The Devastating Loss of Charlie Kirk and the Legacy He Leaves Behind, with Megyn Kelly

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: Next Up with Mark Halperin

Episode: The Devastating Loss of Charlie Kirk and the Legacy He Leaves Behind, with Megyn Kelly
Date: September 11, 2025
Host: Mark Halperin, MK Media
Guests: Megyn Kelly, Robert Pape
Theme: Reflecting on the assassination of Charlie Kirk—his influence, personal qualities, and the implications for political violence and the conservative movement. Also includes an extended remembrance and analysis of Kirk's political strategies and legacy.

---

Episode Overview

This somber episode of "Next Up" is dedicated to the life and legacy of Charlie Kirk, the prominent conservative activist who was recently assassinated. Mark Halperin is joined by Megyn Kelly, a close friend of Kirk’s, and later by Professor Robert Pape from the University of Chicago, to discuss Kirk’s impact on conservative politics, reactions to his death, the current threat landscape, and the broader context of political violence in America.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Importance of Charlie Kirk to Conservatism

(02:05–06:15)

• Megyn Kelly underscores Kirk’s unique talents as a communicator and a political organizer:

  • “He was probably our most effective messenger…He could take the ideas that we debate every day on our shows…condense them into digestible bits, and release them on people in a powerful and persuasive way.” (02:45)
  • Kelly notes Kirk’s effectiveness at reaching young people and converting critics: “He was speaking to a younger generation of kids who were apolitical and explaining to them these issues…that they could understand and access.” (04:27)
  • Kirk was not only influential among adults but deeply impacted the youth, including Kelly’s own children: “They were extremely jarred by this news. They’re 14 and 15, Mark. He was speaking to a younger generation.” (04:27)

• Personal qualities:

  • Kirk was known as a “happy warrior,” warm, giving, and open to genuine debate: “Charlie was kind. He was warm. He was giving. He did not look with disdain upon you if you showed up and you disagreed with him or even if you insulted him.” (03:36)

2. Responding to the Loss and Continuing the Mission

(06:15–07:33)

• Carrying the legacy forward:

  • Kelly argues that the best way to honor Kirk is to “follow his example” and “say all the things that we know are true and right, no matter what the consequences.” (06:15)
  • She calls for increased activism on college campuses and for conservatives to be unafraid to speak up, especially to counter liberal dominance: “You must speak up. If you don’t, they’ve won. Charlie’s not here to lead it anymore. You’re going to have to lead it yourselves.” (07:33)

• Policy recommendations:

  • Kelly emphasizes the need for institutional reforms to address the mental health crisis and prevent future violence:
    • “We need to be more flexible and open-minded to involuntary institutionalization, just as most countries in the West already are.” (10:32)

3. Media Perceptions and Misunderstandings

(11:23–15:03)

• The mainstream media’s view:

  • Halperin and Kelly criticize the “superficial” coverage by the mainstream press, labeling Kirk a “right wing” or “far right” figure without understanding his deeper impact and motivations.
  • Kelly: “It’s such a bastardization by the left…I just feel like they can go fuck themselves. I couldn’t give two shits about what they think of Charlie Kirk. They didn’t know him. They don’t understand any of us. And it’s because of willful blindness they choose to demonize rather than seek to understand.” (15:30)

• Internal critiques from the right:

  • Kelly laments that some on the “establishment right” diminished Kirk for being too “MAGA,” noting his belated acceptance by Fox News and others: “He only got asked back onto FOX within the past four months. He was banned at Fox for...most of his tenure.” (14:18)

4. Charlie Kirk’s Approach and Achievements

(19:58–32:56)

• Halperin’s Monologue/Reflection:
  • Charlie Kirk was described as someone who combined data-driven strategy (“a man of math and science”) with personal charisma and purpose-driven activism.
  • His leadership at Turning Point USA was characterized by relentless work ethic, innovation in outreach, and a refusal to become “smaller” with power.
  • “He carried his success the way a good waiter would carry a tray. Steady, attentive, unselfconscious, consistently like that.” (21:37)
  • He prioritized “clear metrics,” measured outcomes, and sustained organizational growth: “He didn’t like to have meetings where there were no goals or timelines, names next to each task.” (24:55)
  • Charlie was teachable, always seeking to learn even from critics: “Wisdom is found in many fields. And pride. Pride is a poor tutor. Charlie had no pride about learning from others.” (25:55)
  • Kirk is credited with making the critical difference in the 2024 election through voter registration and turnout, especially among young conservatives: “Charlie had done what people said he couldn’t do. And I believe he made the difference in the Electoral College for President Trump through his voter registration efforts.” (26:56)

5. Sampling of Charlie Kirk’s Own Words

(32:56–50:11)

• Entrepreneurial spirit:

  • Kirk described himself simply as an “entrepreneur,” taking pride in building from scratch and being underestimated: “I have probably been underestimated by a lot of people on the left and even on the right at times.” (33:03)
  • On organizational scale: “Well over a thousand full time people on staff now all across the country…over 400,000 donors…Over $100 million.” (34:29, 34:36)

• Media success:

  • “I do a two hour program every single day…which gets turned to a podcast. It’s on hundreds of radio stations across the country…” (33:03)

• Humor and humility:

  • Kirk’s reaction to being parodied on South Park: “I thought it was hilarious. I thought it was awesome…I think we on the right have to be able to laugh at ourselves better.” (49:42)
  • On meeting critics or political opponents: “I love learning. I learned this from Tucker. Sit down with people, even if you disagree. Ask great questions, be curious.” (48:13)

6. Expert Analysis: Political Violence and National Mood

(53:12–77:17)

Professor Robert Pape: Structural Causes and Solutions

• Rising support for political violence:

  • “We are seeing in our national surveys…evidence after evidence that our publics in the United States, both on the right and the left, support political violence at higher levels than at any time since we started doing these quarterly surveys in the summer of 2021.” (53:37)
  • In May surveys: “39% of Democrats said they agreed that the use of force was justified to remove Donald Trump from the presidency.” (55:33)
  • About “violent populism,” drawing analogies to the 1960s but noting today’s mainstreaming of support for violence.

• The demographic shift:

  • The single largest driver cited is the U.S. moving from a white majority to a white minority democracy; other issues include economic anxiety and polarization over social change.
  • “We are now transitioning for the first time in our 250 year history from a white majority democracy to a white minority democracy…” (59:35)

• Mitigating violence—A call for leadership:

  • Pape urges coordinated, bipartisan denunciation of violence:
    • “We need to focus on the short term…what’s most important is our political leaders to condemn violence from their constituents, their side. And you’re seeing this…in their silos. That is the key next step is joint statements.” (62:23–63:39)
  • Supports Halperin’s idea for a joint appearance by former presidents at Kirk’s funeral to set a standard for unity.
  • The real risk: sorrow among millions could evolve into anger and more violence if not handled carefully.

• Role of leadership at all levels:

  • “All Democrats, governors, members of Congress, all former presidents…need to be involved in the statements, just as all Republican leaders need to be involved…” (67:10)

• Short-term security vs. systemic risk:

  • Increased security at events is necessary but not a complete solution due to the wide pool of potential targets.

• Mental illness vs. ideology:

  • Pape emphasizes these are not mutually exclusive: widespread acceptance of political violence can nudge volatile individuals into action.

• Potential for escalation/copycat violence:

  • There is precedent for escalation following political assassinations, though it often unfolds over months, not days.

• Optimism:

  • “70% of the public abhors political violence,” but leadership is required to maintain and build on this consensus.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Megyn Kelly:

  • “Charlie was a happy warrior. Charlie was kind. He was warm. He was giving. He did not look with disdain upon you if you showed up and you disagreed with him or even if you insulted him.” (03:36)
  • “He considered his mission on this earth to fight evil and speak truth. What better way is there to honor him than to do more of that?” (06:15)
  • “I just feel like they can go fuck themselves. I couldn’t give two shits about what they think of Charlie Kirk.” (15:30)

• Mark Halperin:

  • “He carried his success the way a good waiter would carry a tray. Steady, attentive, unselfconscious, consistently like that.” (21:37)
  • “Charlie had done what people said he couldn’t do. And I believe he made the difference in the Electoral College for President Trump through his voter registration efforts.” (26:56)

• Robert Pape:

  • “This is following…a course where we are seeing…both on the right and the left, support for political violence at higher levels than at any time…” (53:37)
  • “We are now transitioning…from a white majority democracy to a white minority democracy.” (59:35)
  • “70% of the public abhors political violence…But that still leaves 30% problematic.” (76:16)

• Charlie Kirk (archive):

  • “I have probably been underestimated by a lot of people on the left and even on the right at times.” (33:03)
  • “I thought it was hilarious. I thought it was awesome. I thought it was hilarious…We on the right have to be able to laugh at ourselves better.” (49:42)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Megyn Kelly on Kirk’s unique role and influence – 02:45–06:15
• How to honor Kirk’s legacy and calls for new activism – 06:15–07:33
• Institutionalization and mental health reforms – 10:32–11:23
• Halperin’s Monologue: What made Charlie special – 19:58–32:56
• Charlie Kirk in his own words / Interview highlights – 32:56–50:11
• Robert Pape explains the political violence landscape – 53:12–77:17
• Call for bipartisan leadership, potential solutions – 62:23–63:39

---

Conclusion

This memorial episode delivers a multi-layered reflection on Charlie Kirk’s impact - not just as a conservative star, but as a builder, teacher, and exemplar of courage. Through emotional testimonial and rigorous analysis, the guests and host explore why Kirk mattered, how his loss reverberates through the conservative movement and the nation, and the urgent need to counteract the rising tide of political violence with both immediate leadership and long-term civic renewal. The episode closes on the message that while Kirk is irreplaceable, those inspired by him must now carry forward his mission—undaunted and emboldened.

