A (2:49)

And again, I think that's one of the things that's coming out of this, is that mainstream people, and we'll get to people who are not mainstream in a moment, but mainstream people are coming together around the idea that the core values of the west include things like I disagree with you and we have discussions and we don't murder one. Another NASCAR driver, Christopher Bell, dedicated his win to Charlie over the weekend. Here's what that sounded like. This week's obviously been a very tough week and you know, there's a lot on our mind. And, and just this one's for Charlie. The Oregon football coach, Dan Lanning mourned Charlie as well. Charlie was a major Oregon Ducks fan. Here's what he had to say. I recently found out like Charlie Kirk.

D (3:32)

Was a Oregon fan, right?

B (3:34)

I didn't know that.

A (3:35)

I heard for his wife Erica and.

D (3:37)

Their kids like that that sort of evil should never exist in our country.

A (3:40)

And that's what it is. It's evil. A wide variety of NFL teams paid tribute to Charlie Kirk over the weekend as well. And here were the New York jets celebrating Charlie's life. You can hear the ovation. Charlie, her was the bright light in this world that will not be extinguished. And then Chance of USA broke out at a wide variety of these events. There was a big event held in Washington D.C. last night, a tribute event and a prayer event for Charlie, a memorial event which is quite beautiful obviously for, for Charlie's family. I can't even imagine. I cannot even imagine. He had two young kids, his young wife, they married less than five years. Kids who were three and one. Erica Kirk released pretty tough video of herself seated by Charlie's casket holding his hand. Hard to watch, obviously. I love you.

C (5:01)

I love you, I love you.

A (5:07)

She then did a pretty extraordinary 16 minute message to the public which she released on Friday evening. Here's what she had to say.

E (5:17)

When I got home last night.

A (5:23)

Gigi.

E (5:24)

Our daughter just ran into our my.

A (5:25)

Arms.

E (5:29)

And I talked to her and she said, mommy, I missed you. I said, I miss you too, baby. She goes, where's daddy? What do you tell a three year old? She's three. I said, baby, daddy loves you so much. Don't you Worry. He's on a. He's on a work trip with Jesus so he can afford your blueberry budget.

A (6:01)

She then. She then did send this inspiring message. She said, listen, you may think that you killed Charlie's memory. Precisely the opposite. Precisely the opposite. You have no idea what you just unleashed. Eric is a strong person.

E (6:17)

The evildoers responsible for my husband's assassination have no idea what they have done. They killed Charlie because he preached a message of patriotism, faith, and of God's merciful love. But they should all know this. If you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before. You have no idea. You have no idea what you just have unleashed across this entire country and this world. You have no idea. You have no idea the fire that you have ignited within this wife. The cries of this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry.

A (7:19)

Again, Erica is herself a relatively public figure. She's very involved in the Christian community in giving. She's been politically involved as well. And her picking up Charlie's mantle would be not only appropriate, but an excellent, excellent thing for. For her to do. Meanwhile, we now have more news about the nature of the shooter. Now, there were some who at the end of last week were saying that the shooter might not have been somebody of the left. This is a bit of a tete a tet that I had with Bill Maher on his show on Friday night, where I explained to him that the shooter was almost undoubtedly a person of the left. And he said, well, you don't know that it could have been McGregor. I said, I mean, sure, it could be a griper, but all the evidence does not point to that. Like, literally all the evidence points to somebody of the left and somebody who is involved with trans issues. Well, as it turns out, that is precisely what happened here. And that is not unexpected. That is not unexpected in any way, shape or form. The reason that that is not unexpected is because there are certain ideologies in the United States and abroad. There are certain ideologies that create violent ramifications, that it's inherent in the ideology that there will be radicals of the ideology who engage in violence. Not all ideological movements are the same. The sort of flattening of all ideologies into, oh, yes, all ideologies are equally likely to lead to violence. That is not true. No one gets shot with regard to discussions over marginal tax rates. No one gets shot over discussions of raising or lowering the age of Social Security. Right. These are not the things that people get shot over. There are, however, ideologies that breed violence, that breed them. And you can spot those ideologies. You can spot them. They have certain features in common. As we discussed last week, the ideologies that breed violence usually have three features in common. Feature number one is a conspiratorial view of the universe in which a shadowy cabal of very powerful people are conspiring to make your life worse, to ruin your life. Your failures are not your own. Are the faults of this shadowy cabal, this evil cabal of people, you can't quite name them. You might have some inkling of who they are. And very often these ideologies use the word they a lot, a lot of they. Not specific. They. Second, a belief that your specific group or you personally are targeted for destruction by that shadowy cabal. Which leads to number three, a belief that violence is self defense. That all the arguments that you are hearing are actually just a facade for power. It's a point made by the terrible left wing philosopher Michel Foucault, one of the most damaging philosophers in all of history, who made the argument that there really are no real arguments and no real discussion points. There is merely power. So if you believe that all arguments, Charlie's arguments, for example, are not arguments, they are just disguises for power. They're a facade for an iron hand and that he is part of, of a shadowy cabal of people who are controlling your life and ruining your life and making your life miserable and threatening you with quote unquote, trans genocide. Well then you are much more likely at the edges to engage in violence. And we know precisely which sorts of ideologies fit this bill. It is not a gigantic secret. We know which ideologies fit the bill that hit all three of those things. Remember that conspiratorial view of the universe, a belief that your specific group is targeted by that conspiracy. And three, a belief that violence is therefore justified in pursuit of ending the conspiracy as a form of self defense. And we know which ideologies fit that bill. Trans ideologies fit that bill. Because the basic idea there is if you say a man is a woman, that is not an argument. That is not even a statement of biological fact. That is in fact a guise for power that you are trying to leverage against me, you're trying to harm me, you're trying to erase me, and therefore I am justified in ending the pseudo trans genocide by doing physical harm to you. And this has always been an inherent part of trans ideology. And by the way, the permission structures that have been created around it, that is just a Reality. I'm old enough to remember personally being manhandled, and I use that word advisedly by a man who believed he was a woman on CNN headline news in 2015 and the entire left wing defending the physical assault on national tv. Because again, that was inherent. I was a threat. I was the problem for saying words. Words were a form of violence. And so again, this is just part and parcel of a broader program. Other ideologies have these aspects too. Left wing Marxism has this view that rich people by their very existence are a threat to poor people. They've stolen from poor people, they're exploiting poor people. Their arguments about wealth, their arguments about innovation are not actually arguments. They're maintenance of systemic power structures and thus they must be laid low. They must. The only way to fight the rich people is to kill them, to do violence against them. This is why Marxist movements generally end with revolutionary violence. It is the thing that lies behind Bill Burr screaming at people. Free Luigi after a murderer kills a UnitedHealthcare CEO. After all, United HealthCare CEO, he was rich. And not only was he rich, he was getting rich by victimizing people. And that meant that he totally deserved to be killed. Free Luigi or white supremacist ideology which says that I, as a white person am being targeted by a shadowy system, not like a specific law which again we can have arguments about affirmative action. Affirmative action is a specific law that redounds to the non benefit, to the detriment of white people. That's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about the idea that failures of white people in any way, shape or form are a result of a systemic, of an evil system that has been cultivated by people of color and or Jews is what white supremacists believe and therefore violence against them is somewhat justified or totally justified. BLM had the same aspect. There are systems of racism and oppression in the United States. And arguments about crime rates, for example, are not really arguments. They're just guises for power. And the only way to fight back against those systems is to loot businesses and burn them down and to do acts of violence and then excuse them. Radical Islam makes the same claim that the very existence of other civilizations that are more successful is a threat to them. Because not that those civilizations are more successful because, you know, they pursue better things. It must be because they are exploitative and terrible and thus they must be wiped from the planet. This is why the undying hatred of, for example the Palestinian movement against the very existence of the State of Israel, it won't go away because it's embedded, it's encoded in the system. The basic idea is the existence of Israel is the threat. Again, all these ideologies have that same basic framework. A giant, shadowy conspiracy. That means that my life is worse. My failures are not my own. They're the result of a system. All arguments made in favor of the system are an aspect of power. Speech is violence. Therefore I can whatever is at hand in order to do violence. The reason that I lay all of this out is because it is now quite clear what was happening with this particular shooter. Spencer Cox, the Utah governor, came out over the weekend and said, yes, we now know that the shooter in this case, when Tyler Robinson was indoctrinated with left wing ideology, here he was on ABC's this Week. You told the Wall Street Journal that Tyler Robinson was deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology. Have investigators uncovered evidence to, to.

