Mark Halperin (7:27)

Good to see you sir. It's wide world of news. You were very close.

Charlie Kirk (7:29)

I was close. Okay, Mark Halperin's Wide World of News, A Two Way TV Mark, welcome. And your reaction to the Gavin Newsom comment? My appearance on his podcast.

Mark Halperin (7:41)

I have so many thoughts about it. I'll tell you my two top ones. First of all, you would think if someone found themselves for the first time in their adult life in a room with someone more handsome than them, they might, it might lead to humility. But instead, it's like your producers creating like a little shrine to you about your appearance. So I'm a little, I'm a little surprised. Had you been in the room with Gavin Newsom before? Or is that the first time?

Charlie Kirk (8:03)

No, that was the first time I ever met him.

Mark Halperin (8:05)

Yeah. So again, you're two of the three most handsome men I know. And so for me, it's just eye candy. To the extent I listened, I thought, I thought it was super interesting. I'm really glad you two did that. You're both fans of Two Way, although neither of you have come on yet. That's my other big thought. But, but I, I have great respect for both of you. I think that you're not underrated, at least not anymore. He's still underrated. I'm not sure he'll run for president. I'm not sure if he ran he'll win. But I think he's a very thoughtful guy. He's not as liberal as people think. And you saw that in the big news he made with you on trans and sports. And he's, and he's, he's a better with people than he's given credit for. He's had some troubles governing his state in part because the legislature is so liberal. But I think for me, you two sitting down and doing that is great. And I think, in general, I've listened to, I haven't finished it. I've listened to about two thirds of it. I think, I think it's a great conversation. And I think you two talked about things in a way that was good. In other words, like you weren't. It was very much in the spirit of what I tried to do. You just communicated with each other. You didn't come trying to score points. And obviously he ceded a lot of ground to you on the 2024 election, and particularly on this issue of trans athletes and women's sports.

Charlie Kirk (9:24)

What, what do you make? Let's just posit that he probably is running for president. I think he is. I think he's incredibly ambitious about the shift on the trans issue and the pushback and the blowback that he's receiving for kind of pivoting on the trans issue. I actually don't think it's genuine because he has actions he could take. But even the statement of that is a divergence from the current Democrat Party.

Mark Halperin (9:50)

Orthodoxy, like the way you framed it. Look, let's see if he takes any action. It is the case that sometimes political figures, elected officials have positions and they don't act them right. You've had pro life presidents who didn't do very much to try to overturn Roe or to try to change the law in a way that would protect more life. So that's one example. I could give you many. Look, this is a guy who was for same sex marriage publicly before Nancy Pelosi was, before the Clintons were, before Barack Obama was, which you could say means he's more left wing than them. Or you could say he is willing sometimes to take positions that are a little bit risky. That position's popular now, but it wasn't back then. I think that every Democrat has to ask themselves two questions if they disagree with Governor Newsom and many people criticize him. One is do you want your party to be on the wrong side of an issue? 70, 30, 80, 20. And if you truly believe that you want to take the position that's the minority, go out and defend it. Don't try to, as most Democrats are doing today, try to obscure the issue and say, well, it should be up to local officials. There's a clear demarcation here. And I think whether you think he switched for cynical purposes or not, I think he explained himself pretty well. And I don't think it's, I don't think it's obvious that he's. I don't think it's. I don't, I take, I would take him at his word that this is what he thinks. But as you said, if that's really what he thinks, there's some actions that have to come with it following through. But if he does want to run for president, and again, I'm not assure as you that he does, if he does want to run for president, that kind of thing is going to put him in a category that very few Democrats today are willing to be in, which is stand up to the base of the party with principle and emotion.

Charlie Kirk (11:33)

And some would say it might be the beginning of a sista soldier moment, which you might remember was Bill Clinton running for the presidency in 1992. I was actually. Before I was born.

Mark Halperin (11:43)

Yeah, it was before you were born and I was in the room for it.

Charlie Kirk (11:46)

So well, no. Educate the audience on this, though. What was the context? Why is that an important reference point?