---

Transcript

[Advertisement Voice]

Your skin should never come second. That's why Pact makes everyday essentials from the purest organic cotton. No toxins, no harsh chemicals, just softness you can feel good in. Because wellness isn't just what you put in your body, it's what you put on it too. From the first layer to the last, getting dressed should feel like self care. Visit wearpacked.com and use code DRESSWELL for 15% off your first order. Dress yourself well. Whenever I need to send roses that.

[Megyn Kelly]

Are guaranteed to make someone's day, the.

[Advertisement Voice]

Only place I trust is 1-800-flowers.com with 1-800-flowers. My friends and family always receive stunning, high quality bouquets that they absolutely love. Right now, when you buy a dozen multicolored roses, 1-800-flowers will double your bouquet to two dozen roses. To claim this special double roses offer, go to 1-800-flowers.com Pandora that's 1-800-flowers.

[Megyn Kelly]

Com Pandora welcome to NextUp.

[Mark Halpern]

I'm Mark Halpern, editor in chief of 2way, host of this program NextUp and somber for all of us here. Just a couple days ago in the last episode, I was sitting in this chair talking to Charlie Kirk. And now he's gone. And we're going to spend this episode trying to grapple with that. We'll review some of my past conversations with him. We'll talk about the moment of political violence. And joining us in a moment, Megan Kelly, host, the Megyn Kelly Show, a good friend of Charlie's and no person I'd rather speak to about what all this means and what we do next. Then Megan and then Robert Pape of the University of Chicago will talk about threats, my reported monologue on what made Charlie special, and then again, highlights from some of the past conversations I had with him, which I'll tell you why they meant so much to me and I hope to people who got to watch them and listen to them. But first, Megyn Kelly. Megan and I spoke yesterday on her program during breaking news of the story. And as I said, there's no one who better understands what Charlie meant to the conservative movement and what kind of person he was. Then Megan and Megan, thank you for making time.

[Megyn Kelly]

Of course. Mark, thanks for doing our show yesterday while it was all unfolding.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. My big project now is to try to deal with what's coming, which is the anger that you and I know is felt by so many people we know who knew Charlie. They're sad, of course, but a lot of anger. And from talking to folks yesterday overnight, a lot of that comes from a feeling that the left doesn't get why Charlie was so important. They're acting like some Republican operative was killed as opposed to an assassination of a leader who meant so much. So could you just start explaining why was Charlie so important to so many people? Not just people we know, but millions of people around the country.

[Megyn Kelly]

He was probably our most effective messenger. I mean, more than anyone, he. He could take the ideas that we debate every day on our shows and in our politics, condense them into digestible bits, and release them on people in a powerful and persuasive way. He was winning over critics. He was actually converting people from the left to the right person by person. You know, just looking at his past week in covering him yesterday, it's like he was at Oxford not long ago. He was in Japan. On Sunday. He was in Utah, as we know. Yesterday, he was launching a tour at which we were debating with him whether we'd go to Utah or Indiana in the next couple of weeks. We wound up going to Virginia with him.

[Mark Halpern]

And.

[Megyn Kelly]

And it's like there was no stopping him. He honed his communication skills to absolute perfection, and he did it by using them, not just with people who agree with him, but more importantly, with people who don't, with an open heart and an open mind. They unfairly demonized him so many times, but one of the things we all loved about him was Charlie was a happy warrior. Charlie was kind. He was warm. He was giving. He did not look with disdain upon you if you showed up and you disagreed with him or even if you insulted him, he actually might laugh a little, like, if you insulted him or took a shot at him. And that was. That was, like, the key to his magic. That was the key to getting these young people to actually listen to him. And one of the things I've noticed in the past 24 hours is that he not only had such an importance to those of us who are on the political right, but to our kids.

[Mark Halpern]

He.

[Megyn Kelly]

You know, my son, my daughter, too. He was in their algorithms. They were extremely jarred by this news. They're 14 and 15, Mark. I mean, he was speaking to a younger generation of kids who were apolitical and explaining to them these issues that they hear their parents debate or they hear kicked around in the news in a way that they could understand and access. And I know, for example, at my son's school today, they were gonna plant the number of flags of those we lost on 9, 11 around the college campus. I mean, around the high school campus. And they just added one more for Charlie. I mean, that's how much he meant not just to us, but to the youth of America. And I'll also say young men in particular.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. President Trump announced he's gonna be awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom posthumously. You and I both have heard overnight from people who didn't know that their kids were so close to Charlie. I'm sure you have, too. At least I have. And none of that surprises me because I've been hearing it for years from folks saying my kids aren't interested in politics. Gavin Newsom said it when he interviewed Charlie, but his kid was so excited. And as you said, probably more men than women. But Charlie was not blind to that. He and I talked on Tuesday about this new NBC poll that showed the disparity in support for President Trump and his policies between men and women. And of course, typical Charlie, he was saying, great on the men, on the males, but what can we do about the females? What's the. What are proper ways you've thought of or can think of to honor Charlie, to not to make concrete this notion that we cannot let his work die with him? What are things you think the country can do or the president can do besides warning him this high honor?

[Megyn Kelly]

I mean, there's a. There's a big difference there between what the rest of us can do and what Trump can do. But for the rest of us, we have to follow his example. We have to say all the things that we know are true and right, no matter what the consequences in terms of name calling or bad grades or even professional consequences. We have to say what's true, what we know is true. He. He considered his mission on this earth to fight evil and speak truth. What better way is there to honor him than to do more of that? And especially now, especially now that the threat environment feels greater and more acute. That's the time it's even more important to speak the truth and fight evil. And that means we're gonna need a revolution on college campuses that is driven by the. By the acolytes of Charlie Kirk. Going to need every conservative or conservative leaning person on every college campus across this country to speak their minds, to not remain quiet in the moments where the liberals are dominating the conversation and telling us the things we know are untrue. Like a man can become a woman. The race dividing that we've seen since 2020, at least, of course, it was before as well.

[Mark Halpern]

It.

[Megyn Kelly]

You must. You must speak up. If you don't, they've won. Charlie's not here to lead it anymore. You're going to have to lead it yourselves. You're going to have to show up. You're going to have to form a Young Republicans club or a Turning Point chapter, which will go on. And you're going to have to say all the things, including to the professors and to your colleagues. And that goes for those of us who are out of college as well, that that's the only way I can think of to honor his legacy. With respect to Trump, we have to see, we need to know who the, who the shooter was, and we need to know specifically the ideology that was behind it. Already there are reports out today that are compelling. I'm sure you saw the Steven Crowder report. And Steven Crowder's got a very solid record. I cover him and follow him extensively. Steven's had very solid law enforcement leaks for years now. I trust him implicitly on this. And not only was his leak from the ATF and an alleged document on the shooter put out there by somebody who I trust, but it was confirmed. Let's say there are 10 details in there. Eight of them were just confirmed by the FBI at the presser. The ones that were not mentioned were the allegations in the ATF report about what was allegedly written on the three unspent cartridges in the gun, which spoke to a specific ideology. No one asked about it because no one there would follow Steven Crowder now would they? Their loss. So we'll find out shortly whether the ideology is as the bullets reportedly convey, and that'll give us some framework for what to do. But Trump. Just one other point, Mark Trump. There is something that Trump can do. Okay, so if it is a politically motivated, targeted assassination based on politics, then we actually are gonna have to take a look at the people who are behind the ideology that pushed it. And what, what has everyone been saying on that front? What has been the messaging? Because it is fair game to look at it. And then those people must be held to account, and those people must reflect on how they've talked about Charlie Kirk and frankly, others like him who have those similar messages. So we'll get there when we get there. But in the wake of this young girl's murder on this train in North Carolina, the shooting of young Christian children in Minneapolis, there actually is some something else Trump can do. Trump needs to not only open the doors again to institutionalization, as he's doing with his cleanup of the homeless encampments in city after city, he needs to create the facilities that can house them. And I don't mean an apartment complex run by leftists, I mean a lockup facility that is humane to which a loving mother would send her son. Like we saw in the case of the Charlotte, North Carolina shooter. She had no place to send him and she knew he was dangerous then. I don't know what this person's ideology is going to be behind Charlie, but we've seen in the Minneapolis shooting as well, someone who was sick and it was obvious to people around them and the writings proved it. And the person's behavior had grown progressively bizarre. And what we see in 99% of these shootings is the people around them had no place to send them. They didn't know what to do. The law enforcement system can't handle them unless and until they've committed a crime, the psychiatric system won't handle them. They can't talk someone out of psychosis or sociopathy and most won't even try. Now, yes, schizophrenia, sure there's medication, but they give you a prescription if you take it. It's up to you. We need to be more flexible and open minded to, to involuntary institutionalization, just as most countries in the west already are. We are the extreme outliers on this in not allowing it because of our First Amendment, because of our, our. The Bill of Rights. Well, you know what? Our civil liberties matter too. The civil liberties of law abiding people. And those need to be front and center.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. I mean, given how aggressive the President has been on anything that matters to him, and we know this matters to him, I think you'll see once at a place in time of his choosing, his advisor's choosing, and the Vice President of course, will be heavily involved because of his relationship. I think you'll see more than just this rewarding of a medal. I think you'll see pretty substantial action. I want to ask you about Charlie. One of my disappointments, not a surprise, but disappointments is people in the, what I call the dominant media, they don't understand who he was or what he was about. And so the coverage is very superficial. They call him right wing activist and things like that.