F (14:58)

Well, so far that has come from his acquaintances and his family members. That's where that initial information has come from. Certainly there will be much more information that is released in the charging documents as they're bringing all of that together.

A (15:14)

So apparently the suspect is not cooperating with the police. That, of course, is not a giant surprise here.

F (15:18)

Spencer Cox, he has not confessed to two authorities. He is not cooperating, but all the people around him are cooperating, operating. And I think that's, that's, that's very important.

A (15:33)

So what do we know about him personally? Well, we know that he was left wing by pretty much all available evidence, including people who knew him well, people who have said this openly. According to Cash Patel. We know actually that apparently he left some sort of note saying he had an opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and that he was going to take it. This is according to Cash Patel, the head of the FBI. He said that the authorities have seen evidence of a text message exchange between the shooter and a second individual. Quote, his family has collectively told investigators he subscribed to left wing ideology. And even more so in these last couple of years, he claimed he had an opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and he was going to do it because of his hatred of what Charlie stood for. Okay. Meanwhile, Spencer Cox says that we know that the suspect in this case had a furry fixation and meaning that he was fixated on this very online, very weird subculture of the Internet in which people sexualize animals, fetishize people dressed as animals, and he had a trans boyfriend, which of course is not surprising. Any way, shape or form in the, the slogans that were etched apparently on the bullets were all gamer and or trans oriented slogans. Notices bulge o w o For example, according to the New York Post, alleged Charlie Kirk assassin Tyler Robinson appeared to have a fixation on furries while his live in transgender boyfriend espoused support for President Joe Biden and joked about being mentally ill. According to social media posts linked to the pair. Lance Twigs, 22, an aspiring pro gamer and Robinson's roommate, appeared to have made a comment in a 2022 Reddit post stating we are riding with Biden on this glorious subreddit. Twigs is transitioning from male to female and was in a relationship with the 22 year old Robinson is, according to Governor Spencer Cox. By the way, Spencer Cox is no rabid right winger on this issue. He's been criticized, I think correctly by many on the right for being too soft on things like the transing of the children. Here's Spencer Cox.

F (17:40)

There were reports yesterday that, that, that we can confirm that that his roommate was indeed a boyfriend who is transitioning from, from male to female. That's, that's information that the FBI had had mentioned yesterday. We can confirm that as well.

A (18:00)

