Saving lives wasn’t the crime — doing it without permission was



Five years after COVID-19, how do red-state doctors still face persecution for heroically treating patients whom the medical establishment abandoned?

Instead of honoring doctors like Mary Talley Bowden and Eric Hensen with medals, the Texas Medical Board hounds them with investigations that could strip them of their licenses. The state legislature, meanwhile, has let the session slip by without so much as a committee hearing for bills that would end this travesty.

COVID exposed the worst kind of medical malpractice. Now, in Texas, we’re watching political malpractice finish the job.

Dr. Bowden, a soft-spoken ear, nose, and throat specialist based in Houston, treated thousands of COVID patients — none of whom died under her direct care. But 48-year-old Tarrant County Sheriff’s Deputy Jason Jones wasn’t so lucky. The father of six died needlessly in a Houston hospital that refused to treat him with anything beyond a ventilator. Hospital staff even covered his breathing tube to block his wife from administering ivermectin and barred Bowden from stepping in after writing him off as a lost cause.

In October and November 2021, Texas Health Huguley Hospital in Fort Worth fought Jason’s wife, Erin, every step of the way. Though hospital doctors had no recovery plan, administrators did everything possible to stop alternative treatments. Even after a court granted Dr. Bowden the right to administer ivermectin, the hospital threw up bureaucratic roadblocks: demanding a list of every surgery she’s performed, three letters of recommendation, and stacks of irrelevant paperwork — despite her record as one of Houston’s most trusted breathing specialists.

On Nov. 10, Bowden sent a nurse to the hospital to administer ivermectin. Hospital staff blocked her from entering, claiming an appellate court had stayed the district judge’s order — yet no such stay had been issued, and neither Bowden, her attorney, nor the nurse had received notice. The nurse turned around without ever stepping inside the ICU.

Jason Jones never received the treatment. The hospital discharged him at half his body weight. He spent the next year in poor health and died in 2023. In the end, the hospital got its way.

Process is the punishment

Jones’ story mirrors those of tens of thousands of Americans during the pandemic. Instead of holding anyone accountable or honoring doctors who fought to save lives, lawmakers have looked the other way. Rather than being celebrated, Bowden was hit with a Texas Medical Board complaint. Her alleged offense? “Disrupting” the ICU — despite the fact her attorney gave the hospital 30 minutes’ notice and she acted under court authority.

Bowden refused to pay a fine or submit to a mandated eight hours of continuing medical education. The board continues to pursue sanctions. The case remains open. She has lost hundreds of thousands of dollars and spent countless hours defending herself — all while continuing to treat patients. Without action from Gov. Greg Abbott or the Texas Legislature, she still faces the loss of her medical license.

At a recent hearing, Bowden attempted to call Dr. Mollie James, a Missouri ICU physician who moved to New York at the height of the pandemic. The board blocked the testimony, claiming James lacked sufficient credentials. Instead, they grilled Bowden about her political views on the COVID vaccine, citing her social media posts.

Four years after COVID’s failures became common knowledge, Texas still punishes the doctors who stepped up when others refused. Physicians who treated patients the medical establishment left to die now face professional ruin — while those who denied care walk free. The Texas Legislature has blown two full sessions without doing anything to stop it. The Texas Medical Board looks more like its draconian California counterpart every day.

No hearings, no accountability

State Sen. Bob Hall (R) has tried repeatedly to reform the board. This year, he finally succeeded in passing SB 2422 out of the Senate on a party-line vote. The bill orders the TMB to vacate all investigations and disciplinary actions against doctors who prescribed COVID treatments like ivermectin, spoke out against lockdowns or mandates, or refused to wear a mask. It requires the board to expunge all related records, refund fines, and reimburse legal expenses.

The Texas House hasn’t even held a hearing.

Abbott — whose mask mandate triggered many of the cases now under scrutiny — has said nothing. The governor refuses to push for legislation to correct the damage. Meanwhile, doctors like Eric Hensen, an ENT specialist in Tyler who treated thousands of COVID patients, still face the threat of losing their licenses. Hensen’s “crime”? He followed Abbott’s original mask guidance. The same governor who issued the order now watches in silence while Hensen’s career is destroyed.

COVID exposed the worst kind of medical malpractice. Now, in Texas, we’re watching political malpractice finish the job.

Elon Musk takes his child to work — and away from the woke mind virus



The media collectively clutched its pearls when Elon Musk showed up at the Senate with his young son, X, perched on his shoulders. He was headed to meetings on the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency. Critics pounced. The BBC quoted American University professor Kurt Braddock, who called it “a political move to make him seem more personable.” Harvard professor and political strategist Jon Haber dismissed it as inviting “chaos” and distraction.

But strip away the media’s reflexive cynicism, and Musk’s decision makes perfect sense. After publicly condemning gender ideology for destroying another one of his children, it’s hardly surprising that he wants to keep his family close.

Elon Musk knows firsthand what happens when the culture takes too much control. He lost a child to the woke mind virus and now seeks to eradicate it.

