Tape Clips (Various Commentators) (4:54)

There is incredible arrogance among the Chinese elites and that's what I take away from this video. You know, there are a number of instances that De talks about and I don't know if they're actually true or not. But the point is that this is what Chinese leaders think. And because they think that way, they're going to push a President Biden around. They're going to do things which are dangerous because we're going to have to push back under President Trump. The Chinese didn't try this because they were afraid of him. So what I'm concerned about is the state of mind of China. We see this From Xi Jinping, the Chinese ruler all the way down to this guy Dungshong. This is dangerous.

Charlie Kirk (5:33)

So the same way that Alabama and Notre Dame and other college football teams recruit multi generations of talent, the Chinese Communist Party has embarked on an ambitious recruitment scheme to recruit young and upcoming political leaders that one day they might be able to hold influence over them. In Axios, a Chinese national named Fang Fang targeted up and coming local politicians in the Bay Area and across the country who had the potential to make it big on the national stage. Through campaign fundraising, extensive networking, personal charisma and romantic or sexual relationships with at least two Midwestern mayors, Fang was able to gain proximity to political power according to current and former U.S. intelligence officials and one former elected official. So as Notre Dame tries to recruit 13 and 14 year olds that will one day be the five star recruit. Linebackers in strong safeties and quarterbacks of tomorrow, the Chinese Communist Party sends in attractive Chinese women to go seduce American politicians so they can have favor over them. Now mind you, these American politicians don't currently have a lot of power. This is in the belief that one day they might be at the highest levels of power in our government. In the middle of all this is the Russian hoaxer himself. The man who if he was in charge we'd be sending Tomahawk missiles and US infantry troops into Moscow and St. Petersburg. Eric Swal. Eric Swal is one of the most disingenuous American politicians out there. Swalwell has said on multiple occasions that Donald Trump is an agent of Russia. He was one of the cheap propagandists behind this lie and Swalwell was in a relationship in one way or the other. We're not sure of the depth or the aspects of it. With Fang Fang. Fang Fang is a Chinese Communist Party spy. Lets play tape of Eric Swal trying to make the case for collusion. Remember, this is how he thought about foreign interference when it came to Russia. Play tape.

Tape Clips (Various Commentators) (7:54)

Russia attacked our democracy this past election and then they showed up to his Trump tower, offered the evidence to his family. They received it, they didn't turn it down. Donald Trump for years had been working with the Russians. He brought people on his campaign who had ties to the Russians. We have seen a candidate and a president who has spoken in very flattering ways about Vladimir Putin. All of the arrows continue to point to a personal, political and financial relationship that Donald Trump had with the Russians.

Charlie Kirk (8:22)