None of this is surprising in any way, shape or form because the takeaway from this transgender person's boyfriend must have been and surely was that Charlie Kirk was somehow a threat to his boyfriend because Charlie Kirk was clearly correct that his boyfriend was in fact a boy and not in fact a girl. According to Axios, authorities are investigating whether Tyler Robinson believed Kirk's view on gender identity were hateful to people like Robinson's transgender roommate. They keep calling a transgender roommate. No, you mean boyfriend. Apparently they had a romantic relationship and that's a hell of a a way to demean the nature of romance. But sure, investigators believe Robinson's anger at Kirk's views could be a key to establishing a motive for the slaying of Charlie Kirk. Each of the six sources familiar with the investigation told dxos investigators believe that Robinson was having a quote, unquote romantic relationship with his roommate. His romance apparently consists of dressing up as a furry and then shooting people to death. See, it seems. Seems about right. Sure. Axios's sources said investigators initially wanted the information about the roommate's gender identity kept quiet because that person is being extremely cooperative with authorities. Well, I mean, again, I'm not saying that it's the roommate's fault, it is the shooter's fault, but this is the ideological soil from which the shooter was springing, clearly, apparently, cox said on Meet the Press on NBC. While Robinson comes from a conservative family. His ideology is very different than his family, he said. Clearly there was a lot of gaming going on, Friends have confirmed there was that kind of deep dark Internet, the Reddit culture and these other dark places of the Internet where this person was going deep. And that obviously is true even from the bullets. The bullets themselves were etched with a bunch of gamer slogans. And again, the sort of unwellness that is associated with people who sit in their room all day playing video games, that is it. That is a real form of social isolation that can have consequences for those with with predispositions toward mental fragility, shall we say. Again, it's not that video games are blamed. There are literally hundreds of millions of people play video games and go shoot activists like Charlie. But to pretend that there is no brain effect of doing this sort of thing, sitting in your room all day with your aspiring transgender boyfriend, talking about politics, self radicalizing and then going and shooting somebody is to be incredibly, incredibly silly and to ignore that which is right in front of us. Obviously. Robinson's bizarre ties to the furry lifestyle have now been revealed. According to the New York Post, an account on the website furaffinity.net which features sexualized images of cartoon animal characters, features an account naming an account name matching one that Robinson used on his various gaming and online accounts, friends told the Daily Mail, According to one official it's pretty clear Robinson's roommate knew a lot and didn't say anything after the killing. So they are a person of interest officially and are cooperating. We want to keep it that way. I mean that seems correct. That seems obviously correct. Mean the it wasn't the roommate that turned him in, wasn't the boyfriend who turned him in, it was his conservative Christian parents who turned him in. And the roommate was receiving messages like I left my rifle in the bushes, can you go pick it up for me? It was only when he was confronted by the police as oh no, really interesting. According to the New York Post, Robinson's online presence points to a hodgepodge of liberal ideology, gamer style humor and post ironic memes. Apparently he was joking around with his pals on Discord, which is another one of these open thread websites. He was joking with his friends that his doppelganger was the one who shot Charlie Kirk after the feds released his photos while he was on the run. According to the New York Post, the 22 year old accused assassins chats with his pals lit up on the social media messaging platform Thursday afternoon. One of his virtual buddies noticed the similarity and tagged Robinson writing wya, which is short for where are you at? Alongside a skull emoji. Robinson wrote back within a minute, said that it was a doppelganger trying to get him in trouble, and people encouraged him to turn himself in to claim the FBI's $100,000 reward. And he said, only if I get a cut. And then there were jokes made about Luigi Mangione. And Robinson just said, quote, he better get rid of this manifesto. An exact copyright I have lying around. And then the accused gunman went on to mock the FBI's investigation, referencing the trans scribblings found on the ammo and claiming it was all fabricated by some dude in the briefing room. So, again, it was only when he was confronted by his parents after admitting it that he was turned in. It was not the transgender partner who turned him in. And again, there were messages from Robinson to his trans partner, literally asking him to go pick up the rifle where he had left it. Again, to ignore the inherent violence of certain movements. This doesn't mean that everyone associated with the movement is violent. It does mean that certain ideologies are more prone to breed violence. And anyone who tells you differently is lying to you. It is not a shock that the source of Charlie's assassination is coming from this movement, is involved apparently in this ideology. That is not a shock at all. It is so not a shock that pretty much everybody who heard about what happened to Charlie immediately jumped to that conclusion. Because, again, the reason we jump to conclusions is we know which ideologies are most violent. Nobody, nobody believes that people who stump for lower taxes are going around just murdering people on the basis of tax rates. Again, nobody believes that evangelical Christians who go to church a lot, that those are the people who are going around shooting people. The reaction to Charlie's death has been gigantic memorials and more people going to church and no violence. There are certain ideologies that breed violence and, in fact, are worse than other ideologies. We should not be culturally or ideologically relativistic about this. As Rich Calder points out, the assassination of conservative pundit Charlie Kirk marks the latest example of a growing wave of murders and other shootings committed by transgender people and others advocating for their rights. The transgender Shooter who murdered six people at National's Convent School in March 2023 raged about hating America, being miserable while being raised as a girl and wanting to kill all the white kids. And that was hidden by the cops for, like, a year. It was only Daily Wire that broke a lot of the manifesto. The Deranged shooter who slaughtered two children and injured at least 21 others at that Catholic school in Minneapolis, identified as a transgender woman. Another shooter, sentenced to life in prison after being found guilty as part of a notorious 2019 mass shooting at a Colorado charter school, told police he targeted classmates who mocked his gender identity. That shooter was born female and then said that she was a male. Said students at the STEM school Highlands Ranch called him disgusting, made fun of him and repeatedly refer to him as a she. Well, the New York Post should refer to him as a she since he was a she. Another shooter was convicted to and sentenced to life in prison. Another 26 year old transgender male killed three people and injured three others before killing himself during a 2018 shooting in Maryland at a Rite Aid warehouse. Again, the insanity here is coming from a place and it does have deeper permission structures attached to it. And here is the real problem. I mentioned a bunch of ideologies. Some of those ideologies have broader acceptance among mainstream parts of the American political debate. I named five ideologies before that trend toward violence because inherently the ideology makes the claim that there is a conspiracy