Maybe Musk recognizes that protecting one’s children — not outsourcing their values to a broken system — is a fundamental duty. Maybe he sees the cultural rot in American schools and wants no part of it. Or maybe he just loves his kids, which used to be considered normal.

Musk bringing his children to work — even to meetings with world leaders like the prime minister of India — doesn’t signal chaos. It signals commitment. It embodies the essence of home education: personal, practical, and profoundly traditional.

Education vs. schooling

Education trains the mind to recognize truth, emulate goodness, and appreciate beauty. It equips children to think independently, search for meaning, and pursue wisdom. Schooling does the opposite. It programs children to conform, accept whatever “experts” tell them, and obey the dominant ideology without question.

Education liberates. Schooling enslaves. Today’s school systems manipulate children into believing that self-harm is self-care — gaslighting rebranded as guidance.

That institutional hostility toward children now stands fully exposed. Since the fall of Roe v. Wade, abortion numbers have surged, fueled by the widespread availability of abortion pills and Planned Parenthood’s marketing campaign assuring the public they’re “safe” and “effective.” They’re safe for no one. They end lives. Meanwhile, activists now push for legal protection of gender-transition surgeries for minors — procedures that mutilate healthy bodies and bind children to pharmaceutical dependency for life.

The rot runs deeper. According to the House Select Committee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, the American Federation of Teachers, led by Randi Weingarten, played a central role in shaping harmful COVID-era school policies. The AFT lobbied the CDC to keep schools closed, not based on science or evidence, but to strengthen bargaining leverage. The union's aim wasn’t safety — it was higher compensation. The result: long-term psychological, developmental, academic, and economic damage to millions of children.

Teachers’ unions, long portrayed as champions of children, proved themselves anything but. The report makes it plain: “Any public health response that warrants closing schools should face the highest levels of scrutiny. School closure policy should be informed by science and data, not fear and politics.” Yet no one in power will face consequences.

Homeschooling is better

Does a system that gets worse for children every year while bleeding taxpayers dry deserve the label “education”?

No serious evidence suggests it benefits kids. With their well-being on the line, we should return to what worked for millennia before the 20th century’s great school experiment: parent-led education.

After generations of institutional schooling, we’ve forgotten a basic truth: Children need parents to become healthy, capable adults. In outsourcing education to the state, we’ve sacrificed much. Home education introduces children to more than rote academics. It builds life skills, strengthens family ties, and helps children understand their place in the world.

Compare that with schools today. Age-segregated classrooms teach narrow content in isolated bubbles, infantilizing students while cutting them off from meaningful interaction with older generations. The results speak for themselves: young adults who now need a word — "adulting" — to describe basic responsibilities.

Would anyone argue that Elon Musk has less to offer a child than a Harvard graduate who took a seminar titled “Queering Education”? That class, by the way, trains future teachers to combat “heteronormativity” and “cisnormativity” in the classroom. These so-called experts claim that “negotiating gender and sexuality norms,” including transitioning minors, boosts academic performance.

Musk wouldn’t buy it. No sane person should.

Retaking control

Mocking gender theory isn’t just common sense — it’s starting to look a lot like home education.

Elon Musk made a statement: World leaders matter, but his children matter more. He showed that balancing both is not only possible — it’s commendable. Rather than scoffing, we should applaud it.

Maybe Musk could redefine the DOGE as the “Department of Good Education” and revive a “take your child to work” ethic in American life. Pair that with some math and classic literature, and we’d raise better students — and make better citizens.

Musk knows firsthand what happens when the culture takes too much control. He lost a child to the “woke mind virus” and now seeks to eradicate it. The man who carried a sink into Twitter headquarters on day one understands symbolism. “Let that sink in,” he said.

Then he hoisted his young son onto his shoulders and onto his list of priorities. It’s time we let that sink in, too — and follow his lead.

Mass deportations are critical to America’s future



In a late-night order, the Supreme Court on Saturday blocked the Trump administration from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport illegal aliens. The administration had relied on the law to expedite removals of some of the most dangerous individuals in the country, including alleged MS-13 gang members.

This wasn’t a final ruling on the statute, but it froze current deportation efforts and signaled a likely loss for the White House. Once again, Donald Trump faces betrayal from the very justices he appointed — only Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. The president now finds himself at odds with a politically driven judiciary that seems to believe unelected lawyers, not the commander in chief, should run the executive branch.

The implication is clear. If Biden can import millions without due process, but Trump can’t deport them without it, then the system has no future.

Mass deportations remain essential if the United States hopes to remain a functioning nation. But the legal system isn’t the only obstacle. Mass democracy — often hailed as a bulwark against tyranny — turns out to be remarkably easy to rig.

When the ruling classes can’t depend on the current electorate to keep them in power, they simply replace it. Democrats understand that new immigrants overwhelmingly support the party that promises wealth redistribution — from the established population to the newly arrived.

Illegal immigrants may not vote immediately, but many will gain amnesty or eventually naturalize. Their children will all receive birthright citizenship. That’s the plan: long-term voter replacement to eliminate serious opposition in national elections.

The crisis at the southern border never threatened Democrats. They designed it. It wasn’t a policy failure. It was an electoral strategy.