Mark Halperin (11:52)

Yeah, I use it all the time, that phrase, because I covered the cling campaign and I was there for that. Sister Soldier was a rap artist who had lyrics that were very violent about, I think, killing police. It was at least about violence against police. And he went and spoke to Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition event. Sister Soulja had spoken earlier at the same event, and he said, you had a rap singer here named Sister Soulja. I disagree with her. Seemed today that seems maybe a little quaint. But back then, when Bill Clinton's Democratic Party was not as far left as it is today, but it was too far left to win presidential elections, standing up to the base of the party was seen as very difficult now, and few were willing to risk doing it. Bill Clinton's whole campaign was about Sister Soldier moments. He came out for nafta, which back then was out of step with the Democratic Party. The trade deal. He came out for the death penalty. He came out for right to work laws against right to work laws. He came for right to work laws. He came out for welfare reform. All of these things were seen as part of a very self conscious and purposeful effort to say things that would put him at odds with the liberal wing of the party, to, to say to more moderate voters, including independents and Republicans, but also to Democrats who wanted to win, I will stand up to the base of the party now when you say Gavin Newsom might have said what he said with you purely for cynical political purposes, I think Bill Clinton believed all those positions. So it had the added advantage of being what he believed. And it's easier to sell that to the public if it's a legit position. But I think Gavin Newsom is someone who has in the past not gotten enough credit for criticizing some of the more liberal policies of the party. And this is of a piece with that. And again, when the left squeals, which they have, and, and, and I think it's been more muted than it might have been, you got to follow through with it. If you want to make the political points stick and sustain, you've got to stick to your guns. You've got to look for opportunities to do it. But you also have to do, if you want to win the Democratic nomination, you also have to do what Bill Clinton did. Bill Clinton said, I would say I'm a Democrat by birth, heritage and inclination. And that's the only way to the Democratic nomination because it's still dominated by the liberal wing of the party, drag them to the center on some issues, but convince them that you're one of them. And I think Gavin Newsom's one of the few Democrats with the skill to do that.

Charlie Kirk (14:15)

So does it say something more broader about our politics, that the attitude is going to the center right, that Democrats are going to have to concede on some of the more unpopular issues? Is it Gavin Newsom that is seeing the trend and he wants to be a little ahead of it? What does that say more broadly about where the direction, the momentum of how people view political matters goes right now?

Mark Halperin (14:39)

Well, I think the party is split, and again, the Democratic Party is farther left than it's been in my lifetime or yours. And so the power of the left and the distance, someone who wants to push the party or pull the party back to the center is farther than it's ever been. I know plenty of Democrats, including people who are in the Bernie Sanders wing of the party, like Congressman Ro Khanna of California, who say, of course, we have to talk to the whole country and not be in our narrow end, confined blue bubble. But again, it's hard to predict how this will go because standing up to the base is a problem. And you saw that on Tuesday, where Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer refused to stand up to the base of their party and they had a massive calamity. If they weren't protected by the media, what they did would still be a dominant story. It's not today. There's a lot of other news, but I think it's up in the air now whether there'll be Democrats like Newsom who help to pull the party back towards the center or they'll be too afraid, like the congressional leaders seem to be right now.

Charlie Kirk (15:42)

Just to make sure we're clear, you're talking about the outrage, the outbursts at the State of the Union. Correct? Is that what we're.

Mark Halperin (15:47)

Yeah, I'm sorry. I should have been more clear. I've been talking about all week. Yeah, I mean, the outburst, the outbursts of the State of the Union, but also the whole series of events around it where the party simply cannot talk about issues in a sustained way that are popular. They're discombobulated by Donald Trump and the whole Trump team, including you. Extraordinary, skillful at keeping them discombobulated. They went in that with one goal. Their one goal was we want to talk about the real lives of real people that are being impacted by Trump policies. And instead they engaged in conduct. I'm particularly Hung up on the failure to cheer for that little boy. But it's just unbelievable. It's not human. It's not human.

Charlie Kirk (16:28)

It's not human.

Mark Halperin (16:28)

But they went in. They went in and they exhibited conduct that so disqualifying for so many people. Now, can they come back from it? Have they done things that are also at peace with that? Of course, of course, of course, of course. But the symbolism of the inability of the leadership to. To get them to do a simple plan does not speak well of the party.