that is victimizing me and therefore I am justified in using violence to silence the speech of those people because their speech is violent. Those five ideologies were again in order trans. Marxist, white supremacist, BLM and radical Muslims. Now the question is, which ones of those ideologies find mainstream acceptance? Which ones have had permission structures created around them that make them more mainstream, that wink and nod at violence? Which ones? The only one that could be considered, quote unquote, right wing. I would argue it's not even right wing. I would argue that it's just racialist. Is white supremacists. Is there a mainstream infrastructure that accepts the white supremacists? I will note at this point that Charlie Kirk spent an enormous portion of his career fighting the Gripers. The Gripers literally declared a groiper war on Charlie Kirk in 2019 trying to take over his organization, TPUSA, from the outside. The leader of that movement literally yelled at me and my small child in a stroller as I walked into a Charlie Kirk event a few years back. Okay, so does that movement have wide mainstream acceptance? No. How about trans? Well, we know that that has wide mainstream acceptance and that the arguments of that movement have been broadly applied across the left. That is a form of violence to say that men are not women, that it is a threat to say men are not women. How about the Marxist idea that rich people need to be leveled that rich people are, are somehow doing some sort of violence to poor people simply by their existence. I mean, not only is that widely accepted, that matrix of thought widely accepted, it is elevated by huge portions of our political elite on the left. How about blm when we know that you were perceived to be a racist if you didn't back the idea that white supremacy was in charge of the country and that this is the reason why there are differential crime rates and differential income rates and differential wealth rates in the United States and excuses were made for violence. Permission matrices were created for violence for BLM. This is why the media treated $2 billion in property damage and multiple deaths as though it never happened. BLM was so important that you could literally go outside and cough on each other in the middle of a COVID lockdown because it was that important. How about radical Islam? We know the entire left has now surrounded the idea and is cheering the idea of radical Islam in the form of Palestinian terrorism. We know that, that there's a reason that all these groups march together. There's a reason that all these groups are on college campuses together because matrices for permission structures for violence are quite common on the left. This is reflected in the polling. By the way, there is a recent poll that came out from YouGov asking a question. Do you generally consider it to be acceptable or unacceptable? Acceptable for a person to be happy about the death of a public figure they oppose, according to Republicans. 77% of Republicans say it is always unacceptable for a person to be happy about the death of a public figure they oppose. 53% of independents feel the same. Only 38% of Democrats believe it is always unacceptable for a person to be happy about the death of a public figure they oppose. Only 38%. That means that some 44% of Democrats believe that it is sometimes acceptable, usually acceptable or always acceptable. And 18% are unsure why. Because again, left wing views have significant crossover with these permission structures of violence. They do. And you, you, you look no further than the elite mockery or rewriting of Charlie's legacy by people to suggest that Charlie was somehow deserving of what happened to him because they didn't like his views. Elizabeth Spears, who's written extensively for Legacy Media, Alice, including the Washington Post, wrote a piece of the Nation called Charlie Kirk's legacy deserves no mourning. None. The white Christian nationalist provocateur wasn't a promoter of civil discourse. He preached hate, bigotry and division. And now notice how she is mixing up the content. What she believes to be hate, bigotry and division, which, of course is total nonsense. Go watch Charlie's tapes. Charlie was not preaching hate, bigotry and division. Charlie was a normie conservative. He was about as normie a conservative as it is possible to be. He held mainstream positions on virtually all things. She says, though he wasn't a promoter of civil discourse because she just noticed the. The mixing up of the means with the substance. She disagreed with Charlie, therefore he wasn't promoting civil discourse. Okay, Now, I can totally disagree with certain people and recognize that they promote civil discourse, that they at least engage in civil discourse. I've been on a bunch of those shows in the last couple of weeks. I disagree with Abby Phillip on everything over at cnn. Abby Phillip is not promoting violence. We had a civil discourse. Van Jones. Right. I disagree with Van on a lot of stuff. Van promotes civil discourse. By the way, his. A lot of people are angry at Van because what Van said last week with regard to Charlie Kirk and the horrible murder of the Ukrainian refugee aboard a. Charlie and Van apparently were trying to touch base behind the scenes. I know that because Charlie and I talked off air before the interview the day before he died, in which Charlie said that he actually liked Van very much and was reaching out to him to try to have him on the show. And Van, I know because I've talked to Van, actually did get a DM from Charlie and then didn't have time to respond before Charlie was murdered. Okay. There are a lot of people who you disagree with are perfectly happy to promote civil discourse, but according to mainstream parts of the left, if you disagree with them, you are inherently doing something that does not promote civil discourse and in fact, promotes violence, and therefore violence might be just a little bit justified. According to Elizabeth Spears, quote, he was an unrepentant racist, transphobe, homophobe, and misogynist who often wrapped his bigotry in Bible verses because there was no other way to pretend it was morally correct. He had children, as do many vile people. Okay, well, if you're. If you're treating this as the. As though this is not a permission structure for violence, you're reading it wrong. It is a permission structure that doesn't. There's a difference between overt call for violence and a permission structure for violence. A permission violence. Permission structure for violence says, well, you know, somebody gets shot that you don't like and go, well, you know, you know, yeah, violence is bad, but political violence is bad. But if you're doing that, you're creating a permission structure for violence. And she is when she says things like, I'm sorry for Kirk's children. I don't know if Kirk was a good father, but if he was, that does little to mitigate the damage he did to other people's children. I can only hope, for the sake of his kids, they have role models who will teach them it is wrong to profit off the dehumanization of people because of who they are. She says, I'm fairly sure Kirk did not care about my child. She said, I do not believe anyone should be murdered because of their views. But. But there's that big word. I do not believe anyone should be murdered because of their views, but that is because I don't believe people should be murdered. Generally, regardless of who they are or what they've done, all murders matter. In other words, Kirk was fine with murder as long as the right people were dying. Okay, well, this is just a permission structure for violence. That's all it is. That's all it is. And it is promoted by the biggest outlets in America. Is promoted by the biggest outlets in America. The New York Times is Peter Baker. Over the weekend, he said, well, you know, Charlie did get people riled up. He did get people. Welcome to politics, where we say things that we don't agree with. And sometimes people get riled up. That is the nature of a democratic republic. Here is Peter Baker.