And the Supreme Court saw no urgency in stopping a border policy designed to rig American elections for generations.

The Biden administration ran a cell phone app that fast-tracked illegal entry. It didn’t just leave the southern border wide open — it flew planeloads of Haitian migrants directly into the United States and dumped them in small Midwestern towns, where they overwhelmed local infrastructure. At no point did Chief Justice John Roberts step in, despite the administration’s blatant disregard for federal law and its constitutional duty to protect citizens.

When government officials at every level violated core constitutional rights during the pandemic — freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, and more — the Supreme Court barely stirred. When federal intelligence agencies colluded with social media platforms to censor Americans and manipulate the outcome of a presidential election, the justices stayed silent. No emergency orders. No late-night rulings.

Even when January 6 defendants were charged under a statute that clearly didn’t apply to them, the court dragged its feet for years before taking up the case.

But when MS-13 gang members faced deportation under a long-standing federal statute, the Supreme Court sprang into action — issuing a midnight order to protect their due process rights.

Different rules for different people. And we’re all supposed to pretend not to notice.

The situation has become so absurd — so transparently political — that Justice Alito called it out in a blistering dissent, highlighting the irony of denying due process in an emergency order supposedly aimed at protecting due process:

In sum, literally in the middle of the night, the Court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to rule, without hearing from the opposing party, within eight hours of receiving the application, with dubious factual support for its order, and without providing any explanation for its order. I refused to join the Court’s order because we had no good reason to think that, under the circumstances, issuing an order at midnight was necessary or appropriate.

The absurdity doesn’t end with the timing. Millions of illegal immigrants already lived in the U.S. before Biden took office. Since then, more than six million (at least) have entered illegally — an estimate even generous analysts won’t dispute.

Now consider the implications: If each of those six million requires a full court hearing before deportation, Trump could devote every waking moment of his presidency to the task and still fall short of removing even that cohort.

The implication is clear. If Biden can import millions without due process, but Trump can’t deport them without it, then the system has no future. Democrats get to flood the electorate with a new dependent voting class during their terms, while Republican presidents get bogged down in endless legal entanglements trying to undo the damage.

Every Republican president becomes a man with a bucket, bailing water from a cruise ship with a hole the size of Mexico.

The left keeps warning that Trump’s battles with the courts risk plunging us into a constitutional crisis. But that crisis began tens of millions of illegal immigrants ago.

Federal judges have already blocked Trump administration efforts to reform the military, reduce spending, and rein in foreign aid. They act as though they — not the president — command the executive branch. Now, the Supreme Court has taken the absurd position that the due process rights of illegal alien gang members matter more than the rights of American citizens.

A government that fails to secure its borders or remove those who violate them abandons its most basic responsibility. No country that tolerates mass illegal presence can long remain a country at all — certainly not for long.

The judiciary isn’t defending the rule of law. It’s eroding it — obstructing legitimate executive action, undermining democratic accountability, and weakening national sovereignty.

The Trump administration has ambitious and vital goals: restoring American industry through tariffs, ending the globalist drift in foreign policy, removing progressive rot from universities, and dismantling the administrative state.

But none of it will matter without mass deportations.

Tens of millions of people live in the United States in defiance of our laws. They must be expelled. The only question is how far the courts will go to damage their own credibility trying to stop it.

Deliverance requires memory — and America is forgetting



Passover has just ended — a central story for Jews and Christians alike but also a defining narrative for America.

America’s founders drew heavily from the Exodus and the Hebrew prophets. They studied Hebrew. Some even proposed it as the official language of the United States. Benjamin Franklin, for his part, suggested that the national seal feature Moses crossing the parted Red Sea. The reverence for this story runs deep in our national DNA. It’s no accident that Hollywood — the most American of art forms — has returned again and again to retell it.

We rightly see Pharaoh as the villain of Exodus — but how many of us stop to honor the quiet heroism of Pharaoh’s daughter?

And yet, as a nation, we’ve let some of our oldest traditions fade. But that’s nothing new. God always finds a way to remind us.

Today, many Americans have begun to realize we needed the pain of 2020 and the years that followed. Without that nightmare, President Trump wouldn’t have returned with the mandate to truly save America. Without those four bitter years, the country might never have awakened to remember who we are.

This moment echoes the Exodus. Just as we needed four years of national affliction to witness Trump’s political deliverance, the Israelites needed to see God’s hand to remember His power. That’s why scripture says God “hardened Pharaoh’s heart.” Not only to punish Egypt — but to remind His people of His unmatched might. To declare, for all to see, “that there is none like unto the Lord our God.”

And yet, even after 10 plagues and a miraculous escape, the Israelites faltered. Jewish tradition teaches that only one in five left Egypt; the rest chose the false comfort of slavery. Many who did leave lost faith before stepping into the Red Sea. Others bowed before the golden calf while Moses ascended Sinai.

Even in the face of miracles, it was easier for some to forget God than to trust Him.

Americans had forgotten even before 2020 — and God gave us a hard reminder.

