him to which bus he needs to get on when he goes out and then allowing him to take off and go on that bus. and go to the train station or bus terminal or airport and go wherever he wants with the federal taxpayer paying the whole thing. Can you imagine how much money this is? You talk about 30 million people who are having all these federal benefits given to them. They also, by the way, get a free phone. They give him a free phone and they can call anywhere on earth that they want with that phone. They give them inside access inside the human processing center. They have another telephone series, telephone stations where they can call wherever they want a taxpayer expense. They talk as long as they want. And this is insane, but it’s a plan to destroy the country. You’ve got the open entry of criminals when you have sex trafficking, drug trafficking, MS 13, 18th street gangs, all these gangs, they are allowing into this country, they’re doing nothing. For the American victims of this, right? Not a word about them. Not a word about the property that’s been destroyed, people who’s been raped, or have been killed. Not a word. No money for them. No sympathy for them. No word about them from this administration, or anybody affiliated with it, or the Democrat majority in Congress. The whole attention is on people entering illegally. And so their first introduction to the United States is that they get to come in illegally. And what does that mean? That means that the rule of law being taught to these people is zilch. They’re told that you can break the laws of the United States, and not only will you not be made to account, You’ll be given all kinds of benefits by the federal

James Egidio: 1:07:43

government. How about that? Yeah, I wonder if that guy that came in to New York, if they gave him Yankee tickets or Mets tickets.

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:07:52

It’s laughable, but I’ll tell you it’s absolutely horrific. Yeah, and none of these people are vetted. We don’t know their backgrounds. As I was told by the CBP chief. He told me that we don’t know anything about these people, so we don’t know if they have a criminal background. And he said, look at this guy. This guy has a tattoo on 13 tattoo. I said why can’t you take him out based on that? Oh, no, the Biden administration makes us presume everybody is innocent and we can only take action if Interpol gives us information and that almost never happens or if they’re on the terrorist watch list, but most of the terrorists who are on the terrorist watch list obviously are not. choosing to come in seeking asylum. They’re coming in through other ways. And he said, We have so little border protection that while we have over 104 terrorists in the past year who have come through on the terrorist watch list that we know, he said there are countless others, no doubt. And he said less than 1 percent of criminals In the sense of those that are committing acts of murder, drug trafficking, sex, driving terrorism are interdicted because all of the personnel are back into human processing. Wow.

James Egidio: 1:09:03

Unbelievable. So Myorcas, I just heard recently, I think it was two days ago or three days ago where Josh Hawley was. Had Mayorkas in front of Congress and it, or in front of in a hearing and he said something about a app that he built that the government built an app for most like a concierge service. Yeah, so it basically brings the illegals right to the. Pretty much the wall, the fence, whatever you want to call it, the entry port of entry. And it gives them instructions through this app that we built for them. So it’s guiding them into the United States.