D (34:45)

He said a lot of things that got a lot of people riled up.

A (34:48)

Right.

D (34:49)

And that's part of his. That was part of his style about race, about gender, about affirmative action and Islam and things like that. But he also enjoyed going to college campuses like the one he was at, even though he knew an audience there might include people who didn't agree with him. And he liked to mix it up. And he's, you know, become, in this last few days, I think, a symbol of the. Of the toxic culture that we're in right now.

A (35:18)

Right, I know. Right, right. You know, that's a good point. We'll get to more of the news in just a moment. First, when was the last time you bragged about your wireless company? Like, did you know my wireless company gave away a thousand American flags to deserving vets and forgave $10 million in veteran debt? Did you know my wireless company raised almost half a million dollars to prevent veteran suicide? When your wireless company is pure talk, there's a whole lot to brag about. You can even brag about the coverage you get with PureTalk, a 5G network that is insanely fast, dependable, and secure. And you can brag about how much money you save with Pure Talk unlimited talk text. 15 gigs of high speed data is just 35 bucks a month with mobile hotspot. Obviously I'm using PeerTalk all the time, use my phone all the time, which means I'm using PeerTalk. My coverage is excellent. They've got one of the best tower networks in the country and again, best price. It's time to switch to my wireless company, PeerTalk. But if you need another reason, something you can really brag about, PureTalk is the only wireless company that gives you a one year free membership to Daily Wire. Plus when you go to PureTalk.com Shapiro again, choose a qualifying plan at PureTalk.com Shapiro and relish your free one year membership to Daily Wire. Plus Pure Talk is wireless worth bragging about. Go check them out right now. Puretalk.com Shapiro Also, here's the reality. Over 90% of Americans don't get enough dietary fiber. And you know that was me. It's very difficult to hit that recommended variety of fruits and veggies and that's why I started using Balance of Nature supplements. These aren't some artificial knockoff trying to mimic what nature provides. They simply let nature do its job. We're talking about 47 real ingredients. Mango, wild blueberry, spinach, kale, shiitake mushrooms, broccoli. The whole works. Plus their fiber and spice blend is also unique. It combines four whole fibers like psyllium, husk and flaxseed with 12 aromatic spices including turmeric and cinnamon. You're not going to find another supplement that does this. I also appreciate there are no artificial additives and no added sugars, just clean ingredients. They're vegan, kosher, certified by the OU and gluten free. You can even mix that powder into smoothies or sprinkle it over your food. No bags, no mess, no measuring. Whenever I'm on the road they are basically a lifesaver. Hard to keep healthy on the road, but Balance of Nature helps me out. After years of research and development, they've created something that makes getting proper nutrition convenient. Head over to balanceofnature.com use promo code SHAPIRO for 35 off your first order as a preferred customer. Plus get a free bottle of fiber and spice. That's balance of nature.com promo code SHAPIRO I think the greatest example of the willingness of the left to create permission structures for violence is the total total insanity insanity of what the New York Times did over the weekend. The New York Times is a pile of steaming hot trash. It is a flaming bag of dog. The New York Times. What a terrible, terrible publication. The same publication that ousted Barry Weiss for the great crime of having approved an op ed by Tom Cotton saying that maybe we should use the National Guard against riots published an op ed by Hassan Piker, the twitcher. The twitch gaming streamer who has not only created permission structures for violence, he has openly called for violence. And they gave that asshole an op ed in the New York Times titled I was supposed to debate Charlie Kirk. Here's what I would have said. And the entire. The entire piece is just a permission structure for violence. That's all it is. The entire piece says that Charlie's killing was an outgrowth of capitalism. It was an outgrowth of homophobia. It was an outgrowth of all the bad things that Hassan Piker doesn't like. Quote Even before knowing exactly why Mr. Kirk was killed, I think there are some disturbing and necessary insights that can be drawn from his horrible death. Ideas that affect the way many of my viewers and many of the people who followed Mr. Kirk see the world. The first of these insights is hardly new. The United States has both very loose gun laws and more violent gun deaths per capita than any other developed nation in the world. The second idea is more general and is connected to perhaps why these kinds of killings happen in the first place. Violence almost never originates in a vacuum, and the killing of a high profile political content creator speaks to a breakdown in our social order. Any answer about civic decline in America has to include a discussion about the failure of our political and economic establishment to reconcile with social challenges that have touched every place and aspect of American life. The social challenges include rising rents and homelessness, the destruction caused by climate change, titanic levels of inequality, and too many others to name. Here, our capitalist way of life, always accumulating, never evening out, leaves more and more people to deal with these problems on their own. So it was lack of low rent. Obviously. It was affordability. It was capitalism. This produces feelings of isolation and resentment as material conditions worsen. And considering our society is swamped by, and yet somehow stitched together by a 247 news cycle that too often feeds this resentment, it is little wonder that a country of stressed out gun owners would have so many grim, needless gun deaths. This connects to my final idea. Americans inhabit a culture of violence to which we have become habitually desensitized. There's a connection between our culture of violence and American foreign policy. Yes, it was the war in Iraq. You see, for years, American politics has taken on an increasingly punitive flavor. During the George W. Bush era, Arabs and Muslims were and remain singled out for suspicion. He's just doing the Norm MacDonald joke now. The old Norm MacDonald joke was, if ISIS were to set off a nuclear bomb and kill 50 million people, I fear the Islamophobia. So now Hassan Piker is just doing that joke. But real. During the George W. Bush era, Arabs and Muslims were remain. Islamophobia killed Charlie, as it turns out. Unbelievable. Wow. What can't it do? The Barack Obama years were not so much a correction as continuity. With drone strikes, night raids, and forever war. What followed in President Trump's first term and in Joe Biden's administration was still more of the same, writes Hasan Piker. Extreme rhetoric about designated American enemies combined with aggressive sanctions and secret operations, a foreign policy organized around punishing and killing our supposedly sworn enemies, diplomacy be damned, conveys the terrible message that we can only kill and maim our way to achieving the world we want to live in. I fear this is most evident in, wait for it. America's ironclad support for Israel. So pulling a gun or launching a missile has become a part of our national character, a sad reduction of morality to the time it takes for fingers to pull the trigger. Americans, especially younger Americans, feel a sense of growing hopelessness as so many of those in power refuse to listen to their struggles, economic and otherwise. This entire article is a permission structure for violence. You can see why they're doing it. It's because of the war in Iraq that desensitizes us to violence. It's because capitalism and its predation, says the millionaire jackass who gallivants around in muscle T shirts on Twitch. Hey, you want to know why I'm a little upset about this? Here's the reason. I'm a little upset about this. New York Times invites Hasan Piker to write an op ed obit about Charlie Kirk, a person he disagreed with about everything, as a sort of, what, emblem of decency? As some sort of promoter of decent dialogue. Hassan Piker. The same people on the left, Elizabeth Spires and others, are suggesting that Charlie was not an advocate for, you know, debate. And he was debating Hasan Piker. He had before, apparently. Let me play you some Hassan Piker. You know what a permission structure for violence looks like? It looks like this here is Hassan Piker talking just, you know, like two weeks ago about his. About his lamentation that Donald Trump was still alive.

C (42:36)

A lot of people were concerned. Everyone was, like, so worried for the safety of the big, beautiful president. They were like, oh, no, I hope that's not the case. I hope he's not dead. It would be so sad if he died, except.

A (42:47)

Psych.