So ask yourself: If we forgot who we are, what else have we forgotten?

Look again to the story of Passover. The book of Exodus begins with a chilling line: “There arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.”

It wasn’t just that Pharaoh forgot Joseph. He chose not to know him. Acknowledging Joseph would have meant acknowledging the Israelites and all they had done for Egypt. Joseph saved the Egyptians from famine. His descendants helped build up the nation. So Pharaoh erased them. He enslaved them. He ordered their sons drowned in the Nile.

But not everyone forgot. Pharaoh’s own daughter remembered. She rescued Moses — the one who would lead the Israelites out of Egypt, receive the Ten Commandments at Sinai, and pass down a faith that would eventually give birth to Christianity.

That’s something worth remembering. We rightly see Pharaoh as the villain of Exodus — but how many of us stop to honor the quiet heroism of Pharaoh’s daughter?

She saved Moses when it was unpopular, even dangerous, to do so. She defied her father’s command, choosing righteousness over convenience. Her courage made everything that followed possible.

Christians have long understood the wisdom of Romans: “If the root is holy, so are the branches.” Like that olive tree, we must guard the roots to grow strong branches. We must remember.

So let us remember who we are. Americans are a people who remember God. Like Pharaoh’s daughter, we remember Joseph — even when the world forgets. Like the Israelites, we walk away from slavery and into the unknown, trusting the God who delivers.

We are that people.

I just pray we don’t forget.

We say we want free speech — until we hear something we hate



The First Amendment is clear: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.” No qualifiers. No exceptions. Just liberty.

Forged in rebellion, the First Amendment protects the unsavory as much as the noble. Yet Americans in 2025 — left, right, and center — still can’t stomach it. We’re too emotional, too fragile, and too quick to clutch pearls or pitchforks when words sting.

Absolute free speech demands that we ditch the training wheels and face the chaos.

Historically, liberals owned the free speech mantle. Think of the ’60s counterculture, railing against establishment censors. However, that legacy began to crumble when Tipper Gore pushed for “Parental Advisory” stickers, and it outright shattered during the 2020 election and COVID-19 pandemic.

The left became the “script enforcers.” Dissenters questioning lockdowns or vaccine effectiveness were branded “misinformation” spreaders and booted from Twitter and Facebook. Big Tech, egged on by progressive lawmakers, didn’t just moderate — it silenced. The party of free expression revealed its censorious streak, proving that power trumps principle every time.

Conservatives took up the free speech mantle — so they say. Elon Musk’s 2022 purchase of Twitter promised a free speech renaissance. He called it a platform for unfiltered truth — a digital town square — and it felt like that for a while. Users could breathe easier, tossing out hot takes without instant banishment. But the honeymoon’s over. X still throttles visibility on certain topics: any post with the word “trannies,” questioning foreign aid to Israel, or disputing the timing of a push for more H-1B visas, to name a few.

Even the champions of “absolute free speech” have limits they won’t admit.

The First Amendment doesn’t care about your feelings — or mine. That’s the hard truth. It protects the speech we all hate — slurs, rants, provocations. The Supreme Court has carved out narrow exceptions: You can’t defame with reckless lies (New York Times v. Sullivan, 1964) or incite imminent violence (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969).

However, today's content getting axed — even on so-called “free speech bastions” like X — rarely crosses those lines. It’s just “uncomfortable.”

“Hate speech,” a term so elastic that it’s meaningless, gets slapped on anything from locker-room trash talk to policy critiques. Thankfully, the Constitution doesn’t bend for hurt feelings. It’s absolute until a court says otherwise — and courts have historically leaned hard toward liberty.

Take Cohen v. California (1971). A guy wore a jacket saying “F**k the Draft” into a courthouse. Though his jacket was certainly offensive, the Supreme Court ruled that it was protected speech, noting that “one man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric.”

Similarly, in Snyder v. Phelps (2011), the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that Westboro Baptist protesters, who picketed soldiers’ funerals with vile signs, were protected under the First Amendment. The pattern is clear: The framers of the Constitution established a system in which words can be expressed freely, and judges sort the mess later — not moderators, not mobs, not you.

So why can’t we handle free speech? Liberals want safe spaces; conservatives want certain topics off-limits. During COVID-19, the left cried “public health” to justify silencing skeptics. Now, some on the right clutch their chests over critiques of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee influence or aid to Israel — topics that deserve debate, not gag orders.

Both sides claim they’re protecting society, but they’re really protecting their feelings. Absolute free speech demands that we ditch the training wheels and face the chaos. Americans on both sides, however, keep reaching for the mute button.

The X experiment proves it. Musk handed us the keys to a more unrestrained platform, but users — left and right — still howl when they see something they hate. Visibility limits persist, not because Musk is a fraud but because the consumer base demands it.

We’re not a society built for unfiltered truth; we’re too hooked on comfort. The First Amendment promises a brawl of ideas. Until we grow thicker skin, we’ll keep begging someone — government, tech lords, or whoever — to play referee.

Absolute free speech isn’t a fantasy; it’s the law. Courts have defended it for decades, but we fail to actually live it. Conservatives might lead the charge, but even they flinch at speech they hate.