[Megyn Kelly]

Or far right.

[Mark Halpern]

Far right, yeah, yeah, far right. Right wing. Such a talented guy. And I spent a lot of my time when I talked to him asking about that as a journalist so interested and have someone without family connections at such a young age had achieved so much. So what are some traits of his that you think allowed him to achieve so very much in so many different realms at 31, I think first and.

[Megyn Kelly]

Foremost, Mark, he really felt like he was God's messenger. I really think he felt he was driven by God, that he was mission driven and, and that it was a divine mission, and that's what gave him all of his inspiration. He was so tireless in his pursuits. There was never a point at which he said, it's good enough. You know, it wasn't about money for him. All the money that Turning Point was making, he was putting back into the organization. Charlie didn't have some desire to live large and have this huge, expensive life. He wanted to change the country for the better. And that's why he knew. You know, one of the things I noticed yesterday, and going back over some of our own interviews and some of Charlie's clips, he knew he was under threat in some of the interviews he gave. He talked about the death threats that he got. He talked about how well armed he was, what a good security team he had. But, you know, in a way, notwithstanding all that, Mark, he was too trusting. He was too trusting because he was exposed in a way he shouldn't have been at that event. You know, the rooftop shooter was obviously a foreseeable risk given what happened to Trump the summer before. And I think Charlie's security team just didn't envision it as being a realistic possibility for him in any event. My point is simply, he was courageous. He knew that there was a threat, and he continued out there anyway. And his wife, Erica, too, continued out there anyway. He said repeatedly he felt that he had a mission to fight evil and speak truth, and that's what he did. He didn't care who was across from him. And I spoke to him after many of these media generated controversies on my show and on his. And he would thank me for defending him because the defenses were so few and far between in, you know, even some on the right. Mark, to my great lamentation, would rip on Charlie and didn't like Charlie because they thought he was maga. You know, the more establishment right, you know, the right of yesteryear, not Trump's MAGA right. And they diminished him. They would jump on the controversies. They would see him as somebody with whom you wouldn't want to be associated, you know, not in polite company. He wasn't. He only got asked back onto FOX within the past four months. He was banned at Fox for. For most of his tenure building Turning Point. They didn't want anything to do with him. So I'm, I just. For those people, I have a level of anger today. I, I forgive them, but I'm coming off a level of anger because he wasn't what they said they. They needed to get past the fact that they had this image of the guy and try to actually listen to him. Because I also share in the belief that he was a messenger from God. He was speaking true sense and saying all the hardest things and saying them really bravely. And for me, that's what I hope his legacy will be.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. And you alluded to this several times as a happy warrior, the opposite of a hater. It confounds me, even today, in the wake of his death, people saying he spewed hatred. This guy had a pure heart. It was so kind. And you can't find anybody who dealt with him and knew his heart, who wasn't in awe of just what a kind person he was.

[Megyn Kelly]

It's such a bastardization by the left. And in the past, whatever it's been 18 hours, I've had zero appetite to look at what they're saying about him. Like, I just. I'm having a really difficult time caring, and that's unlike me. You know, usually on these stories, I definitely look at what the left is saying, and then I usually mock them on my show, and it's somewhat cathartic, but I'm just not there at all. I just feel like they can go fuck themselves. I couldn't give two shits about what they think of Charlie Kirk. They didn't know him. They don't understand any of us. And it's because of willful blindness they choose to. To demonize rather than seek to understand. So fuck them. I just feel like we know who he was. We understand his legacy. We will live up to it. We will continue his mission. We will shove it down their throats with every show and column that we have, and we will do it relentlessly. They think they've gotten less of Charlie Kirk. They're gonna get more. He's. I'm telling you, these are disciples of his on these college campuses who now are gonna find the strength to rise up against the nonsense. And people like me, like you, like Ben Shapiro, all of us who have been in these trenches for quite some time only feel emboldened. Not coward, not cowed. Emboldened to say all of the things and say them even more forcefully and to work on being even more compelling and even more energetic so we can say them in more places, to more faces and persuade more millions over to our side. They've done exactly what they didn't want to do, and the one thing they haven't done is to silence Charlie's message. Though they've succeeded in silencing him.

[Mark Halpern]

Megan, so grateful to you. I know how hard this is for you and how raw it is and how raw it's going to remain. But I couldn't be more grateful to you, not just for making time, but to offering the clarity to explain what he was about. Because as you suggested, there's so many voices out there, not either ignorant or malevolent, who don't want his true memory and his true essence to be. To be clear to the public. So thank you for doing that. Thank you for making time and grateful to you. And we'll talk again soon.

[Megyn Kelly]

Anytime, Mark. See you soon.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay, next up, my reported monologue on what made Charlie Kirk so very special made him different. And highlights from some of our past conversations, including one just two days ago. That's next up. Attention folks 64 years or older. This is important. The Department of Justice recently sued three major Medicare brokers for claiming they were unbiased while allegedly pushing people into plans that got them the biggest kickbacks. It's true most insurance agents cannot be trusted. And you can't rely on government resources either. That's why I want you to know about a place called Chapter. CHAPTER was started by people who went through this personally in their own families after their parents were pushed into the wrong Medicare plans by an agent who was more focused on commissions than on good care. Chapter's mission is very simple. To give every American the honest, straightforward Medicare advice that they need and that they deserve. And here's what makes them different. They're the only Medicare advisor that compares every plan nationwide, not just a few. That saves their clients an average of eleven hundred dollars every year. There's no reason not to call. It's quick, it's easy, and they can review your options in less than 20 minutes. If you're already in the good right plan for you, they'll tell you. But if there's a better one, they'll help you switch. This could be the most important call you make this year. Dial pound 250 and say Chapter Medicare to get the peace of mind you deserve. Again, that's pound 25250 and say Chapter Medicare.

[Advertisement Voice]

Your skin should never come second. That's why Pact makes Everyday Essentials from the purest organic cotton. No toxins, no harsh chemicals, just softness you can feel good in. Because wellness isn't just what you put in your body, it's what you put on it too. From the first layer to the last, getting dressed should feel like self care. Visit wearpacked.com and use code dresswell for 15% off, your first order packed. Dress yourself well.

[Mark Halpern]