C (42:48)

Everybody was stoked. Everybody. Oh, my God. When it happens, like there is. I don't. I can't think of anything that so many people can point to without actually saying it. I'm not even joking. Like, what else have we had as a collective, as a society where we can just kind of point to it without even saying anything? And everybody understands it. Like, virtually everybody understands it. Now, as I've warned you before, evil never dies. As I warned you before, this is like, you know, a byproduct of the Turkification of the United States of America. Yeah, we were monitoring the situation on Trump's untimely demise. Obviously, it didn't happen. He's golfing this morning. Son of a bitch. That was a lot of fun, though.

A (43:37)

Here was Hasan Piker talking about spilling blood in the streets of capitalists. Seems like somebody who. He's very anti violence, you see, he's really forwarding the debate. Hasan Piker, he's a person you definitely need. In the New York Times with an obit about Charlie Kirk basically blaming his death on capitalism and the natural predations of a country that supports Israel and engaged in the Iraq war, creating exactly the permission structures for violence. Creating them. But don't worry, he's nonviolent. Listen to him be nonviolent. Here we go.

C (44:08)

Hurt poor people that they can. They. They can afford housing in Berkeley. I don't know how that. Well, my understanding is that the property.

F (44:16)

Owners who have properties there choose just.

A (44:18)

Not to rent it at all. Yeah, kill them. Kill those mother. And murder those motherfuckers in the street.

C (44:22)

Let the streets.

A (44:24)

Let the streets soak in their red capitalist bloods, dude. I mean, that's. Wow, so much nonviolence. I mean, what. Probably he should get an op ed in the New York Times about Charlie's murder, probably. Or how about this one from 2022, talking about, you know, what should happen to people he disagrees with.

C (44:44)

I'm sick and tired of it. Left wingers, liberals, you need to be showing your opponent's guts on there, okay? You need to be gutting them. You need to be shanking these and letting their. Letting their intestines just ride on stage. What the is this, man? Slice them up. Slice them and dice them. What the is this? You cannot have a bigger layup.

A (45:17)

Okay? And. And then how about this one where he said that it doesn't matter if rapes happen on October 7th. Don't worry, he's very opposed to violence. Very, very opposed to political violence as the New York Times probably should give him an op ed. When I say that the left creates permission structures for violence, it's because they do. Hassan Piker was given a massive profile in the New York Times just a few months ago. Hasan Piker was invited by the New Yorker to speak at the New Yorker Festival. He's being treated as though he is. He was taking pictures with Zoran Mamdani, another pro terrorist fellow on the left, like five minutes ago here he was talking about, about October 7th.

C (45:58)

Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter if rapes happen on October 7th. Like that doesn't change the dynamic for me even this much. So that's the other part of this problem that many people that can't contend with. Like the Palestinian resistance is not perfect. They're not like so good. They have magical bullets and there's no criminal elements that could have conducted themselves very differently. Like that doesn't change the dynamic for me at all.

A (46:25)

Here is Hasan piker justifying 9 11.

C (46:29)

This is so insane. America deserved 9 11, dude. It, I'm saying it.

A (46:38)

Here. He was saying he had no issue with Hezbollah, another terrorist group. Is there a terrorist group he doesn't love? But don't worry, he's a nonviolent advocate for free speech and, and solid debate in the New York Times. Don't tell me that the left isn't fomenting violence when they create permission structures and celebrate people who create permission structures and in some cases openly celebrate terrorist violence.

C (47:02)

Hezbollah is a, is a paramilitary organization that is also a part of the Lebanese parliament. Do we like them or no? I think as a resistance group they're pretty successful against Israel. Oh, but everybody hates them. Like everybody in the region. A lot of people don't like them. Like I like what you like. I don't have an issue with them. Let's just say, say.

A (47:29)

Hezbollah is responsible for the murder of 241Americans in the Beirut barracks bombings in the early 1980s. Here is Hassan Piker saying that Zionists, by which he means Jews, he does, should be treated as rabid neo Nazis.

C (47:44)

I, I think like this will never happen. But in a totally just world, any kind of, regardless of your background, any kind of Zionist tendency should be treated in the same way as being a rabid neo Nazi. And you couldn't even, you shouldn't even let someone be the fucking local dog catcher. As Felix was posting. If they've ever exhibited any Sort of any sort of like positive feelings about the state of Israel. I'm so serious about this.

A (48:20)

Hmm. Hmm. Probably we should give him an op ed in the New York Times about the, the sources of political violence. He can call it if I did it. Meanwhile, again, this has spread across a large part of the left. Oxford's president who debated Charlie Kirk, the President elect, was promoting political violence just the other day over at Oxford to.

C (48:47)

Effectively create change in the world we desire. Inside Prop will argue that at times there is simply nothing else that can be required other than violent retaliation. And this is a view I wholeheartedly agree with. The view that some institutions are too broken, too aggressive, too oppressive to be reformed. Like cancers of our society, they must and they should be taken down by any means necessary.

A (49:11)

Hmm. Hmm. I wonder where is the violence coming from? I don't know. It's, it's, it's, it's all a mystery. Remember that Bob Villain character? Remember that guy, the, the one who was on stage in, in Britain saying death, death to the idf. Remember that at Glastonbury? Well, it turns out that the same people who hate the IDF and the same people who hate Western civilization more broadly and hate America and hate Trump, it turns out that they are perfectly excited about Charlie Kirk's murder, just ecstatic about it. Here was Bob Villain saying that he was happy that Charlie had been murdered.

C (49:49)

I want to dedicate this next one to an absolute piece of a human being. The pronouns was.