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:09:39

We have NGOs. The United States government pays for these NGOs. We, the taxpayer are paying for these NGOs. We have NGOs on the Mexican side that tell people who are coming. that this is what you need to do to tell a CBP in order to be capable of getting asylum. So they’re basically educating them on how to present themselves to federal authorities on the other side. And they’re telling them more information like what you’re talking about. Oh, here’s an app. Oh, here’s additional information. Oh, this is where you go to get free education. This is what you’ll need to do. Once you get to the next NGO after you’ve been through the Human Processing Center, this is what you’re going to go through in the Human Processing Center. This is what they’re doing. And you know what’s real tragedy here? So the cartels are basically determining American immigration policy right now. They’re the ones that are deciding who gets to come in. They’re terrorist organizations and they want to kill us. They want to destroy us. So they’re letting in whoever they want and we’re not doing anything to prevent that. So all these people are abused who are coming in almost all of them in one way or another, unless they’re part of the cartels or unless they’re engaged in criminal activity that is benefiting the cartels, they are going to be abused. So if it’s a family member or children or whatever, they’re all abused. And the CBP chief was telling me, he said, Jonathan, we have our suspicions and they’re well informed that many of these so quote unquote family units that come across where there’s a male and their children. And then there’s a female, oftentimes they’re not even in the same family. And then it’s part of a cartel activity. It’s either sex trafficking, drug trafficking going on here. But he said, oftentimes he, they suspected sex trafficking. And so this is the kind of thing that you’re seeing happening. And it will go on indefinitely if there’s another Biden administration. Yeah. And the consequence is going to be the destruction of the United States. We can’t survive. Our country cannot survive by having people with loyalties to foreign powers and never having to be vetted and never having to swear allegiance to this country and never having to prove their ability to earn an income. Never having to establish they have no criminal background. If we allow the cartels for another eight, for another four years, for six years to decide who’s going to come in we are going, we’re going to just have crime through the roof. We’re going to have acts of terrorism going off all the time. It’s we are so fortunate. That there has not yet been, and there may still be a Hamas, a terrorist attack in the United States, all for a global jihad, because as I, as the CBP chief told me, there are so many Hamas coming in through, we, there are so many people from the Middle East and we know that they’re based on what has happened recently, we know that there’s a two year time period during which they were planning this. They call us the great Satan. They call Israel the little Satan. You mean to tell me that they didn’t anticipate that there would be an American reaction? You mean to tell me that they didn’t plan for that and send people over here? You mean to tell me that all the people from the Middle East who’ve gone into this country unvetted do not include individuals who are in Hamas? In fact yesterday, The day before yesterday, FBI Director Christopher Wray, who I think should be impeached, but FBI Director Christopher Wray admitted that there was a real risk of terror in the United States based on the presence of Hamas here. So apparently the FBI. Knows that there is Hamas here, whether they, and they know that there’s more chatter but whether or not they know the whole number, I think is probably that they don’t because they’re out into this country unvetted for so long that, but it’s a danger. We live in a state really of it’s a time bomb environment where the fuse can be lit at any time. The bombs are probably all over. And the violence may happen. And then there’s this other second kind of terrorism that no one is talking about, which I think about quite a bit, which is the infiltration of all sorts of government and private institutions by individuals intent on destroying our country. And interfering with the operation of critical businesses and our school systems and system of education system and private enterprise that is engaged in critically sensitive activity. And it’s not just a Chinese infiltration. It’s also infiltration from other enemies around the world because of this open border policy. So I think we, there’s a, a book by Azra Nomani called Woke Army, which people should read that basically explains how Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood set up shop here in, in Herndon, Virginia in way before 9 11 as part of an effort to turn America into a theocracy, a radical Muslim theocracy, And they, their plan was to infiltrate institutions and to inspire Americans to regard any effort at criticism of the Muslim Brotherhood or of any of their affiliated mosques in the United States as an act of bigotry and they succeeded in spades in that respect. And it’s fascinating to read to see how far into American society, these people who have been intent on destroying our country have gotten. Yeah. And

James Egidio: 1:15:11

even our election system doesn’t seem like it’s very flimsy right now. It just, with the way they, they have people voting with mail in ballots, and these machines are they’re, you can’t trust the machines. It just seems like it’s the whole voting system is so flimsy as well. What’s your take on that?

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:15:30

The mail in ballots, ballot harvesting, are absolutely rife with fraud. I have no doubt, and that’s exactly why they’re favored by so many Democrats, I think, is because they tend to benefit from these acts of fraud. You’ve got George Soros and his operation are working around the country to try to really eliminate a lot of the impediments to allowing individuals who have a radical agenda from getting into government, and I think. Some of those they’re interacting with, if not a majority of those they’re interacting with, are taking advantage of ballot harvesting and and are doing so to great success for the Democrats. There was an attempt to have federal legislation passed, which would have made mail in ballots the rule of law across the United States through every jurisdiction, overruling the Constitution’s requirement that the processing of elections be a state matter. This unconstitutional law, which was favored by the Democrats, is the second time it’s been introduced. Is one they vigorously fought to, to have adopted, which would have destroyed the integrity of the American electoral system. We have to think of our electoral system in a critical way. That is, we have to regard every opportunity for fraud as a potential and guard against it. And ensure that there’s not only voter identification, but really very strict measures to ensure elements where fraud can take place are locked off and not open. Right now we have a spigot basically open to fraud. And that’s because when you have mail in balloting. And you have ballot harvesting and you have it in state after state, you are inviting those fraudsters people want to, do nefarious things with the election to take advantage of it a lot of changes have to take place. A lot of them have to take place at the state level, and some states have done a fairly good job of doing that. A lot of states haven’t, but it’s going to critically affect, I think, upcoming state elections and the federal election. We have to get on this and ensure the integrity of the electoral system.