Charlie Kirk (16:48)

Of course they can come back. I mean, after January 6th, everyone thought we were done and we dug ourselves out. So of course they can come back. If you are a private student loan debt borrower, listen carefully, great patriots here. Private student loan debt in the US totals about $300 billion. About 45 billion of that is labeled as distressed. Why refi refinances distressed or defaulted private student loans that others will not touch. Why refi does not care at all about what your credit score is. If your private student loan debt is keeping you up at night and ruining your life, you guys should check out why refi calm that is yrefy.com yrefi.com so check it out right now. Whyrefi.com do you have a co borrower? Why refi can get them released from the loan. You can give your mom or dad a break. You can even skip a payment every six months up to 12 times. May not be available in all states. Go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com that is whyrefi.com so check it out right now. Why refi.com youm don't have to ignore the mountain of student loan statements on your kitchen table anymore. Go to yrefi.com that is yre f y.com so Mark, I want to get your reaction to Hakeem Jeffries kind of being a little frozen when he was asked yesterday about the Gavin Newsom situation.

Mark Halperin (18:04)

Yeah.

Charlie Kirk (18:04)

Now what's interesting to me is that Gavin's team seemed to not give a little memo or a heads up to Democrat leadership that this was coming. And I think that's important. There wasn't someone working the phones. Hey, Hakeem, just want to let you know it's gonna make national headlines. It was as if Gavin said it because understand this was not a live interview. They had a 36 hour lead time. And with a 36 hour lead time, they very well could have been a good party man. Like a good company man. Picked up the phones, worked it and they would had a little workshop thing and all the tensions would have been. Instead, he kind of played into the ambush. Let's play this piece of tape here. Play 224.

Mark Halperin (18:45)

I want to ask about California Governor Gavin Newsom's comments saying that Democrats were in the wrong for allowing transgender athletes to compete in female and girls sports. What is your response to that? After Democrats had opposed the women and girls in sports? I haven't seen his comments. What Democrats opposed was unleashing sexual predators on girls throughout the United States of America.

Charlie Kirk (19:16)

Okay. It's a completely unrelated. I have no idea what that means. I mean. Sorry, Mark, react.

Mark Halperin (19:24)

Yeah. I mean, first of all, every time I see the guy on TV now, he looks exhausted. For those of you who are just listening to the audio, Hakeem Jeffries just needs a nap or a vacation. And that means, I believe, it's a manifestation of how much pressure he's under. I hear from Democrats in Congress regularly, and I spent a lot of time on the Hill this week around the president's speech. He is not able to grapple with the liberal wing of the party. And so what you have is a guy who knows his party's on the wrong side of a lot of issues, including the one that Governor Newsom made news on. He is. He is unable to stand up to that wing of the party because when he tries, they threaten to revolt there. It's where the energy is in the party. And. And they've not found a way to stand up to him. Governor Newsom could have given them a heads up. He's not particularly close to a lot of Democrats. A lot of Democrats don't like him, and he doesn't make time for that. And that happens sometimes with big state governors, particularly California, because it's 3,000 miles from Washington. But I believe that if Gavin Newsom runs for president, he's not going to run as part of the Washington Club. Right. He's going to run as an outsider. That's in vogue right now, of course. And so he didn't want to give him a heads up. He wants to operate here on his own plane. And I'll say again, that reaction, that Brooklyn brand of of word salad from Hakeem Jeffries is a manifestation of the fact that the party is a mess right now, not just on the issue of trans athletes and women's sports and girls sports, but on the general question of how do they grapple with Donald Trump, who, contrary to what the press says, is largely talking about issues that are 70 or 80% popular as opposed to 20 or 30% not popular. And they don't just, they haven't grappled with that because the rational thing would be to pull some sister soldiers and say, you know what, we're with America, but they just want to, as he did there, change the subject or in some cases defend the unpopular position, which, you know, hats off to them for being principled. But party can only last so long if they're on the wrong side of 70, 30 and 80, 20 issues.