A (50:09)

Cuz if you ch, you will get banged. Rest in peace, Charlie pieces. So what exactly was he saying there if you could not hear him there? He said, I want to dedicate this next one to an absolute piece of bleep of a human being. And then he said the pronouns was were. Because if you talk bleep, you will get banged. Rest in peace, Charlie Kirk, you piece of bleep. Then later he claimed that he wasn't actually celebrating Charlie's death because. No, of course not. Of course not. A permission structure of violence. It's not enough to just say political violence is bad. If you say with one hand, hey, I don't like political violence, and with the other hand, let the blood run in the streets of the capitalists or you know why Charlie was shot? It's because of systemic problems with capitalism and the capitalists and the war in Iraq and people I disagree with. That's why Charlie was shot. And you know, you know it's bad he was shot. But if the ideologies you humor are conspiratorial, ideologies that end with the result. I don't like this viewpoint. Therefore speech is violence and you deserve to be murdered. You are part of the problem and you should be called out for that. You want to know why the numbers are going up on this? You want to know why the heat is going up? That's why the heat is going up. And the crocodile tears from the New York Times of all places, while they while they promote precisely the kinds of people who do this insane. We'll get to more on this in a moment. First, finding that right hire can drag on for months. You're either waiting for decent candidates to apply, drowning in resumes that don't fit, or chasing down people who aren't even looking for jobs. What should be a straightforward thing turns into a frustrating cycle of, you know, the waiting and the sorting, which. Well, the future of hiring looks a lot brighter because ZipRecruiter's latest tools and features help speed up finding the right people for your roles so you save valuable time. And now you can try ZipRecruiter for free at ZipRecruiter.com Daily Wire One thing that really stands out about ZipRecruiter is how quickly you can connect with the right people for your team. When you see a candidate that catches your eye, you can unlock their contact information right away instead of waiting around or jumping through hoops. Plus, with over 320,000 new resumes being added every month, you're constantly getting access to fresh talent. And that means you can fill those open positions much, much faster than you'd expect. Use Zip Recruiter save time hiring 4 out of 5 employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the very first day. If you go to ZipRecruiter.com DailyWire right now, you can try it for free again@ziprecruiter.com Daily Wire ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire. Also, here's a simple question. When is the last time a headline actually told you, you know, the actual, honest, full story in today's news cycle? Headlines move fast. Very often they only scratch the surface. Data like, you know, the data that comes from the government can give you the full picture behind those stories if you know where to find it. Enter USA Facts. It's a not for profit organization that pulls numbers straight from the government sources. No agenda, no distortions, just the information on the issues people argue about every day, like inflation, taxes, border crossings, and more. You can explore articles like what is the current inflation Rate, or how are public schools in the United States funded? Or even what's in that big, beautiful bill. Here's the best part. They're not inflating the numbers. They contextualize them. They include easy to understand charts without the commentary. So instead of just reading somebody's take, you're seeing a trend. That's what we should demand. Data that doesn't hide behind opinion. So if you're done with just reading those headlines and you're ready to learn just the facts, head on over to USAFacts.org it's time we had access to the data we deserve. Data before opinion, facts before opinion. USAFacts.org can help you get all of that data. Go check them out. USAFacts.org okay. Meanwhile, apparently the left has decided that, that it's cancel culture. Now, if you wish Charlie Kirk's death, if you celebrate Charlie Kirk's death and then you lose your job, that's cancel culture. Let me explain. That is not cancel culture. That's not. Cancel culture is where you dig up somebody's 15 year old tweet because you want to ruin their life. Cancel culture is where you say something that's basically innocuous or inside the Overton window, so to speak, and then everybody comes along and ruins your life. You make a dumb joke on Twitter and everybody ruins your life. Hey, that's cancel culture. You know, it's not cancel culture. Somebody saying, I don't wish to pay somebody who celebrates the death of Charlie Kirk. I'm sorry. If you post online that you're very, very happy. If you post a tick tock video yourself celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk and your employer decides, hey, I don't feel like paying you, that is perfectly legitimate. If you say, I don't feel like going to the business of somebody who celebrates Charlie Kirk's death, that is perfectly within your right. That is also an aspect of freedom. Now, let's be real. All of politics is extremely reactionary. And what that means is that because the left was so enamored, because the left was so enamored of censorship and shutdowns that they shut the Overton window this small, like super tight. There was a reaction by the right which said that everything that was socially condemned or societally criticized was a form of cancel culture. And that was a bad definition and it isn't true. You as a, as an employer have no obligation to hire a current member of the neo Nazis. You don't. That is not cancel culture. You as an employer, do not have an obligation to employ nurses who post on Tick Tock about how much they're happy that Charlie Kirk is dead. You don't. A cancel culture is a different thing and we ought to be more specific about it and listening to the left cater wall about it. Yeah, guys, my sympathy for you is absolutely zero. Zero. Alrighty. Meanwhile, again, the permission structures the left incredibly strong. Kathy Hochul has now embraced Zaran Mamdani. She has endorsed Zaran Mamdani, a person who supports terrorism. A person who is on board with every one of these scavenger movements that I have described here. I mean that. That is what the Democratic party is doing. Stop pretending that ideologies are all the same. And you can see it. I work over at the Emmys, as the Emmys were last night. And naturally, I mean, first of all, the self involvement of the MA is insane. So the host, Nate Bargazzi, he said he wasn't going to do politics and he didn't. Not so for the people who are there, none of them had a single word to say about the murder of a person who is kind of in their business. I mean, Charlie was certainly in the political entertainment business. There's no question that that's the case. Right? He appeared on many of their shows. In terms of appearing on late night shows, obviously he was. He was the butt of a joke on south park, which he very much enjoyed, by the way, and thought was hilarious. Not a single mention of Charlie. Not a single mention. But many mentions of support for. Wait for it, wait for it, wait for it. Hamas in the Gaza Strip. He's in the left. The left is perfectly fine with violent movements so long as they mirror their political priors. So long as they believe that the system itself is corrupt. And these are the benefit. This is what makes Hollywood glitterati nonsense so appalling. Really. It's really like nauseating crap. The. The reason is because these are the greatest beneficiaries of America. These are talented idiots, many of them with the brains of guppies who are walking around jabbering about politics. Is why Ricky Gervais years ago at the Emmys told everybody you're at the Golden Globes, I believe said you're all making asses of yourself. Just stop. No one needs to hear you on politics. You're ridiculous. You have less education than Greta Thunberg. He was right. They still aren't stopping. So you have Javier Bardem denouncing genocide. There wasn't a single word said about Charlie Kirk at this event. Not one. Not one. It's the Biggest political assassination in the country in probably 50 years. Not a single word at the Emmys, but plenty of words in defense of terrorists in the Gaza Strip.

B (57:42)

Here I am today denouncing the genocide in Gaza. I'm talking about the IAGs, which is international association of Genocide Scholars who study thoroughly genocide and has declared it is a genocide. And that's why we asked for a commercial and diplomatic blockade and also sanctions on Israel to stop the genocide. Free Palestine.