Next up, what made Charlie Kirk so special? I did not know him nearly as well as many people I know, but I knew him well enough, I think, to understand what he was about. And I was always so interested whenever I talked to him or talked to other people about him, about how he was different as a person, as a political operative, as a builder. So here's my best sense, from talking to a lot of people, including overnight, so many of the people who loved him and cared about him and understood him far better than I did. There are people who enter a room the way the morning light slips through the blinds. It's quiet, but then suddenly the outlines are clearer. Charlie Kirk, he lived in that light. He worked where policy meets persuasion. That was what he did. Where the day's work isn't noise, it's numbers for him. Voter registration tallies, counted how many donors he was able to call, counted where he got volunteers placed in a campaign, always refining his arguments until they basically moved on their own. Charlie was a man of math and science. He cared about zeros and ones in the data, for sure, but also he was a creature of poetry, of the human spirit. He wore a lot of titles, had a lot of different jobs. He made each of them sound simple when I talked to him about it. He was a political strategist, a great public speaker, a very successful video podcaster, a hugely successful fundraiser for his organizations, a great organizer, a lobbyist of sorts, not officially, but knew when he wanted to make Congress bend to his will and how to act, to do it. And he was a builder. I asked him in an interview, which we'll show to you in just a minute, what his profession was, what he would put on his tax returns. And he chose the simple word entrepreneur, as if he ran some sort of shop on Main street that just happened to scale big across the whole country and in many cases around the world. That modesty, that simplicity, that was part of Charlie's charm. Big undertakings he'd talk about, explain them in a tone you'd use if you're ordering a cup of coffee. Big grand projects carried out with very hard work, but always with a lot of modesties. What mattered to him most was spirit. Despite what some people on the left or in the media would tell you, Charlie was not a hater, really. He was quite the opposite of that. And in terms of talent, I have never in my career met anyone shrewder about politics, and I've met most of the great political Operatives of the last 30 years or so. No one better and better liked in his movement than that he helped shape the MAGA movement, that he was one of the President's top lieutenants in oftentimes you've all seen this in your lives. When people get great power, it makes them small. Charlie would not become smaller with the power he had. It didn't make him arrogant. Imagine what his life was like. He was 31 when he was killed. He was running a hundred million dollar plus business, private. A private organization, a leader in his party, friends with both the President and the Vice President, and known by a roster of top business and political leaders, others all across this country. It did not make him brittle or vain or cruel. Charlie wasn't like that. He carried his success the way a good waiter would carry a tray. Steady, attentive, unselfconscious, consistently like that. If you think you don't know someone who's under 25 who wasn't a follower of Charlie's, you're wrong. I've been contacted since he was killed by so many parents, saying to me, I didn't realize how my kids even knew who Charlie Kirk was or how connected they were to him. His current ran under dorm rooms, through the group chats, church basement, school auditoriums, through comment threads and long car rides home after rallies. Charlie had a big following, very uncommon these days to be someone who can reach so many people who aren't that interested in politics or are very interested with the same message. Charlie's success was based on the oldest of disciplines. Hard work, getting up early, didn't use drugs or alcohol, didn't get a lot of sleep. And sometimes I'd kid him that I could tell he was a bit tired. He would do the same back to me. Charlie believed in this age where populism has grown so big and in some cases done so much damage. He believes populism was an accelerator on big ideas. Not a wildfire, a spark that could move the engine, but not a blaze that would consume a forest. Both President Trump and Vice President Vance loved Charlie to the max, at least in their own ways. Different temperatures, but the same flame. They loved him for a lot of reasons, including that this guy was a cool cat. He kept his cool when he did the work, and they knew how hard he worked on their behalf. Back in January, amidst all the official inaugural balls, Charlie threw a big party his organization, Turning Point had at a giant hotel in D.C. a lot like the annual gatherings he threw where young people from around the country gathered. It was A spectacle, but a spectacle with a purpose. It was a giant party. Room after room with food stations and bars and so many people. Incredible atmosphere. And staged with ambition. Not necessarily Charlie's kind of party. He'd rather be with his wife and kids, and certainly not at the open bar. But it was in proportion to the very person at the center of that event. What that night showed is what Charlie believed about public life. You got to make strong arguments to be sure. Ideas matter, but it's also about the staging, it's about the hospitality. It's about welcoming people in. Ideas Charlie knew required rooms and lights and microphones. They needed a path and an entrance through a crowd. Charlie never forgot that he was, like his friend Donald Trump, an extraordinary showman. And like Trump, in service of ideas. Charlie always stayed in service of both ideas and of Jesus. But he knew in the real world, where he was operating, that required a lot of pageantry. Among Charlie's many talents, he's one of the best marketers of political ideas I have ever seen. Megan and I talked about that. He'd come up with something, a phrase. He'd workshop it, he'd refine it, he'd reimagine it, he'd strip it back into its essence until he had the strongest case he thought he could make unembarrassed, full throated. He always measured success with clear metrics. He didn't like to have meetings where there were no goals or timelines, names next to each task. He was extremely serious about getting stuff done. And it wasn't just with cold efficiency, although he surely had that. It was care and insistence that you've got to take the time available to you to do what you can do. Nothing good, Charlie knew, becomes real by accident. Another thing about Charlie, pretty remarkable, rarer than it should be. He was teachable. He loved to learn. When we talked two days ago about coming up to New York City and going to see a campaign event with Mr. Mamdani, the socialist, Charlie was really interested. Just as he's learned so much on all of his tours, including the one where he perished. He was eager to learn from anyone, especially including and especially his critics. If the other side framed an argument more clearly, he would say, why? Why are they winning that debate? If they built some sort of tool that worked really well, he wanted to know, how'd they build it? How does it work? Charlie lived one of the oldest lessons. Wisdom is found in many fields. And pride. Pride is a poor tutor. Charlie had no pride about learning from others. Then came the 2024 election. Charlie said he was going to register folks to vote, including especially young people, and turn them out. The traditional Republican consultants, including many who had worked with Charlie and liked him, they scoffed. They would say to me, charlie's going to pour all this time and money into voter registration and turnout and it will not work. They said those were chores that are for pros, not for amateurs. Charlie knew they were saying that. He kept his own counsel, he worked with his team, and he proved them wrong. The memos they wrote about how Charlie would fail those aged poorly. When the totals came in on election night, it was clear the work had spoken. Charlie had done what people said he couldn't do. And I believe he made the difference in the Electoral College for President Trump through his voter registration efforts. It was a parable for the talents that are told in spreadsheets. In politics, what you stored grows if you work hard and smart. Charlie liked to say that what Americans want, we talked about this the other day, they want simple things, durable things. A healthy, happy family, a welcoming community, solid opportunities, and like Charlie, all filled with a sense of optimism, a chance to feel pride in both themselves and in their country, a confidence in the American economic system. Charlie saw that list not as a wish, but as a set of assignments to go through carefully and achieve one by one. He would always match his actions to the outcomes he thought the country needed, the outcomes that affected, as I say, the real lives of real people. The ledger for Charlie was about material things, but more so, it was moral. Moral before political. It always stayed that way till his last day here. At times, he felt almost scriptural, in a very familiar sense. Nothing was obscure, only what we all know, that Charlie believed that small beginnings could move mountains. He trusted the mustard seed. He always remembered that the Good Samaritan did not outsource compassion. Charlie would stop, tend. He paid what prices needed to be paid. He always promised to return and fix things and make them better. He kept warning about building on sand. And he worked as if the evening would ask for an accounting, which, unfortunately, this week it did. Charlie's manner carried with it the steadiness of someone who knows the truth. People are forgetful often, but they're not faithless. It's going to take time, more than I think a lot of people around me know. For those of us who relied on Charlie to remember that consistently remember, he's not going to be around a corner anymore. He's not going to be on the other end of a text or group chat. That is what happens when a life Ends that's been woven through other lives so tightly that the fabric, if you look closely, holds his shape. We're in a time of superpowers and superstores, trade wars, drone wars, partisan wars, screen time. All those serial zooms were on. And the disconcerting world of AI. All of that is troubling, sometimes scary. Charlie always focused on the human. The human fix, the ties that bind us all. A handshake, an agenda with names on it. The ride to a polling place, the gentle insistent, the clarity always beats noise. Charlie made things feel close. That's part of the reason he inspired so many people. He kept the fire in the hearth and always had his door open to anybody. History is always going to argue about errors and about ideologies, always. But those who worked beside Charlie say they saw something simpler in him. He was shrewd, he was kind. He was relentless about results. He believed big change begins as something small, something you can do today and then build on tomorrow. In a world that too often rewards superficial performance, Charlie always was guided by purpose. We're in a time now that prizes for so many rewards from short term hits. Charlie, though, thought about the long term. He chose order and sustained effort. When evening came for Charlie, the column of what got done was a lot longer than the column of what he said or what was left undone or unsaid. I've thought a lot about this. If there's a proper diction of benediction for the life that he led, it's one that everybody knows he was a well done, good and faithful servant. Like so many people who knew Charlie in one way or the other, they're going to miss him. I already do miss him quite a bit. His memory is going to live on and he'll be, he'll be honored quite a bit, but he cannot be replaced. I'd like you to see now a little bit of my conversations with Charlie over the last year or so, both here on nextop as well as on two Way, where he was a great guest and great conversations. I always tried to ask him questions he wasn't expecting. Questions that might bring out parts of Charlie that didn't come up in a two or three minute news hit on a cable channel. So here are a little bit of what I fondly remember as my conversations with Charlie Kirk. I'm fascinated by Charlie Kirk. He's an incredible story. And as much as he's covered, he's undercovered. And as much as he's highly rated, he's underrated.

[Charlie Kirk]

Great to be here, Mark. Thank you, it's an honor. I am a fan.

[Mark Halpern]

You have built something really extraordinary. When people ask you what your occupation is, what do you say?

[Charlie Kirk]

I would best describe myself as an entrepreneur, which. So I thank you for all the kind words, Mark. And some of that is earned and some of it is not. So thank you. It's just right place, right time, honestly. And I would agree with one of your things. I have probably been underestimated by a lot of people on the left and even on the right at times. But I definitely wear several hats. I do a two hour program every single day that you're nice enough to join quite frequently. Our audience loves you, by the way. Mark. It's phenomenal. Which gets turned to a podcast. It's on hundreds of radio stations across the country. It's simulcast on multiple television stations.

[Mark Halpern]

And just to be clear, for some people that would be a full time job, two hour daily show with that level of distribution. So that's one thing you do. Incredible. Keep going.

[Charlie Kirk]

Yeah. And then on my, my day job as I joke around as CEO of Turning Point USA and Turning Point Action and Turningpoint pac, but that one only really gets deployed in short term election cycles. But really Turning Point USA and Turning Point Action, which I started will be 13 years ago in June and well over a thousand full time people on staff now all across the country working in several different departments from our high school department, our college department, our faith department. We have Blexit and we have Turning Point Academy. We have our entire Turning Point Action side that is divided from our grassroots team, our ballot chasing team. We have a whole student government project. We have a, I would say a pretty sophisticated digital operation on top of all of that.