Charlie Kirk (21:31)

Yeah, or just say completely unrelated statement. I mean, I don't think anyone is pushing sexual predators on girls. I just, it's like an, it's a completely unrelated statement. Mark, I'm gonna go back to a op ed written by James Carville and I know this came up in my Gavin Newsom discussion where he basically argued that Democrats should do a strategic retreat or rollover and play dead. He argued that the Democrats best move right now is allow Trump's numbers to get soft and this whole thing's gonna fall apart and then we will strike. What do you make of that? This is the New York Times piece right here. James Carville, it's time for a daring political maneuver. Nothing that we can do. Play possum and allow it to kind of pass over. What is your take on this? Has this ever worked in recent American modern politics? Is this a playbook that has been proven to work?

Mark Halperin (22:20)

It works in possum politics, but this is about human beings. Look, I think James is trying to make a virtue out of three things which right now are big problems for the party. One is President Trump continues to be an 800 pound gorilla moving 800 miles per hour. Number two, Democrats don't have any leaders who have the communication skills to stand up to him. And number three, they don't have anything like what your party has, which is issue positions that you can sell through a machinery that's cranking fast, involving communications and interest groups and realized real human beings, as we saw at the State of the Union like speech. So I think what James is basically saying is we need to do nothing now because anything we do will make it worse. See Tuesday night. But eventually, when he thinks the time to stop playing possum comes, you'll still need those same three things. You'll still need leaders and ideas and messaging capacity. And Donald Trump hopefully has made some errors. That's the thing that could change that. They don't have to control, but it's not definitely going to change. So I've heard lots of smart Democrats say James is just saying that because he wants to have something to say. And the alternative is to say, yeah, Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin should be going head to head with Donald Trump right now when the party's divided and without any popular issue positions that they know how to sell.

Charlie Kirk (23:46)

So the state of the Republican Party seems as if we have plenty of momentum moving forward. Any of the fault lines seem to be smoothed over and there is large unity behind the president and the administration. Just looking at Doge, some of the reports yesterday saying that there might be a tighter leash on some of the activities there. What is your analysis of the state of how this administration is operating?

Mark Halperin (24:13)

Six weeks in, super successful, getting a lot done. And it's unprecedented. You and I have talked about it. We've never had a second term president like this. All the energy and creativity and more planning than we've had in a normal second first term president or second term president, but, but much more experienced than a first term president. So it's a, it's a combination that is working very well. They're getting a lot done. I think there's three big areas of danger. One is dealing with the Congress on the big stuff that has to get done. Republican only votes required for the reconciliation packages on taxes and spending and immigration and military stuff that has to get done. And they can't basically can't lose any Republican votes at the same time with Congress, they have to get Democratic votes on some issue. So figuring out how to pass, avoid a government shutdown, raise the debt ceiling and pass the president's domestic agenda, that's one. Two is Doge, which is great and popular if you describe it as cutting waste, fraud and abuse. But as we saw this week, members of Congress, Republican members of Congress, members of the Cabinet, they just, they say we don't work for Elon Musk and we don't want to cut veterans, we don't want to cut hospitals in our district, we don't want to cut research in our district. And so figuring out Elon's role and figuring out how to cut without really pissing off not just voters, but a lot of Republicans and veterans, that's the second, third, second issue. And then third is the president's unprecedented at this stage of an administration playing big casino overseas, big casino in the Middle east, big casino with Ukraine, Russia, and maybe he'll succeed. And certainly I don't think you can argue that this is worse than what Biden was doing, which was basically nothing, just maintaining the status quo. But he's taken a lot of big risks. He strikes a deal with Russia and then there's Russian tanks on the Champs Lysees, or he does a deal with Gaza and something worse takes over. So those are big risks. I'm not saying he shouldn't be pursuing these three tracks by any means. Those are things he ran on, but I think those are the big areas of just littered with landmines and complications. And there are some Trump allies, including at least one friend of yours that I know, who say maybe this is too much from a communications point of view, a bandwidth point of view, a presidential focus point of view. Maybe there's just too many big projects and some of them should go on the back burner for now.

Charlie Kirk (26:38)

Mark, please plug two Way and also your newsletter, which I read every morning. Really quick 20 seconds.