A personal and financial relationship that Trump had with the Russians. You mean like that you have with our greatest enemy, the Chinese Communist Party? Eric Swalwell. You see, the case demonstrates this is from Axios, China's strategy of cultivating relationships that may take years or even decades to bear fruit. So I know a lot of the people at Axios. A lot of them are good people. My question is, why did they not release this story before the election? This story at Axios is a pretty incredible story. Why are they releasing this now? Maybe they didn't have all the facts and the sources. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt there. But at Axios, why didn't they release this a month and a half ago? This would have been a bombshell story heading into the election, especially since there's a subcontractor for the Chinese Communist Party about to become president if we don't do our job and reverse the current electoral votes in Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania and Michigan. So Eric Swalwell has declined to comment on the story, but it said that Beijing has, quote, engaged in a highly sophisticated, malign foreign influence campaign. If that's the case, why has no one attacked the fact that Joe Biden is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Chinese Communist Party? Fang Fang used political gatherings, civic society conferences, campaign rallies, and campus events to connect with elected officials and other prominent figures, according to U.S. intelligence agencies and officials. You see, the Chinese Communist Party has been playing the long game in this Axios piece, which is at least. This is at least eight pages long. It's a very lengthy piece. There's no way they wrote this overnight. It shows Eric Swalwell with pictures with this Chinese Communist Party spy, Fang Fang. And it says that Fang's ties to Eric Swalwell began when he was a council member for Dublin City, California. So Fang Fang started to recruit Swalwell, who looked like an up and coming ambitious city council member. The Chinese Communist Party is more invested in the long term political strategy of our country than most parts of the Republican Party. The Chinese Communist Party has developed more of a farm team than the Republican Party has. Fang's earliest known engagement with Swalwell occurred to the Chinese Student Association. Huh. Wonder who's been warning about that. By 2014, she has risen in local political circles and developed close ties to Swalwell's office. That is just the beginning of that Chinese corruption story. And guess what? It also has some ties to the Governor of Georgia. Well, it's been quite a year, hasn't it? Well, it's actually been a total nightmare. And Christmas is a great time to reflect, especially on those who helped us get through it. Now, Noble Gold has put together this incredible collection of American Eagle 22 karat gold coins. So you can say a huge thank you to the people you love. Nothing says you're amazing quite like a 4 coin gold American Eagle limited edition proof set. Now look. It's nice. It looks beautiful. All these sorts of things. Let's talk about why you really need this to protect against inflation. When inflation comes, you need things you can touch, not just things you can see on a computer screen. That's why you need to buy two sets and you'll be gifted a free 5 ounce silver Apollo 11 coin. The Apollo 11 is valued over $300. In case you missed it, you'll receive the coin for free if you purchase this holiday offer. To learn more, call Noble Gold at 877-646-5347 and tell them Charlie Kirk sent you. Ask for Noble Gold holiday thank you offer by calling 877-646-5347 or visit noblegold investments.com Here we have pictures of Eric Swalwell, according to Axios.com Being very close to Fang Fang. Few seem to know Fang Fang on a personal level. Several acquaintances told Axios she seemed to come from wealth. She drove a white Mercedes, according to one official. But she never spoke about her family or her hometown. Swalwell and Fang Fang were very close. She hosted multiple fundraisers for Swalwell. Now, it says here that Fang was a bundler for Swalwell and other candidates. Now, mind you, it is illegal for foreign nationals to contribute to to US Politicians. There is no evidence that Fang Fang gave any money to Swalwell, but there is evidence that she was raising money for him. A bundler? Why was Eric Swalwell okay with a foreign national, a Chinese Communist Party citizen, being a bundler for his campaign? He was so close to Fang Fang that federal investigators had to come in and warn Eric Swalwell that he was dealing with a Chinese Communist Party spy. And do you remember the story that Dianne Feinstein had a Chinese Communist Party spy driver for nearly 15 years? Either 15 or 20 years. It looks as if the Chinese Communist Party has infiltrated the top levels of government all throughout the San Francisco political empire. Democrat political empire. The Bay Area political operative who witnessed Fang's fundraising on Swallow's behalf was concerned whether donors she brought in were legally permitted to donate. They found no evidence of illegal contributions. However, Fang facilitated the potential assignment of interns into Swalwell's office. Oh, so Fang Feng, the Chinese Communist Party spy, our greatest enemy. They're not an adversary. They're an enemy is staffing Capitol Hill via Eric Swalwell. Fang attended conferences for mayors across the United States, and Fang engaged in sexual or romantic relationships with at least two mayors of Midwestern cities. I have a feeling we're gonna find out who those mayors are very soon, because if they're Republican mayors, the New York Times will have them on the front page of the New York Times within a day. If they're Democrat mayors, citizen journalists will find within a week. That's just the way this stuff works. So if the New York Times finds any interest in this story, we'll find out who those mayors are very, very soon. So you see, that's exactly what happened with the pardon story. Remember that pardon story came out last week where they said that someone is trying to exchange money for a pardon in the Trump White House? I said, give the New York Times 48 Hours and their sources will tell them exactly who it is. And like clockwork came out. Actually ended up being a non story. The guy that was pushing for it is dead. A man that I knew of, Sanford Diller from San Francisco, ended up being a non story. At a 2014 conference in Washington, an older Midwestern mayor, quote from an obscure city, referred to Fang as his girlfriend and insisted the relationship was genuine, despite the clear age difference between Fang and himself. Fang also had a sexual encounter with an Ohio mayor in a car that was under electronic FBI surveillance, said one current US Official. When the mayor was asked why Fang was interested in him, Fang told him she wanted to improve her English. The same official said, and so what we are seeing is a concerted multidimensional effort from our greatest enemy to infiltrate our government. And yet Eric Swalwell went on television. Let's play cut 35. Eric Swalwell on CNN making accusations of Trump Russian collusion in May of 2017. Play tape.