[Mark Halpern]

And that's over a thousand people, right?

[Charlie Kirk]

Correct.

[Mark Halpern]

And how much money annually was coursing through those various things?

[Charlie Kirk]

Over 100 million. So about 100 to 120 million a year.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay. Also probably, probably as much as you delegate. Also a full time job.

[Charlie Kirk]

That is a full time job to raise that. Without a doubt. And look, we're super blessed and very fortunate with over 400,000 donors that now give to us, which is a real number. On top of that, I also create a lot of content and I speak. Yes. Yesterday I did five and a half hours of speaking on campus at Texas A and M University. On top of doing the show and on top of raising money. And so we post those videos online. And the last couple years they've really gone super viral and making a big difference with young folk.

[Mark Halpern]

Have you and I ever Talked about Rush as a broadcaster. I can't remember.

[Charlie Kirk]

No, we haven't. No. And I would love.

[Mark Halpern]

I used to. You know, I used to listen when I would take vacations and I would drive, like, out west. I would love. I would arrange the ride for three hours to listen. Rush would only talk about things he was interested in. That's an audience. And the audience knows. The audience knows. If you're hosting a show and you're talking about something that's not interesting.

[Charlie Kirk]

And what I loved. First of all, you're exactly right. One of my favorite shows ever. Hilariously. It's so funny you say that. I remember I once had to drive from Denver to Steamboat, and I found the signal of Rush and the entire drive. There's something about driving in the west and listening to Rush Limbaugh that just kind of fits, right? Like the Americana landscape and listening to Rush. And he was just going on and on and on about his iPhone. It was like 30 minutes he was talking about how he got a new iPhone and he made it so interesting. I mean, like, how could. He was talking about all the new features and how he's in touch with Apple and actually, Rush gave me an iPhone. He would give it to some of his friends, and he gave me many models ago, an iPhone. Look, I actually grew up as, quote, not a Rush baby. But I was told Rush was too much of an extremist growing up, you know, by people around me, not by my parents. It was just kind of the vibe that he had.

[Mark Halpern]

I've told people for years, whether you're Democrat, Republican, or journalist, whatever, if you want to be a broadcaster on audio, video, or both, go listen to Rush hours and hours if you haven't listened, because it's just so much to learn from. And I'd say I say the same thing about people, about you now, as both a broadcaster and as a idea political entrepreneur. Like, if you're a Democrat and you're not studying Charlie Kirk, you're making a huge mistake because you're doing stuff that is just like Rush. People have done stuff like it, but not exactly what you're doing. Your work, organizing and energizing young people on behalf of the conservative movement. And President Trump is also, I would say, of all the things you've done, one of your most historic achievements. It really is historic. And. And there was a lot of skepticism, you know, this even from people who you're friends with, even people who, like you, who said Turning Point's not going to turn any young people out. They don't know what they're doing. They've never done it before. Get out. The vote is not for amateurs like Donald Trump. You're riding the crest of a movement.

[Charlie Kirk]

I talk a lot with the folks in the administration. I also, and I'm sure this will come up in Q and A. I think they're doing a much better job than the media would always give them credit for. There's a massive amount of incoming and they have picked the biggest fights because the voters voted for those fights. I'm just here as a friend of the president. And again, right place, right time. Look, as far as, like, where I find myself in the role, the best way I think I actually help the administration is not like being in the White House or being in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. Oh, that's nice. Right? That's amazing. It's an incredible enormity to even walk those halls. It's actually being in the grassroots and then also being an explainer of what the administration is doing or trying to do to people that don't have time to consume, you know, six hours of this information and get down into the weeds.

[Mark Halpern]

There are people who have the job I do who would look at your contact with the administration and the money you raise and they'd say, this is evil and insidious and, and there's something wrong with it. And, and if you were on the left, if you were doing this with Barack Obama and you were organizing young people and helping pressure members of Congress who weren't supporting the president's agenda, you'd be time person of the year. You'd be, you'd be considered a hero by the media. But because you're doing it on behalf of.

[Charlie Kirk]

Definitely not going to get that mark.

[Mark Halpern]

That they did because you're doing it on behalf of a Republican, it's, it's treated differently. The reason I find you so interesting is because you've created a new paradigm for how to do this. Do you think you'd be good at being a CEO of a private sector company?

[Charlie Kirk]

Well, I will say our show, which is private, is profitable.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. So if I, if I gave you, if I gave you $100 million investment and said, go start, go start a manufacturing business in the United States, what, what industry would interest you? What would you like to make?

[Charlie Kirk]

To make? Well, I think that drones are the future. And so I'm fascinated by drones. And I think that, that he who is able to control and produce their own drones is going to be able to determine and chart their own destiny.

[Mark Halpern]

All right. Going to bring folks in for Mr. Kirk, as always, unmute, tell him us where you are for those who don't know and tell us what's on your mind. And we start with Nilda. Go ahead, please. Hi. Oh my God, I'm so excited. I've been following Charlie Ford a long time and now after Hilton trying to come out for go here in California.

[Megyn Kelly]

What can we do here for our beautiful state? Charlie, you know how well.

[Charlie Kirk]

Thank you. God bless you.

[Mark Halpern]

Great question. And just to frame it a little bit, the California used to elect Republican governors and except for Schwarzenegger, who was a bit of an anomaly. It's been a while. So do you think much about how to build a Republican party in California and what are the elements of that?

[Charlie Kirk]

Look, I think that it can be done in the next 10 years and I know people are going to might laugh. But listen, first of all, that's why endorse Steve Hilton. I think that the chance of him winning this cycle might not be the best odds, but getting closer and closer to that is incredibly important. But if Hispanics and especially Hispanic men keep on moving in the direction that they have been moving nationally, California can be in play. I know over a long period of time. It requires voter registration, requires no more demoralization. And finally, if young people continue to move in the broad way that we've seen and California even minorly follows that trend, we can see, we could probably see some more competitive, a more competitive landscape in California. So I endorse Steve Hilton and I wish him the best of luck and success.

[Mark Halpern]

All right, Nija, thank you. Nola, thank you so much for joining. Appreciate it. How did Barack Obama, governor's president that you found admirable.

[Charlie Kirk]

Found admirable. Boy, I could tell you first, I mean the obvious, let me just tell you background and then I will try the best to answer that question. Actually, I do have an answer to that. But first, I grew up in Chicago during the Obama craze 08 09. So I understood the celebrity and the aura of Obama. The big hope that everybody would repeat time and time again. That was his greatest failing is they thought it would be a de emphasis of racial politics, not an emphasis of racial politics. We were talking more about race at the end of the Obama presidency than at the beginning. I think that was one of his great failings. What I actually think he did well was that he could have been way more radical his last four years. He kind of took it easy. I say this as a conservative. He did not issue flurries of radical Executive orders. He, he was in some ways so careful to not come across as like, overly, overly revolutionary as a president. And there's a lot of historians that wrote this, and again, this is going to sound like improper, but you understand what I'm saying. There are some historians that have said about Obama that he knew he was the first black president and he took that with a lot of weight. So he didn't want to be like overly radical and overly throwing away of White House custom. And, and for that I actually admired. And again, I don't mean to racialize. That was his own telling to his own inner circle.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Charlie Kirk]

And so, yeah, I think that in that way it was good. And then the other thing, I admire that Republicans in Congress need to realize this. He went big. He won a mandate and he went very big that first year. He went for health care, he went for stimulus. It cost him, but he went really big. And, and for that I admire.

[Mark Halpern]

Charlie, what Supreme Court cases do you have your eye on now?

[Charlie Kirk]

I don't know if it's being heard yet or if it's incorporated in a broader one, but the question on impoundment is the most important existential, I think, spending question in front, I'm sure, Mark, your reporting bears this out as well, of whether or not does the executive branch have to spend all the money that Congress appropriates?

[Mark Halpern]

Do you worry about Amy Coney Barrett and about, and about the Chief Justice? Do you think it's an appropriate thing for you and your organization to do, to kind of put the same pressure on them in advance of rulings? No, absolutely not. So you'll never.

[Charlie Kirk]

No, I think it actually could have a self defeating principle. I think that it sometimes could. Again, these are human beings that are, I mean, there, there's nothing you can do to what pressure? I mean, they're there for life.

[Mark Halpern]

Would you mobilize against them if they, if they ruled adversely to the President's agenda? I mean. No, no.

[Charlie Kirk]

I mean, you wouldn't, you wouldn't criticize.

[Mark Halpern]

Them at a rally.

[Charlie Kirk]

Well, criticize, yes. But instead, I think the way to win the Supreme Court is remember the old adage is they read newspapers too, they listen to podcasts, too. Persuade them. They're people of high scholarly intent. They're very sophisticated. Instead of screaming into a rally like Chuck Schumer, you're going to feel the whirlwind or whatever.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Charlie Kirk]

Maybe we need, in that particular instance, create an argument as to why you think their decision was right or wrong or why you hope they'll Rule a certain way.