A (58:09)

Thank you, Javier Barnam. Your words are taken under advisement. Meanwhile, Hannah Einbinder, who I'd never heard of because she, I guess she's in a show called Hacks and, and she is again, she's like Bernie Sanders, about as Jewish as a ham sandwich, but likes to pretend that she is somehow associated with Jewishness in order to promote wild anti Judaic left wing points of view. She decided to use her time to not only promote a terrorist state but also to say F ice, which is just great.

G (58:42)

Finally, I just want to say. I just want to say finally, Go Birds, ICE and free Palestine.

A (58:52)

Thank you. She followed that up by suggesting that she, as a Jew, she had to separate off from the idea that the Jews support Israel. No, Jews don't support you. Jews don't support you because you are a clown masquerading as somebody who has any association with, with Jewishness while enjoying again, the best that Western civilization has to offer. Fancy dresses, fine wines, $50,000 swag bags, an Emmy award for saying words that someone else wrote. Congrats to you, Hannah Einbinder. And this is what Hollywood is. A virtue signaling luxury, belief, permission structure for violence, group of complete dullards.

G (59:37)

I feel like it is my obligation as a Jewish person to distinguish Jews from the state of Israel because our religion and our culture is such an important and long standing basically like institution that is really separate to this sort of ethno nationalist state. And in terms of the pledge, it's like many movements, boycotting is an effective tool to create pressure on the powers that be to meet the moment, you know, so the film Workers for Palestine Boycott does not boycott individuals. It only boycotts institutions that are directly complicit in the genocide.

A (60:32)

She's a clown. I mean, first of all, it's not even factually true. It boycotts institutions like the Tel Aviv Film Festival, which is great. Crime is existing. But again, this is what Hollywood is. This is what Hollywood is. It's idiot jokes who are who pretend to be profound while simultaneously standing for some of the most violent people on planet earth. This goes way back. All the way back to Jane Fauna standing for the, you know, fangirling over the Viet Cong. You know folks, I've gotten a lot of good financial advice over the years. Probably the best financial advice that I ever had is just don't overspend on the big ticket items. That's what will bankrupt you. But good advice is one thing, actually putting it into practice is another. With Acorns, it's easy to make healthy money habits automatic. Acorns is a financial wellness app designed to help you invest for the future, save for upcoming goals and make smarter spending decisions. Today, getting started is simple. Investments can begin automatically using your spare change, so there's no need for an extensive financial background. The platform builds expert curated portfolios to ensure money is managed wisely. Taking the guesswork out of investing Whether you're saving for a car, a new home, educational expenses for kids, retirement or other life milestones, Acorns offers tools to support a range of financial ambitions. There's also an integrated checking account with features that automatically invest, plus an emergency fund designed to help grow savings. All accessible within a single user friendly app. Sign up now and Acorns will boost your new account with a five dollar bonus. Investment Join the over 14 million all time customers who've already saved and invested over 25 billion dollars with Acorns. Head on over to acorns.com Shapiro or download the Acorns app to get started. Paid non client endorsement compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns tier two compensation provided investing involves risk. Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC registered investment advisor. View important disclosures@acorns.com Shapiro but you know who they're really excited for? They're really excited for Stephen Colbert. Because if there was one hero of the week in terms of free speech last week, it wasn't the man who got shot while debating. It was Stephen Colbert, who is a victim of being paid tens of millions of dollars to do a horrible show with low ratings and blowing extraordinary quantities of cash on his overproduced junkyard of a television late night show. So much heroism. So much heroism. And of course they're very. Wow, look at that. Congrats to Stephen Colbert who is probably worth $100 million for. For being just horrible at his job. But he got put fired. And that means he's a hero. A true hero of the Republic. Sit down. Thank you very much. We gotta go, we gotta go. But while I have your attention, is anyone hiring? He then went on to talk about, you know, his own heroism, his own Heroism for, you know, having been fired for not being a good host. Sometimes you only truly know how much you love something when you get a sense that you might be losing it. And 10 years later, in September of 2025, my friends, I have never loved my country more desperately. God bless America. Stay strong, be brave. And if the elevator tries to bring you down, go crazy and punch a higher floor. Oh, what. What a hero. What a hero. Well, at least we know they're on the right side of history. Well, you know, these ridiculous people at the Emmys congratulating themselves. The good news is that their reach is relatively limited. I asked my sponsors at Comet, a new web browser, by perplexity, how many people watch the 2024 Emmys? It's too early for the ratings. And how many people go to church in the United States on a typical Sunday? The answer is the average audience for the Emmy awards telecast in 2024 was somewhere between 6.87 and 6.9 million people, which was an increase over 2023, but still not huge numbers, little under 7 million people. Meanwhile, church attendance in the United States. Gallup's most recent data indicates regular weekly church attendance in 2025 stands at 20% of Americans, which amounts to somewhere between 66 and 70 million people. And, you know, on a monthly basis, somewhere between 135 and 145 million people go to church. And church attendance is going up. The Emmy ratings, they've been bouncing around, but they're still remaining pretty low. I would imagine that Sunday the churches were packed. That's what the report I was hearing from all my Christian friends. I will say that at my synagogue on Saturday, not only was it packed, but every synagogue that I know, every single shul that I know, had a prayer specifically for Charlie or a speech specifically about Charlie talking about what he meant to the country. Alrighty, folks, before we go to member block, I want to remind you, you should go over to tpusa.com and go and help out. You should join TPUSA if you haven't already. You should go check out Charlie's show today. J.D. vance, Vice President of the United States, is hosting Charlie Kirk's show. There are a wide variety of links available over at TPUSA to help Charlie's family to help out tpusa. As people have been saying, CPUSA is a great organization to associate with. If you want to start a chapter, you should. If you want to get money, you should. There's give, send, go for Charlie's family as well. I encourage you to go associate more with the folks over at TP usa. And. And remember that now that Charlie is no longer here, he's still here. So long as people pick up that microphone. That's all of you and going and spreading the word. All right, folks, we reached the end of the show. We'll be back here tomorrow with much more and Ben Shapiro. This is the Ben Shapiro Show.