Mark Halperin (26:44)

Okay? So two way TV. You can go on and watch our programs. And there's some in the morning, some at night. It's different, long, sophisticated conversations, two way participation from the community. The newsletter is very expensive. Not everyone who listens to the show will want it. Go to walking docs, walkingdoc.com mark and you can read about my premium product called Concierge Coverage.

Charlie Kirk (27:06)

Mark, thank you so much. Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here. Brand new year, Brand new opportunities to change the world for the better. It's easier than you might think. You can save babies by providing ultrasounds with preborn. Together with the Sanctity of Human Life Month, we're gonna save 35,000 babies to show the world that not only do we believe life is precious, but we're gonna do something about it. Your gift of preborn will give a girl the truth about what's happening in her body so that she can make the right choice. What better way to start this new year than to join us to save babies? And $28 a month will save a baby a month. All year long. A $15,000 gift will provide a complete ultrasound machine that will save thousands of babies for years and years to come and will also save moms from a lifetime of pain and regret. I am a donor to this organization, and you should be, too. Start this new year by being a hero for life. Call 833-850-2229 or click on the preborn banner at charliekirk.com that is charliekirk.com and click on the preborn banner. I'm a donor. You should be, too. CharlieKirk.com Preborn Banner joining us now is a old friend, a great friend, an amazing patriot And a congratulations is in order to the Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins. So good to see you, Brooke. And it's amazing to see you in the Cabinet for President Trump. Congratulations.

Brooke Rollins (28:28)

Oh, Charlie. Kirk. I mean, really, what a joy on so many levels. I know we have gotten to talk quite a bit off of the camera and off of your show, but this is the first time I've been back on the show, and I'm just so grateful to do it. But thank you so much. It's the honor of a lifetime.

Charlie Kirk (28:44)

So there's a lot of attention right now on the Department of Agriculture and kind of the mess that Joe Biden left you. The thing that is a talking point of the Democrats, and to be fair, a reality a lot of Americans are experiencing is the price of eggs. Separate fact from fiction. Why is it that egg prices have gone up so dramatically? And what is the plan to bring those prices down?

Brooke Rollins (29:07)

Well, it's funny, you know, all of the talk in Washington and certainly the amazing State of the Union, which was unbelievable. I'm sure you've spent a lot of time on your show talking about it. Oh, yeah. And it's what's happening with Ukraine, what's happening with America across the world, what's happening at the border. I mean, what's really happening across all of government. With Elon and Doge, it's just been astounding. It's another revolution. But at the end of the day, if the single mom who lives in Detroit, Michigan, can't go to the grocery store and afford a carton of eggs, then the world's not right. Right. I mean, that's, it's that sort of pocketbook issue. And that as we, Charlie, you and I have long battled together to take the American dream to every corner of our country. These are really real significant issues. I don't have my chart here with me, but if I did. And by the way, President Trump loves this chart, but it shows that for 40 years, the price of eggs was pretty static. It was right around $1.50, $2 a dozen. Then under Obama, it went up, not surprisingly, because of overregulation and higher taxes, etc. The cost of input went up, but not significantly, maybe from $1.52 to $253. Then under Trump, without anything intentional. But just because less government, lower regulations, everyone did better, the prices went back down. But then under Biden, they skyrocketed 230% higher than what they were under. Trump won. And there's, there's reasons for that. Overregulation et cetera. But the avian bird flu, which is a virus that these chickens have gotten, is a huge reason the Biden team basically depopulated about 150 million egg laying hens last year. Which is the protocol. We're looking at the protocol now to see how to, to tweak it so that hopefully we don't have to do that moving forward. But we did. We rolled out a five point plan about a week ago. Includes deregulation, includes repopulation much more quickly, includes importing eggs from other countries for the short term and then for the long term, figuring out how to solve for these viruses that are basically annihilating significant populations in our poultry industry.

Charlie Kirk (31:16)

And so I don't oversimplify it, but a bunch of chickens were killed like 100 million, and therefore it restricts the supply and the demand stays the same. And so the price goes up. Is that somewhat of a fair summation?