[Mark Halpern]

All right. How many words in a thought bubble would you say?

[Charlie Kirk]

Approximately how many words are in a thought bubble?

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, about.

[Charlie Kirk]

I've never sick out six or seven. Yeah.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, that's six. All right, I want. I want the Charlie Kirk thought bubbles on the following. This is the rapid round here. So just like.

[Charlie Kirk]

Here we go.

[Mark Halpern]

What's the thought bubble? Here we go.

[Charlie Kirk]

You asked the best questions. I told my team. I said I gotta be on my game. Mark asked the best question.

[Mark Halpern]

Should be good. This be good. Charlie Kirk thought bubble. Marco Rubio wants to be president.

[Charlie Kirk]

I prefer J.D. vance, but Marco's great.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay.

[Charlie Kirk]

I'm trying to like, count my words as I say it.

[Mark Halpern]

I understand. Hey, we'll go with a prox. Jeanine Pirro, U.S. attorney, phenomenal friend and.

[Charlie Kirk]

Far more qualified than the media realizes or is covered.

[Mark Halpern]

Is there any ally of the president who's not your friend?

[Charlie Kirk]

Yes, but I'm not going to tell you who.

[Mark Halpern]

Really? Wow. Are you thinking of just like one particular person?

[Charlie Kirk]

One or two?

[Mark Halpern]

One or two. Are they serving in the administration?

[Charlie Kirk]

One of them is, yeah.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay, interesting. We'll have to come back to that next episode. All right, back to the thought bubble. Six words. The president's team calls and said they want you to spend this weekend at Mar a Lago.

[Charlie Kirk]

Thank you for the call. I have to see if I have a family conflict, but I'll do my best.

[Mark Halpern]

All right. And would you look for.

[Charlie Kirk]

Which has actually happened before?

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, yeah, I bet. If you. If you didn't have a family conflict, would you look forward to it?

[Charlie Kirk]

Oh, yeah, absolutely. I mean, it's. Look, he's the best to be around. You've spent time around him.

[Mark Halpern]

He's.

[Charlie Kirk]

He is the. He's a force of nature. He's got, I think, at times supernatural energy. And. Yeah, I mean, if I. If I could be helpful. I will always be helpful to the president or his team.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay. Somebody screens your calls. Let's say. I know probably mostly just pick up your cell phone, but somebody screening your calls and they say, it's true.

[Charlie Kirk]

I have my own.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, but somebody, Somebody's, you know, you. You hand your phone to somebody because you're doing something and they're screening it and they pick up and they say, I want the thought bubble. Hey, Charlie, it's Roger Stone.

[Charlie Kirk]

Say hi, Roger. How can I help you today?

[Mark Halpern]

All right, so you. Would you be happy to hear from Roger?

[Charlie Kirk]

I like Roger. I advocated for his pardon. And he's a uniquely American political figure. They do not have, like, Roger Stones in the Netherlands. Like, there's something about him that's true that I find to be dramatic and fun and unpredictable.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. Okay. You look down at your phone, and there's a text from Pete Hegseth says, charlie, I just can't take it anymore. I think I got to quit.

[Charlie Kirk]

No, we work too hard. You're too good of a man. Grin and bear it. Turn off your phone for a day and keep going.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay.

[Charlie Kirk]

That would be my advice.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay. J.D. vance says, hey, Marco and I are going to the Pope's first mass this weekend. Want to come? Thought bubble.

[Charlie Kirk]

I will say, actually, I have to be in London to debate at Oxford, but I would actually honestly say thank you for the invite. Hope you guys have a great time. I'm not Catholic, but please invite someone who would value it more, and I would value it a lot, but I would feel as if I'd be, like, stealing a seat from someone where that would be, like, the coolest thing in their life as kind of a cradle Catholic. I mean that, like, non sarcastically. I think that a cradle Catholic would have much more reverence for that, even though I would be floored and honored as. And I love Catholics, but I think.

[Mark Halpern]

That would be understood. Look down at your phone. It's a text. Ready? It says this. Hey, Charlie, it's Kamala Harris. I got your number. I'm going to be in Phoenix, and I would love to get together.

[Charlie Kirk]

I would. First, I'd have to verify that it's actually her number.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay. Yeah.

[Charlie Kirk]

And I'd say only on camera.

[Mark Halpern]

Is that. That would be your thought bubble. I'd only do it on camera.

[Charlie Kirk]

Correct. Yeah.

[Mark Halpern]

Why would she text back and say, I want to have. I've heard a lot of great things about you. I want to compare notes and at a private dinner.

[Charlie Kirk]

No way. I would consider to be disingenuous. Unless. Unless. Unless. Unless there would be an intermediary that would advocate.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay, let's say. Let's say.

[Charlie Kirk]

Then I would mutual.

[Mark Halpern]

Yes, you would do it. And.

[Charlie Kirk]

Yes. Yes.

[Mark Halpern]

Would you look. Would you look forward to it?

[Charlie Kirk]

I would. Of course I would. I love learning. I learned this from Tucker. Sit down with people, even if you disagree. Ask great questions, be curious.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay. Couple more. You get a call and you pick up. The phone rings. You don't recognize number. It's block number. You pick it up and. And the person says, this is Barack Obama, and I would like you to come to Chicago and speak to a group of young student leaders.

[Charlie Kirk]

Yes, happy to. Absolutely. You would do that, yeah, of course I'll speak. I mean, honestly, I'd love to meet Obama. I'm not, like, a fan of his, but I actually never met him. I have a whole. No, I haven't. No, I've seen him. I saw him at the inauguration, which is actually the first time I ever saw him in person. And I would love to privately figure out. I have a theory he's not actually as radical as the current left wing of his party is.

[Mark Halpern]

That's. That's, that's accurate.

[Charlie Kirk]

And I want to confirm that. I want to kind of feel what drives him. And so, yeah, I mean, I'd meet him. And I think that if he wants me to speak to a bunch of students, I'll speak to, you know, any students. We could maybe speak at the Obama library if it ever gets finished.

[Mark Halpern]

South Park. Were you a fan of south park as a boy?

[Charlie Kirk]

Yes and no. I'll tell you that when I was. I, I. It was a big deal when I was in, like, eighth, ninth grade. So I watched a couple episodes thinking at everybody in South Car. South park was like, beyond anything I had on my. Even back this summer. I couldn't have imagined it. So.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. So they included you in the, in the new episode, do you care?

[Charlie Kirk]

I thought it was hilarious. I thought it was awesome. I thought it was hilarious. I mean, people say, you know, it was so funny. A lot of people on the left were mad that I wasn't mad. I thought it was really funny. And, you know, a lot of people are, you know, we have the master debater shirt. We. It says kind of, you have to be able to laugh at yourself and don't take yourself so seriously. And honestly, like, they captured the essence of, like, what we kind of do in a very south parking way. And, you know, that that's. That's a symbol of success. And I think we on the right have to be able to laugh at ourselves better.

[Mark Halpern]

I've never been so proud of you for all your. For all your accomplishments. This, to me, was, like, the pinnacle. Okay, next up, my conversation with one of the country's leading experts on political violence, the University of Chicago's Robert Pape. That's next up. Okay, now I want to tell you a story about a guy named Leo Grillo. He was on a road trip, and Leo came across a Doberman. The dog was severely underweight, clearly in a lot of trouble. So Leo rescued the Doberman and he gave him a name. He called him Delta. Sadly, though, Delta is just one of many animals that needed help. Which inspired Leo to start a new group called Delta Rescue. It's the largest no kill, care for life animal sanctuary on the planet. They've rescued thousands of dogs and cats and horses from the wilderness and they always provide them what they need. They give their animals shelter, love, safety and a home. This dedication everlasting love to animals. That's Leo's mission and it's his legacy. Delta Rescue relies solely on contributions from people like all of us to do this good work. If you want caring for these animals to be part of your legacy, speak now with your estate planner. Because there are tax savings and estate planning benefits too. You can grow your estate while letting your love for animals live well into the future. Check out now the Estate Planning tab on their website to learn more and to speak to an advisor we call a dog man's best friend for a good reason. You can help those who need it most. So please right now visit deltarescue.org to learn more. Again, that's deltarescue.org the biggest homeowner Mistakes.

[Advertisement Voice]

Do it yourself lumberjack. Better leave it to the pros doing your own electrical work. The results could be shocking. But letting just anyone replace your windows? Biggest mistake ever. Be a happy homeowner and leave window replacement to the best the certified master installers at Renewal by Andersen. For a limited time, buy one window or door and get the second 40% off plus $200 off your entire purchase with special financing. Minimum purchase of four. Visit renewalbyanderson.com today for this great offer.

[Charlie Kirk]

Big game today and no way to watch it. Sling lets you do that with day pass. Get instant access to live college football starting at just $4.99. One day pass gives you 24 hours of non stop action on ESPN. And ESPN want SEC or ACC network too? Just add sports extra for a buck. No contracts, no hassle, just pure unfiltered game day. Sling lets you do that. Visit sling.com to learn more.