James Egidio: 1:17:35

Yeah, especially when you get a guy like Zuckerberg puts in 400 million dollars into the 2020 election. That’s just mind blowing that he can put that kind of money into this election and not think for a minute that he’s not swaying elections and influencing elections

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:17:51

and it’s, it, there is so much obvious effort to engage in fraud. It’s hard to believe that there is no fraud and the standards of proof in court make it very hard to prove fraud because if you don’t, if you can’t trace a ballot back to the voter, And, we have anonymous voting in this country. It’s very hard for you to do that. You can do it electronically in certain circumstances, but in many instances, when you have, for example, ballot harvesting, how do you know? How do you know whether the people that they’ve acquired these ballots from fill the ballots out themselves or whether people who are Democrat operatives came into an area? met in an old folks home, for example, and filled in all the the names and information for them. You don’t. So ballot harvesting is a particularly dangerous situation. Also, the length of the elections process having, 45 to 60 to 90 days. Yeah. Voting enables is an invitation for fraud. And then having, allowing our legislatures to change the date of the final day of election so they can suddenly just unilaterally say, Oh, okay, for another 24, 48 hours, we’re going to still accept more ballots. What is that? This is the kind of thing that is characteristic of third world countries. It is really a. Something that should never happen here in the United States. We need certainty, we need a short voting period, we need to get rid of ballot harvesting, and we need validation of any mail in ballot, a system of secure validation. And we need to make sure that people who vote are lawfully eligible to vote. And there’s a lot of pollution on that side too, corruption. You’ve got people are illegal aliens. They’re getting cards that are sufficient and treated the same as a social security card, and they’re able to get a driver’s licenses. And from driver’s licenses in some states, they’re able to get the right to vote. They’re able to get registration and vote even though they’re illegal. And many states, even my own state of Virginia, if you go in and vote, you cannot have any identification and say, I don’t have my I. D. And then you just fill out a paper. All right. And then you can vote. Now they say that the paper is then subsequently assessed to determine whether it’s valid or not, but I have serious doubts about the prudence of relying upon such a system. They need to be interdicted at the point of voting not after they vote. It needs to be done so we know that the person who’s voting is legally able to vote at the time they vote. Not after

James Egidio: 1:20:27

unbelievable, I just, I pray that we have some kind of revival as opposed to an alternative to that, because I think there’s, it’s just, I think people are on an edge. You can feel it around you, and

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:20:43

that’s our hope. Our hope is, that enough people wake up, realize that we are a majority and we’re not losing this because we’re a minority. We’re losing it because we’re a silent majority. We need to become vocal. We need to become active. We need to become insistent and we need to take seriously our role. In saving our country. And if we do that, we’ll save it.

James Egidio: 1:21:07

I really appreciate your time on the medical truth podcast. It was very enlightening and very informative. And again, the website is

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:21:16

go ahead. https://www.EmordForVa.Com. And I appreciate everybody’s support. Yeah. This is a campaign that, if we don’t receive the support of donors we’re at a severe disadvantage. So putting in a plug for the campaign, I would say if you can donate, no matter what it is, please do, because it makes an enormous difference and we’ll appreciate it very much.

James Egidio: 1:21:40

Thank you so much, Jonathan, for joining me for this episode of the medical truth podcast. I appreciate it. My

Jonathan Emord, Esq: 1:21:45

pleasure. Thanks.

outro: 1:21:47

Thanks for listening to the Medical Truth Podcast. For the latest episodes, go to www. medicaltruthpodcast. com. You can also find the Medical Truth Podcast on Rumble, as well as all the major podcast platforms like Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, and iHeart.