Brooke Rollins (31:31)

That's exactly right. Now, alongside the Biden, crazy inflation, crazy overregulation, crazy spending. Right. I mean, the bird flu has certainly been a massive driver in that. But it isn't just that. And you know, as much as we would love to get the price of eggs down to $2 by tomorrow, although I think we're making some good strides, I've seen some recent numbers. This is going to take a little while. It's going to take a little while to figure out how to solve for the flu. It's going to take a little while to get the deregulation, such as Prop 12 in California and line speeds and other things back to normal before they were in Trump 1 and, and frankly, just bring the cost of goods down across the country. But we're making incredible strides. I'm so proud of this president. He has just been such a, I mean, we all know this, right? Such a warrior for everything that we care about. And my role now becomes, you know, the farmers, the ranchers, the ag community, bringing prosperity back to rural America and getting the price of those eggs down. That's at least what he's told me.

Charlie Kirk (32:30)

So speaking more broadly, educate our audience about the duties and the responsibilities, all about what the Department of Agriculture does. People just think of it as, you know, kind of corn or soybeans. It's a lot more than that. Kind of give us a little insight into your portfolio.

Brooke Rollins (32:46)

Well, it is. And when I got the call on November 23rd from President Trump, it was a Saturday before Thanksgiving. My fan, my husband and my four kids and I were driving to Auburn, Alabama for the Texas A and M Auburn football game and very unexpectedly had the conversation that, I mean, really kind of changed everything. Although I will eventually go back and join you, Charlie, out in the. Out in the trenches doing the great work outside. I mean, yeah, that's where my heart is, but it really is. It's a privilege, it's a blessing, but it's a big job. I mean, people assume to your point, it's corn and soybeans and some beef. But it's also the food stamp program, which is a massive bureaucratic nightmare of a beast where we're not even really getting the food to the people who really need it most. And when we are, it includes Cokes and candy and all kinds of bad stuff. So there's massive amount of work that we need to do there. It also includes the Forest Service. So we've got the largest firefighting unit anywhere in the country of any size of government is the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. We've got almost 30,000 firefighters in our community. So yesterday I was in North Carolina. They've got some fires that have popped up that are a little bit scary, looking at the damage of Hurricane Helene, but also understanding what we need to do and the resources that are necessary to ensure we don't have another fire like what happened in California, that all the different components are working well together. You name it. I think usda, you know, it was the first agency, the first cabinet position created after the founding of the country. So.

Charlie Kirk (34:24)

Right.

Brooke Rollins (34:24)

George Washington and Thomas Jefferson created Defense and State, an attorney general, et cetera. They waited, what, almost 100 years, and then Abraham Lincoln created the Department of Agriculture. And I think. And then it was a little while longer before the other ones came along. And so I think it became a little bit of the dumping ground for all the things that didn't have a place in a federal agency. But that's part of the great role, and I welcome it and I thrive with it. How do we realign the United States Department of Agriculture? How do we set a model for not just the federal government, but around the country on how you realign, how you reduce, enforce, how you become more effective and more efficient with much less money? And that's what we and our very small team right now. We're still trying to get people in the door, but that's what we're doing every day.

Charlie Kirk (35:10)

So let's also talk about tariffs. And I know there's a lot of back and forth on this. And by the way, the American people voted for tariffs and they Want tariffs? Yes, they did. My phone was lighting up like a Christmas tree. I'm sure your was from farmers and ranchers and people that are great folks, you know, hey, what's going on? Are we able to sell our product? We will import our product. How are you guys thinking about this at the Department of Agriculture?