[Mark Halpern]

Okay, joining me now, next up, Robert Pate, Political science professor and director of the University of Chicago Project on Security and Threat. Really one of the most thoughtful people I've ever talked to about this question of political violence. And at this moment we need all the expertise we can get. Professor Pape, welcome. Thank you for being part of this.

[Robert Pape]

Thanks for having me on. Mark. I'm sorry it's under these tragic circumstances.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. So you study these things. You've helped people in government navigate the dangers here. And you and I in communication, you've been warning about something like this for quite some time. What are the circumstances that you think have led us to this moment? Are they economic? Are they cultural? Psychological? Why? Why have we gotten to this point as a country?

[Robert Pape]

So I'm glad you explained the circumstances, Mark, which are there are social changes happening in the country that are radicalizing our politics, and then this is leading to support for political violence. The first point I'd like to make, though, is that I'm sorry to say that as tragic as yesterday was, something like yesterday was predictable. This may not be true for journalists. It may not be true even for leaders in the White House. But the fact of the matter is this is following. We are following down a course where we are seeing in our national surveys that we do at our center at the University of Chicago, evidence after evidence that our publics in the United States, both on the right and the left, support political violence at higher levels than at any time since we started doing these quarterly surveys in the summer of 2021. So that's the reason why those New York Times op EDS in the last nine months been basically sending up the sos. That's the reason why I've been saying we're on the brink of major political violence. And I'm sorry to say that we are now at a watershed moment where we have crossed a major threshold.

[Mark Halpern]

And.

[Robert Pape]

And as bad as yesterday, was very concerned that we, if left to its own devices, this is going to get worse. And so that's why this conversation is so important. You're one of the most important audiences in the whole country because you speak to multiple parts of the country, which is so unusual, and this is a problem for multiple parts of the country. So if you'd like, Mark, I could give an answer then to what's going on in terms of the detail.

[Mark Halpern]

So you're. You're saying people will say to pollsters, to people taking surveys across the political spectrum, that political violence is a good idea or a necessary evil, or that the other side's going to do it. What are they actually saying in these surveys?

[Robert Pape]

What our questions. We ask very specific questions. So we don't ask the general question. Do you generally support political violence? We do ask those, but we know from survey research you want to ask more pointed questions. So, for example, in the May survey that we conducted, this is a nationally representative survey done with Newark, one of the most reputable polling agencies on the planet. The gold standard, 39% of Democrats said they agreed that the use of force was justified to remove Donald Trump from the presidency. The use of force is justified to remove.

[Mark Halpern]

Four in 10 Democrats say force would be justified to remove the incumbent president. Yep.

[Robert Pape]

Now you will then ask, well, wait a minute, what do they mean by the use of force? What do each of those words mean? So, Mark, over the last four years, we have done secondary research. We have gone into, we have done focus groups, we have gone into probe in more detail specific expert surveys on what do people think they understand that question to mean.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Robert Pape]

And 55% of people, we use a term, the use of force. Notice that that's not the word violence, because violence can mean many things. Yelling. And what we have learned in our survey research over the last four years is 55% of the people who use the. Who who are responding, the use of force. 55% mean assassination, murder, killing, shooting, violent mob to overthrow somebody. So it's not always the same type of. Of physical violence, but they are not just. There are about 40% that mean, like even with use of force, yelling. But when you use the phrase violence, that's more. One in ten means something physical like a shooting. So it's 90% are on the softer side.

[Mark Halpern]

If you think about our history, and obviously the data is not going to be perfect over time because you've not been at it for decades. But you think about the 1960s, when there was of course, a lot of political violence. You think about the Civil War obviously, going back longer. Are we in an unprecedented moment, or does this have an historical analog in this country?

[Robert Pape]

It has a historic analog. Mark I term our era the era of violent populism. So I coined a new phrase because all these movies about civil war and all these. There's nothing going on. No, there's a middle ground going on. So we needed to give it a name. So I gave it the name violent populism. And you see in the op eds, the pieces in foreign affairs, this phrase is being used by me. And what I mean by that is something akin to the 1960s, where we are experiencing major social change which is causing radical politics here because the social change is making the political outcomes much more fragile and much more consequential, which is leading to support for political violence in the body politic itself. I don't just mean by a few people under a rock in the fringe, I mean in what we normally call the mainstream. And that is what our opinion surveys show. And yes, the historical analog here to the 1960s is apt. The reasons are not the same, of course, but I just want to point out that the idea that social change would lead to Significant, significant political violence in a country is really common. In the study of political violence all around the world, which I've done for 30 years.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Robert Pape]

It's just the last five years I've had to focus on the United States because that's been the critical case.

[Mark Halpern]

So when you talk about social upheaval, does that mostly have to do with the economy? Is it mostly about things like trans issues or gay marriage? What, what is, what's the upheaval that people on the left and the right are reacting to?

[Robert Pape]

Yeah, there's one big social change and then there's some additional ones that are also significant. But let's talk about the big social change that is at issue. We are now transitioning for the first time in our 250 year history from a white majority democracy to a white minority democracy. For our entire 250 year history, although we've had different versions of whites in the population, we have been an overwhelmingly white majority country. Well, in 1990, just to give a number, we were 76% non Hispanic white. Today we are 57% non Hispanic white. In the next 10 years, by 2035, maybe 2040, depending on deportations, we will then be 49% non Hispanic white.

[Mark Halpern]

Let me, let me, let me stop you there because we both know that race, unfortunately, is a long running factor in societies. Has any previous country gone from a majority white country to a minority white country?

[Robert Pape]

Not quite in those terms, but countries like Lebanon, for example, countries like Yugoslavia. So we will find analogs to this social change that, not in the identical way that our race structure and our ethnic structure looks, but we will, will find analogs to this. And for your readers, for your listeners, they may say, well, what is Professor Pape talking about? They should read some of the work by Donald Horowitz here. This is somebody writing about this as far back as the 1980s, not in the United States context, but this is the common, this is a common understanding among experts.

[Mark Halpern]

And so in the recent past, when there's been periods of extreme violence and social unrest in Lebanon and Yugoslavia, you're saying that correlated with these kinds of ethnic or racial changes in the population.

[Robert Pape]

Over decades, over decades, where over the decades you get a disjuncture between the demographic change that occurs and also who governs the country.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Robert Pape]

And so you notice. Go ahead.

[Mark Halpern]

Well, so let's talk a little bit about solutions because it's a grim, a grim picture you're painting with the data. You, you advise policymakers what's required for this country to go back to A societal sense that political violence is unacceptable, that we can make change at the ballot box, we can make change through, you know, Congress and lobbying, more peaceful things. What's required to reset people away from an openness to political violence to achieve goals?

[Robert Pape]

Well, there are short term things we need to do and then we could consider longer term things. But right now, Mark, because of the watershed moment of yesterday and because of the possibility that millions of people who feel wounded in sorrow over what happened because Charlie Kirk was so beloved, millions will then over course of weeks, that will evolve into anger and that can evolve into then worse things. We need to focus on the short term. And in the very short term, what's most important is our political leaders to condemn violence from their constituents, their side. And you're seeing this with the Democrats here. And we're getting more evidence about the shooter's motives as we speak and then also restraint on the part of its constituents of the targeted side. So this is tough. And I've been calling for this, Mark, for several years in my op, eds, Boston Globe. And you are now seeing that leaders on both sides are doing it, but they're doing it in their silos.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Robert Pape]

That is the key next step is joint statements.

[Mark Halpern]

Right. So for, so for instance, we've seen individual statements from the living former Democratic presidents denouncing what happened. My big idea that I've talked about and I'll continue to talk about is all the former presidents should go to President Charlie's funeral and have a big show of unity and put out some sort of joint statement, maybe even do a joint interview with me or someone else to say, all of us, regardless of party, condemn political violence. That's not the way things should be solved. Would that kind of symbolic move be significant?

[Robert Pape]

Yes. And just to add on to your very good idea, Mark, then after the funeral, come to the University of Chicago on October 6th, where we've already reserved a giant forum where you can help me moderate a discussion among the presidents here that can then be televised around the country on this issue. So this is that level of importance because the watershed we have been seeing this rising surge of political violence. We haven't seen this since the 1960s. We now have a much better understanding of the causes. We know that the Internet plays a role, but notice, de platforming hasn't stopped this and that's because the Internet's only a secondary factor. So as we are navigating this historic, historic change in our country, it's really important that we have historic responses by our political leaders. And these are the things we are calling for right now.

[Mark Halpern]

So was President Trump's statement on Wednesday night helpful when he, when he said, you know, we're going to figure out who did this and they're going to be pursued and punished? Is that that tamp down political violence or does that encourage it?

[Robert Pape]

I will say two things about that statement. Number one, for Donald Trump, that was a restrained statement.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, no, we're not. Great. We're not grading on a curve though, here.