RFK Jr.’s pharma ad ban: TV’s $6.9 billion question



Whether you’re streaming shows on Hulu or turning on cable TV to catch the news, you’re bound to encounter pharmaceutical advertisements that always end with a lengthy list of side effects.

Those ads always feature smiling, happy supposed customers oblivious to the side effect voice-over that usually lists “death” as one of issues they may face.

However, you’ll only see those ads if you live in the United States or New Zealand, because they’re the only countries that allow pharmaceutical companies to advertise prescription drugs on TV — a practice that the U.S. adopted after FDA rule changes in 1997 and that New Zealand regulates under its Medicines Act.


Now, Secretary of Health and Human Services RFK Jr. aims to change that.

RFK argues that these commercials fuel overmedication and Big Pharma’s influence. Taking them down could disrupt the $6.9 billion pharma TV ad market — which could also disrupt television itself.

“I hate to have broadcast entities lose money,” Jeffy tells Pat Gray and Keith Malinak on “Pat Gray Unleashed.”

“They’re gonna have to make up that money somewhere, and then they’ll probably raise your subscription fees and kick employees to the curb,” Malinak says.

“I mean, look, that’s why you don’t have critical stories on national news, or any news networks,” he continues, “critical of the pharmaceutical industry or the COVID vax or any kind of issue. It’s because those newscasts are funded almost exclusively through pharmaceutical TV dollars.”

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

New York Times charts prove COVID panic's permanent damage



Five years after the world stopped and lockdowns began, shocking New York Times data reveals that the COVID-19 panic left permanent scars on America’s economy.

“Remember, that 2020 to 2022 period was a dark economic time, right? It was really, really terrible, and it lasted a long, long time until it came ‘back to normal.’ But the chart can’t even detect those changes any more because COVID broke the chart,” Stu Burguiere of “Stu Does America” comments.

And while many things did go “back to normal,” some things have stayed at COVID levels for five years now.

“Some things changed around the country and never got back to normal. And this is the stuff we really lost because of not only COVID, but the government response to COVID,” Stu explains.


The New York Times charts reveal that used car prices are one of these things that never went back to baseline. The used car market had been reasonable before and at the beginning of COVID, before spiking like crazy up to February 2022. While it has dropped slightly, it’s still far above pre-COVID levels.

“And then this is probably one of the more sad examples of what we lost during COVID,” Stu says. “Third through eighth-graders and their test scores. This is just a way of measuring academic performance, it’s not necessarily just about whether they get lower scores or not, but you see a massive drop-off.”

On average, these students have fallen quite behind in reading and math — but depending on where they go to school, that changes slightly.

“Red states opened early, got their kids back to school. Their decreases are much less punishing to the kids when it comes to academic performance than it is in blue states,” Stu explains.

Even sadder is the chart revealing socialization.

“This was decreasing anyway, before we got to the COVID period, and then we saw a massive drop-off in 2020 by about 25% of the time you’re normally socializing with others. That drops by 25% in 2020 and has stayed low,” Stu says.

“We have now lost a massive percentage of the time that we actually spend with other human beings,” he continues. “That’s bad. Spending all your time online and not spending time with actual people is really, really, bad.”

Want more from Stu?

To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Mandates, masks, and mayhem: Never again!



Five years ago this month, the government effectively declared martial law. In doing so, it made what may be the worst decision of our lifetime — crushing civil liberties, wrecking the economy, and causing untold deaths through mismanagement of the virus and widespread use of a dangerous vaccine.

We continue to suffer the economic and health consequences of those decisions. Meanwhile, at both the federal level and in many states, lawmakers have failed to address the core liberty issue: preventing those powers from ever being used again.

It took just three years after the Civil War to ratify the 14th Amendment. Yet five years after COVID-era abuses, no comparable protections have passed at the federal level.

After the civil rights abuses that helped spark the Civil War, the country passed sweeping constitutional amendments to protect basic freedoms. Yet Congress has taken no such action after the COVID catastrophe. The same goes for many red states, which have done little over the past five years.

Still, it’s never too late to do the right thing. The following checklist outlines what Congress and state legislatures — especially those with Republican majorities — must do to fix it.

End biomedical tyranny

The COVID-19 era revealed a dangerous truth: It is neither scientifically sound, morally justified, nor constitutionally acceptable to force one person to undergo a medical intervention for the sake of another. Congress and state legislatures must act immediately to codify the following protections:

  • No mandates: No federal or state agency should ever require individuals to use a therapeutic, vaccine, prophylactic, or medical device.
  • No limitless emergencies: A president or governor may not declare a public health emergency lasting more than 30 days unless both legislative chambers approve an extension by a supermajority.
  • No lockdowns: Except for narrowly targeted, short-term quarantines of individuals exposed to deadly, quarantinable diseases like Ebola, the federal government must not restrict individual or property rights under the guise of pandemic control.
  • No masks: Outside surgical or clinical settings, no federal or state government should compel individuals to cover their faces as a condition of participating in public life.