Brooke Rollins (35:32)

Well, there's no doubt, you know, I've been out of six or seven different states. I've only been in for about two and a half weeks, I guess three weeks and been to, gosh, a bunch of states, talked to a bunch of farmers, almost 200, I think, from around the country, had a lot of them come to Washington. It's really important to me that I get outside the noise of Washington and outside the kind of the, you know, the associations, etc. Not that they don't play a very good role, but I want to talk to the farmers directly and in so doing, the number one issue for them is the uncertainty that tariffs and the trade potential, trade renegotiations, what that means for our ag community. And listen, Charlie, in 100 years, I'm not sure that the ag community, that our farmers and ranchers have been operating at more of a razor thin margin than they are today. I mean, it is a not a good place to be our exports. We have a trade deficit of $49 billion in ag thanks to Joe Biden. It was zero when we left President Trump's first term. That is real money taken out of the pockets of our farmers. But the number one thing they're concerned about is trade. And so yesterday the President who I have been talking to and he. These are his people, right? We are his people. And he knows that the rural communities and the ag communities have been with him since the moment he came down that escalator. It took other people a lot longer to get on board in early 21, when others were running for the hills and not supporting President Trump. This community was and he knows that. So he mentioned the State of the Union a few times on Tuesday night. Farmers, I'm with you. I love you. Yesterday I talked to him multiples of times as they were finalizing at least the 30 day deal to exempt ag products under US MCA going to Canada or Mexico, which is a huge relief, even if short term. They exempted fertilizer, also called potash, from Canada under a different kind of line. But at the end of the day, the President is hyper focused on delivering for the American people. He was elected on tariffs being part of that toolkit in order to bring prosperity back to America. But I am so confident that he is also an everyday thinking about the real world effects on the backbone of this country and in rural America, which.

Charlie Kirk (37:40)

Are our farmers, so critically important. Secretary Rollins, it's nice to say that anything else that you on your kind of front vision, things you're dealing with, you want our audience to be aware of. And what are your asks out of Congress with this big budget bill? What are some needs that you see waste to cut elimination doge up the food stamps, where you're gonna be going to Congress and say hey, here are my big asks.

Brooke Rollins (38:06)

So at the end of the day I think what's really important and I'm assuming most of the people watching you today, Charlie, and are fans of yours, probably also watch the President on Tuesday night. This isn't easy, right? Revolution is never easy. And there are really hard decisions to be made. And there are days that my goodness, the concept of how you get this massive beast of the federal government that has gotten too big under both Democrats and Republicans, right? Democrats and Republicans. How do you take it back to where it is meant to be? How do you return the power to the people? How do you implement our founders vision of self governance when things have just gotten so out of control in Washington? And while Charlie, you and I are both very much pathological optimists, I don't even know that you or I could have imagined the world that we're in right now in the best way.

Mark Halperin (38:59)

Right?

Brooke Rollins (39:00)

We've got Elon Musk who is just doing such a phenomenal job. We have a cabinet, we're like family and we're all working together. We've all now known each other and worked together for years at this point. So it isn't like we're in our silos anymore. This is a team effort to save America. So as I'm going to the Hill and part of my message has been, Charlie, when you're in a revolution and you are significantly reducing the size of government, nothing will be perfect, it will be imperfect, there will be mistakes made. But this sort of shaking up the whole system and almost restarting it in a way, there's not going to be another opportunity I believe perhaps in our lifetimes to do exactly what we're doing now. So even as I'm talking to our friends on the Hill, but even this morning I talked to a Democrat senator and I won't say who it was, but we had a very collegial conversation about what our goals are, what we're trying to do at usda, the importance of returning and realigning the agency. And for the most part, even those on the other side of the aisle understand that President Trump won with a mandate and winning the popular vote and winning all the swing states. And that's now what we're working to effectuate. So I have gotten nothing but mostly general positive feedback, even from those on the other side who understand what it is we're trying to do. And for the most part, doing it with the best. Well, for our intent sake, we are doing it with the best of intentions. But even those on the other side, I think, for the most part, recognize that while they are not in power, they may not make these decisions, but they realize this is what the American people have asked for.

Charlie Kirk (40:35)

Brooke, you're the greatest. Secretary Rollins, I should say, with all due respect, Charlie.

Brooke Rollins (40:38)

No, Brooke. Brooke, forever.

Charlie Kirk (40:41)

You're the greatest.

Brooke Rollins (40:42)

Thank you, Charlie.

Charlie Kirk (40:43)

Thank you. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us. As always, freedomarliekirk.com thanks so much for listening and God bless. For more on many of these stories.

Mark Halperin (40:52)

And news you can Trust, go to charliekirk.com.