[Robert Pape]

Well, number two, yeah. What he did in that statement more than anything else is reflect the MAGA mood. And his opening 10 seconds captured that mood exactly as I would have expected. Sorrow and anger. Those are his two words. And what I'm saying is that sorrow is going to grow over the next several weeks. Those 2 million people who valued Charlie Kirk so much could well grow into 40 million people in the next month. And that sorrow can evolve because that wounded population can evolve into any anger.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Robert Pape]

And that is the trajectory that I'm sorry, that we are on. We saw this work after 9 11. After 911 we were wounded as a country. I was on television on 911 with some of our most senior leaders who swore all up and down we would never be angry. Eighteen months later, we invaded Iraq with 70% support of the public. And we had no evidence of any. We just did it because we were angry.

[Mark Halpern]

We talked about presidents, former presidents being visible spokespeople leaders with the capacity to tamp this down. It doesn't matter if governors do it. Members of the clergy, business leaders, like, where do people get their signals about how to think about political violence, besides from presidents and ex presidents at all levels?

[Robert Pape]

So what I have been saying, and I'm glad to say it on your program as well, is that all Democrats, governors, members of Congress, all former presidents, all levels need to be involved in the statements, just as all Republican leaders need to be involved in the statement. So, yes, we have our standard bearers. These will be the presidents. By just by definition, you know, they are the, the, the standard bearers. But then we also know from polling, and this is not unique to our poll, and this would be true in most political polling, that people take their signals also from more local leaders as well. And that's one of the reasons, Mark, for years I have worked with the sheriff's associations. So if you will, you know, people scroll around, they'll see, oh, what is Professor Pape doing working with the Illinois sheriffs or the national. All these sheriff's associations. Well, these are some of the most important and trusted elements in our country and they actually carry significant weight. It's a little bit like watching your audience might watch the show Longmire and people look up to Longmire and so forth. Well, that's true in many local communities, so it really is. You're right. It's not just one. But nonetheless, I think that the idea of the former presidents, your idea is exactly spot on about the, the, the, the events, the, the funeral here. But I would, I would actually go further because we need to not think if this is a one and done. We are on a rising bad trajectory for the country.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Robert Pape]

We need to do much more.

[Mark Halpern]

More.

[Robert Pape]

And what I would say is the politicians need to put as much energy into tamping down the violence among their own constituents as they do running for office in the first place.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah. What about this? Just the mechanics of it, in other words, is one good way to deter political violence. More security, more shows of force at events where someone could be the subject. I mean, there are no mystery that Charlie Kirk was, was out in the open and that people didn't like him. So is that a way to deter political violence? Simply shows of force, more security to make people who might be inclined to commit such acts be deterred because it seems harder to do in the short.

[Robert Pape]

Term, a week or two, this is certainly going to happen whether it helps or not. And because it was Charlie Kirk who is not actually an elected official, you can. Everybody would be well advised to have big podcasts here, to have more security and so forth and so on as you're, as you're describing. However, it's important to realize that Charlie Kirk was extremely prominent in the, in the Republican Party. Extremely visible, but so too were many others. I wouldn't say hundreds, but I would say this is a larger set here than. And you. And I don't really want to name names because I'm not trying to put anybody under a spot.

[Mark Halpern]

Definitely don't name names.

[Robert Pape]

But, but what you've got is a wider pool. And over time it really is going to be impossible to have perfect security around these wider pools. And people can find our homes online, things like that.

[Mark Halpern]

As you know, isn't there a big difference? Maybe. Maybe I shouldn't ask in such a loaded way. I was talking to a former FBI agent about this. To my layperson's mind, there's someone who's crazy, who's not part of any group, who doesn't really have a, a rational or linear political agenda. You know, I'm going to kill the governor of Mississippi, because I don't want him to sign the bill that's on his desk that I don't like. It's more just they're nuts. And they see like a lot of mass murderers do. They see in the act of violence some sort of tending to their own insanity versus, versus, you know, we're going to take this person out because it achieves some very concrete specific political result. I mostly see, and we're waiting to see as we speak here, who, who's being charged will be charged with killing Charlie. But isn't most of this just crazy people?

[Robert Pape]

These are not alternative explanations, Mark, the way they're typically presented in the media. The media is often looking at mental illness as an alternative to the political motive and not seeing that. The real pipeline here is the more support there is in the public for political violence, the more volatile actors, I call them, people who are on the edge for one reason or another will be nudged over the edge.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Robert Pape]

And that is the actual pipeline. Now for something for your viewers to go find. So it's not just Professor Pape spouting this off and hand Wavy. This Secret Service has done the best analysis to date of shooters and assassins in the United States. Your viewers can go find this. It's a report done by the Secret Service in the late 90s. They cover nearly 100 political attackers. This is our secret.

[Mark Halpern]

And what did they find about them?

[Robert Pape]

What they find is, number one, half of them have college education or graduate education. That is the idea that they all fit a specific socioeconomic profile is not true. Number two, they find that about 40% of them have some degree of mental illness, but only a tiny fraction go so far to have like hallucinations and so forth. So there's.

[Mark Halpern]

Let me ask you a question. And again, I don't know if the data will bear this out or you've got some subjective sense, people say in response to Charlie being assassinated, let's come together. Let's use this as an opportunity to lower the temperature to speak out against political violence. Does history suggest that that's more likely or that there are copycats or eye for an eye escalations that lead to more political violence? In other words, does a political act of political violence beget more? Or could it be the game changing time in which people turn to their better angels?

[Robert Pape]

There are multiple pathways for political violence that we have to worry about and they're not independent. So the first pathway I talked about is when you have larger and growing support for political violence in the body Politic. And our surveys show that again, about 39% of Democrats would fit this bill and about 24% of Republicans would fit this bill. So this is happening on both sides of the political. And then you've heard that pathway, but then there's another pathway, as you're saying, which is the copycat or the retaliation. So this is the problem that now oppressed prominent figure in the Republican Party has been attacked. And this can spur somebody to attack a prominent person who's in the media on the Democratic side, say.

[Mark Halpern]

But does, but does history suggest that's a hypothetical or that happens.

[Robert Pape]

It happened. It. History suggests that it's difficult to disentangle because they tend to be separated by months and sometimes even years in the, say the Secret Service study. So it's, it's, you often see that in this, this is in the Secret Service study and you see this in the anecdotal discussions on, on television, in the media in the last day that the political assassins themselves would be assassins really go and study the private previous political assassins. They're really, this is another thing that, that they find in the report, which is the, they are rational enough that they will go and start to think instrumentally. And that includes studying mistakes and the, and what's happened by others.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Robert Pape]

So that they can improve their outcome, their tactical outcome. And that is again, going side by side. So these are not, these are folks who are not so mentally ill that they can't actually have attack plans or risk plans.

[Mark Halpern]

Right.

[Robert Pape]

And so that's why it's important not to sort of think that this is all happening in a spontaneous way. The, the danger that we're facing is these attackers often will prepare for weeks. They will learn from each other, they will be inspired by each other. And unfortunately, what we saw yesterday was somebody who probably learned from crooks's mistakes.

[Mark Halpern]

Right. All right, last one. What gives you optimism? If people want to, want to say, well, you know, the numbers don't look great. We've had some high profile occasions. Everybody's now read the list of recent occasions of this and obviously the murder of Charlie. What would give you optimism that the country can move out of this?

[Robert Pape]

The big source of optimism is that in our surveys, 70% of the public, that's 70% on different sides very much support joint calls to tamp this down. That is about 70% of the public. It's actually unfortunately shrinking a little bit. About 70% of the public abhors political violence. And the reason is because they can see the consequences of this getting worse and getting worse. Now, it's also the case that I believe political leaders can see that they have direct something directly at stake for themselves and their families. And that's the reason why you can bring the leaders to have their incentives aligned with the center of the public.

[Mark Halpern]

Yeah, having having the glass 70% full does sound good, but that still leaves 30% problematic.

[Robert Pape]

So then we need the leaders to make that, bring that into action.

[Mark Halpern]

Right. Okay. Robert Pape again, one of the country's foremost experts in understanding political violence. He's at the University of Chicago and very grateful to you for sharing your expertise.

[Robert Pape]

Thank you, Mark, for all you.

[Mark Halpern]

Thank you, Professor. All right, that's it for today's program. We'll continue to think about Charlie and talk about Charlie. I am grateful to have known him. I am grateful to have him on this show. And I went on his show on a regular basis and was honored to be there. His audience, his followers, his friends, his professional colleagues, all will miss him. And all of us will look to figure out ways to not just let his spirit live on and the ideas lived on, but to renew our fidelity to the importance of free speech, the free exchange of ideas. And the joy that Charlie, a tough combatant in the trenches, the joy he brought to everything he did, his beautiful family, his young children, and the tough, tough work of trying to make this a more perfect union. Grateful to you for joining us. We'll be back next week with a couple more episodes. Appreciate your watching. Always be with us so you can know what's coming. Next up.

[Charlie Kirk]

It'S Stephen A. Smith here.

[Robert Pape]

You want sports?

[Mark Halpern]

SiriusXM's got it all.

[Robert Pape]

Every game, every team, all season long. Debates, rants, hot takes and no filter whatsoever.

[Mark Halpern]

Trust and believe. You don't want to miss what I.

[Charlie Kirk]

Have to say this week on the.

[Mark Halpern]

Stephen A. Smith show, only on SiriusXM.