These protections must be enacted at the federal level. While several Republican-led states have passed laws addressing parts of the issue, few have permanently banned public and private vaccine or mask mandates in all settings.

Additionally, county health directors should not have the authority to declare emergencies with criminal or civil penalties unless the county’s legislative body explicitly approves it. Even during such declarations, constitutional rights — such as the right to worship — must remain fully protected.

No experimentation without representation

Ban all mRNA shots: Except for terminally ill cancer patients, mRNA technology should not be used. Data now shows that mRNA does not stay localized, contains DNA contamination, and causes widespread inflammation. After five years of studies and real-world outcomes, mRNA technology has surpassed the threshold that would normally prompt the FDA to pull a product from the market. States should either ban its use or at minimum prohibit state agencies from promoting it.

Repeal the 2004 PREP Act: The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act shields all public health “countermeasures” from liability, including vaccines, therapeutics, and testing tools used during emergencies. Even cases involving willful misconduct can only be brought by the federal government. Congress must repeal this law and restore accountability.

Repeal the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act: This law exempts all vaccines on the childhood immunization schedule from liability. Congress should repeal it to restore legal recourse for vaccine injuries.

End marketing of emergency-use products: Any product approved only for emergency use should not receive government-backed promotion or special status. These products should be treated solely as private medical decisions between doctors and patients.

Restore informed consent

The FDA and state governments must not mandate or promote new vaccines or biologic products unless they undergo proper safety evaluation. No product should receive approval without long-term, placebo-controlled trials that test for:

  • Allergenicity — potential to cause allergic reactions
  • Carcinogenicity — potential to cause cancer
  • Fertility impact — effects on reproductive health
  • Immunogenicity — ability to generate an immune response
  • Genotoxicity — potential to damage genes or cause mutations

Approval should require evidence of reduced all-cause mortality over time. No vaccine should gain approval if trial data shows more deaths in the vaccinated group than in the placebo group.

Regulators must not approve vaccines for one age group while ignoring safety concerns in another, unless they can clearly demonstrate that risks do not apply to the targeted population. For example, after acknowledging that RSV shots caused Guillain-Barré syndrome and walking back its recommendation for people over 60, the FDA continued to promote the shots for those over 75.

Additional protections should include:

  • Banning self-spreading viruses and biologics.
  • Criminalizing the release of any pathogen, including self-spreading vaccines, and allow individuals to sue those responsible.
  • Prohibiting the placement of vaccine-related materials in the food supply.

Congress should also establish a commission to audit the childhood immunization schedule and review new vaccines in the development pipeline. This includes a full review of their necessity, safety data, and efficacy. Enlightened consent must serve as the foundation for informed consent.

The right to treat

Congress must prohibit the FDA from blocking doctors from prescribing fully approved drugs for off-label use.

All pandemic or emergency public health funding for hospitals must remain treatment-neutral. Funding should not favor one therapy over another. Clinicians — not federal agencies or pharmaceutical companies — should guide treatment decisions based on best practices, not profit motives.

Given ivermectin’s broad-spectrum antiviral properties and well-documented safety profile, it should be made available over the counter. Arkansas has taken the lead in adopting this approach.

Protect doctor-patient autonomy

Doctors must not face penalties — such as loss of their licenses or board certifications — for expressing dissenting views on vaccines or mask mandates. State medical boards must overhaul their complaint processes to focus only on cases with actual patient harm.

Boards should accept complaints only from:

  • Patients alleging direct injury
  • Immediate family of deceased patients
  • Medical professionals with firsthand knowledge of patient harm

All complaints unrelated to patient injury should be dismissed without review.

The Trump administration should direct the Department of Justice to drop all prosecutions against physicians charged with so-called “COVID crimes.” These include cases like that of Utah plastic surgeon Dr. Kirk Moore, who faces federal charges for allegedly providing vaccine exemptions and other patient-centered actions taken during the pandemic.

Adopt a new ‘Patient’s Bill of Rights’

Some states have taken steps in the right direction, but stronger civil and criminal penalties must be in place to protect patient rights across the country. Every hospital and senior care facility should be legally required to:

  • Prohibit denial of treatment, including organ transplants, based on vaccination status.
  • Allow at least one surrogate or visitor to be present for patients in hospitals or nursing homes.
  • Permit patients to use FDA-approved drugs off-label, prescribed by a licensed physician, at their own expense and with informed consent.
  • Guarantee the right to refuse any hospital-prescribed treatment and the right to leave the facility if the patient is mentally competent — effectively banning medical kidnapping.
  • Provide patients or their families a legal cause of action to file civil suits against facilities that violate these rights. District attorneys should also have the authority to pursue criminal charges when appropriate.
  • Revoke state tax-exempt status for hospitals found in violation of these provisions.

It took just three years after the Civil War to ratify the 14th Amendment. Congress codified its principles into law within a year of Lee’s surrender at Appomattox. Yet five years after COVID-era abuses, no comparable protections have passed at the federal level, and only a few states have enacted partial reforms. That needs to change. The time to act is now.

Trump’s war against the deep state starts with the courts



We are not a nation of laws, and we never have been. We are a nation of political will, and we always will be.

For more than a generation, the right has either failed or refused to acknowledge this essential truth. Meanwhile, the left has embraced it with unwavering commitment. As a result, it was on the verge of fulfilling Antonio Gramsci’s vision of a “long march through the institutions” — until the 2024 election stopped the left just short of the goal line.

Trump has an opportunity to turn the left’s misuse of the courts against it. He has already set the stage for a second term that could make him a once-in-a-century leader.

The good news is that after the 2024 election, we’re still in the fight. The bad news? We have 99 yards to march in the opposite direction. Here’s how we got here.

The left understands that politics is ultimately about power — acquiring it and using it — not about process. Leftists start with the policy outcome they want, no matter how extreme or destructive, and then fabricate a process to make it appear “legal.” That’s how judges, with no constitutional authority to do so, can decide that Venezuelan drug lords have a greater right to live in America than unborn babies have to be born.

Meanwhile, the right has typically responded by meticulously adhering to every subsection of every constitutional doctrine in its desperate, fleeting attempts to preserve what remains of sanity. And the right has done so at a glacial pace — while the left sprints toward Gomorrah.

Aggression on many fronts

Enter Donald Trump.

Unconventional quarterbacks rarely score 99-yard touchdowns, but they change the game. The right’s shift in leadership last decade introduced a wild card that made the left feel genuinely threatened for the first time. Instead of a predictable, by-the-book leader — akin to a classic drop-back passer — Trump operates best outside the pocket, forcing opponents to react to him.

His administration shattered the traditional “first 100 days” playbook, which typically focuses on one major campaign promise at a time. Instead, from day one, Trump aggressively took on the left across multiple fronts simultaneously.

This unpredictability has sent the left into a panic, driving leftists to act in ways previously confined to their most fevered fantasies. That’s why Trump faced two coup attempts in his first term. The Russian collusion hoax, orchestrated through the intelligence community, was nothing more than a psychological operation designed to nullify the 2016 election.

The second coup attempt came in the form of COVID-19 — a manufactured crisis weaponized by the bureaucratic swamp, with Anthony Fauci leading the charge. This psyop wasn’t about public health. It was designed to ensure Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election.

When that failed, leftists tried to imprison him, hoping to prevent his return. When that, too, didn’t work, they even attempted to assassinate him. That, by sheer providence, also failed.

Now, with its back against the wall, the ruling class has deployed its ultimate weapon — the most powerful psyop of all. The one that, for decades, has made Republicans surrender without a fight the moment they hear four dreaded words: “The courts have spoken.”

Injunctions as weapons

Trump has served as president for just 18% of the 21st century, yet he has been the target of nearly 70% of all federal injunctions issued against a sitting president in that time. An overwhelming 92% of those rulings came from Democrat-appointed judges. In February alone, Trump faced more federal injunctions than Joe Biden has during his entire presidency.

The same Biden who opened the borders to drug cartels and human traffickers, mandated controversial COVID-19 vaccines as a condition for employment, and pressured Big Tech to suppress dissenting views. In a just and rational world, such corruption would be unthinkable — but it was where we lived until just a couple of months ago.

Trump has thrown the Democratic Party into chaos, but the swamp’s power structures remain intact. The intelligence community, the administrative state, and activist judges continue their work, shielding the establishment from accountability. Hardly a day passes without a leftist judge fabricating authority the Constitution never granted, imposing new “rights” and obligations as phony as a country called “Palestine.”

Just as the Russia collusion hoax and Fauci-funded COVID hysteria were used to derail Trump’s first term, the judiciary is now the left’s weapon of choice against his second. Leftists will not stop unless they are forced to stop.

Beat the system

The right has little experience — let alone success — challenging judicial supremacy. For too long, conservatives have played by the left’s rules, expecting fair outcomes in a system rigged against them.

But one example proves it can be done. I know it well because it wouldn’t have happened without me.

In 2010, Iowa made history as the first state to remove state supreme court justices through a retention election, holding them accountable for their rulings. I was one of the movement’s leaders. No one expected us to succeed. The Republican Party wanted no part of it. We had no support from GOP candidates for governor or Senate. Republican-aligned trial lawyers stayed out of it. We were an underdog coalition taking on a judicial leviathan.

On election night, we won by 10 points. All three justices we targeted received higher percentages of “no” votes than the Republican gubernatorial nominee — who had refused to support us.

We accomplished this with just $1 million, a small sum for a modern statewide campaign. Not only did we convince voters to take a stand, but we also got them to turn over their ballots and vote in a way they never had before.

For months, my three-hour radio show — broadcast on the state’s largest media platform — focused on the retention vote, providing invaluable in-kind support. After the victory, key backers of our campaign approached me with an offer to fund a national expansion of my show. They knew we wouldn’t have won without that messaging effort, and that’s how I ended up where I am today.

Opportunity of the century

That campaign taught us several lessons — lessons the Trump administration would do well to apply now.

First, this is not a debate over legal theory or constitutional interpretation. It’s a battle over authority — not just between branches of government but over whether we still have a government that operates with the consent of the governed. Who is truly sovereign in America? The people or the judges? No branch of government — especially an unelected one — should be above the will of the people.

Second, the foundation of this fight is the source of law itself. Democrat-appointed judges reject “the laws of nature and nature’s God,” acting as if they are a law unto themselves. They do not see themselves as just a Supreme Court but as supreme beings. Whatever they decree must be enforced, with no questions asked, despite their lack of any inherent enforcement power. This is the essence of dictatorship.

Third, exposing this reality is crucial. These judges must be drawn into open confrontation where they admit their unchecked power. Voters — particularly those even remotely sympathetic to us — will be infuriated by their smug entitlement.

Finally, the people need a galvanizing issue that forces them to reject the myth of judicial supremacy. Their current outrage over an urgent cause must outweigh their long-standing deference to the courts.

We haven’t had a president challenge judicial overreach since Abraham Lincoln defied the Supreme Court’s heinous Dred Scott decision by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation. Thomas Jefferson, the man who wrote America’s mission statement, spent much of his public life warning about the dangers of an unchecked judiciary. He feared that if left unrestrained, corrupt judges would twist the Constitution into “a mere thing of wax.” He argued that the other branches must do their duty to prevent judicial usurpation.

Trump has an opportunity to turn the left’s misuse of the courts against it. He has already set the stage for a second term that could make him a once-in-a-century leader. Now, he faces a moment that could define his presidency. Stripping illegitimate power from unelected judges and returning it to the people who rightfully govern stands as the ultimate act of populism.

For the last 50 years, the left has imposed its most destructive policies on the country by judicial fiat. If Trump takes bold action now, he has a chance to cement his place in history alongside Lincoln and Jefferson.

Let’s build statues for the masked enforcers of COVID tyranny



Think about all the statues the woke mob tore down in recent years with the same fury they now reserve for firebombing Teslas. On the fifth anniversary of COVID-19’s medical, legal, and ethical failures, I have a few ideas for heroes worthy of new monuments.

Idaho alone deserves at least two. In September 2020, police arrested Gabe Rench for peacefully singing hymns at a public protest against the city of Moscow’s strict mask mandate. A court later ruled in his favor. Then, in April 2020, officers handcuffed Sara Brady in front of her children for letting them play outside at a park in defiance of a stay-at-home order. She, too, was ultimately cleared of any wrongdoing.

We should build statues and monuments to remind future generations of how science and dignity were cast aside for cultish hysteria and blind fear.

It took until 2023 for justice to prevail in both cases, delayed by a swarm of overzealous Karens and Keystone cops who failed to learn from history’s authoritarian follies. Instead, they seemed eager to replicate them.

They deserve statues too — depicted in their masks, rigidly marching six feet apart, blindly enforcing fraudulent “safety” measures. They can stand near Rench and Brady, a permanent reminder of the goose-stepping hysteria that defined the era.

The statues should defy logic, evoking disbelief and confusion. Children will gaze at them, instinctively pitying the absurdity and disgrace of the era they represent.

“How did they let it come to this?” they will ask. And wiser adults of a future age will answer, “Because they were morons, child. Utter morons.”

Todd Erzen, my book editor, envisions a mural in downtown Des Moines capturing his experience in April 2021. That day, he took his young daughter to a small restaurant to pick up a pizza. Inside, diners sat freely eating and chatting without masks. But when Erzen walked in for two minutes to grab his order, the Stasi guard working the cash register insisted that he wear a mask.

When Erzen pointed out the absurdity — customers raw-dogging the air all around him for an entire meal were somehow "safe," yet his brief presence required a hazmat-level response — the restaurant workers refused to give him the pizza. Then they called the cops.

Erzen hopes the mural will provoke a question from future generations: If someone truly feared infection, why would they prolong an argument with a supposed biohazard instead of simply handing him his pizza and ending the interaction as quickly as possible?

The mural would be called “Trust the experts!”

Not so fast, proclaims the New York Times. This week, the paper ran an op-ed with a breathtaking lack of self-awareness, headlined “We Were Badly Misled About the Event That Changed Our Lives.” What in the name of Wuhan is that nonsense? Misled by whom? Where was that level of skepticism when Joe Biden declared COVID-19 a “pandemic of the unvaccinated”? Where was it when Sweden stayed open and defied predictions of mass death and disaster? Or when ivermectin — a Nobel Prize-winning treatment — was suddenly banned overnight, nearly costing my friend Bill Salier his life?

Yes, we should build statues and monuments to remind future generations of how science and dignity were cast aside for cultish hysteria and blind fear. Let them see a grand sculpture of Salier, measuring out “horse medicine” in a desperate bid to save himself, while a smug pharmacist and the likes of Terry Bradshaw mocked him.

Our monuments to the scamdemic should be as absurd as the reality they reflect — a cause for both mockery and lamentation. They should remind us of a similarly stiff-necked people who once worshipped a golden calf instead of the one true God and thus help us vow to do a much better job teaching future generations to smash their idols instead of allowing them to be brought to us by Pfizer.