Tape Clips (Various Commentators) (15:50)

There's a pattern here, John, on the classified and unclassified side of deep personal, political and financial ties that Donald Trump and people in his family and his businesses and on his campaign had with a foreign adversary in Russia that converged at the same time that Russia was interfering with our campaign. This is a complicated set of financial transactions, electronic messages, foreign witnesses. It's going to take time, not as fast as I'd like, but the American people deserve to hold any U.S. person accountable that was working with Russia.

Charlie Kirk (16:23)

There is a complicated campaign that goes to show Eric Swalwell, through electronic messages and wire transfers, had a financial dealing relationship with the Chinese Communist Party. Let's play cut 37 again.

Tape Clips (Various Commentators) (16:41)

Russia attacked our democracy this past election. And then they showed up to his Trump Tower, offered the evidence to his family. They received it. They didn't turn it down. Donald Trump for years had been working with the Russians. He brought people on his campaign who had ties to the Russians. We have seen a candidate and a president who has spoken in very flattering ways about Vladimir Putin. All of the arrows continue to point to a personal, political and financial relationship that Donald Trump had with the Russians.

Charlie Kirk (17:09)

Eric Swalwell is double a baseball for the Chinese Communist Party. The big leagues is Joe Biden the big man, as he's called in certain documents. If Joe Biden becomes President of the United States and we are unsuccessful in these legal challenges, in the rallies and the calls and the emails that you guys can participate in in every legal vote.com then the Chinese Communist Party will control our government. Play Ratcliffe. DNI Director Radcliffe on Tucker Carlson last evening. We've been warning about this for months. We knew that Joe Biden had serious ties. Not just ties, but he's an employee of the Chinese Communist Party. He works for them. He is their master. They are his master. He is subservient to Xi Jinping Playtape.

Tape Clips (Various Commentators) (18:02)

The most jarring part of the piece,

Charlie Kirk (18:04)

I thought, was your description of the massive ramp up of the Chinese military. And from your telling, not necessarily for defensive purposes, what do you think their aim is? Well, again, dominate militarily, technologically and economically. On the military front, they've already achieved having the largest navy of any country in the world. From a military force standpoint, the People's Republic of China has a military of 2 million. They want them to be the largest and they also want them to be the strongest, which is why they're engaged in what you referenced, which is called gene editing, which is literally trying to alter the DNA. Experimenting on DNA to make soldiers, sailors and airmen stronger and more powerful. That's horrifying. So you know who else did this in the attempt to create the evil Third Reich in the 1930s and 1940s? The National Socialist Workers Party military during their blitzkrieg attempts. When they pierced the Maginot Line into France, One of the ways they were able to do this is they gave almost pseudo heroin type injections to their infantry. It made their fighting force be able to go for a hundred hours straight when they invaded France, the French resistance and soldiers had never seen anything like it. And when they actually pierced the Maginot Line, they were able to make it all the way to the Atlantic Ocean in five days. Able to make it to Paris within three days. No one has ever seen the kind of pace of invasion. And so what the Chinese Communist Party is trying to do is very similar to what the National Socialist Workers Party did in the 1930s and 40s. However, the difference is the infiltration. You see, the Chinese Communist Party, they're doing things differently than the Soviet Union did and the National Socialist Workers Party did, or the Italian fascists. You see, their strategy for the last couple of decades has been to infiltrate, influence and take over our government from within. They know that we're the finest fighting force on the planet. They know that we are still the wealthiest country on the planet. They know that if they were to awaken a sleeping giant, we would rise in retaliation. So what has the Chinese Communist Party done? They have funded social justice warrior causes to weaken the spirit of America. They have funded environmentalist groups, which we discuss in our third hour with Congressman Lance Gooden today. And you guys can check that out on our podcast. They fund and support BLM Incorporated. Producer Connor, can we get the tweets? That goes to show the Chinese Communist Party tweeting out support of Black Lives Matter. You see, it was the Chinese Communist Party that, that was saying they support BLM Incorporated despite the Chinese Communist Party having well over 1 million Muslims in concentration camps. You see a lot of these groups say never again will we allow another holocaust. That's a lie. There's a holocaust that is basically happening right now in China. Not to mention the cyber warfare that ties into our election, the hacking, the small dollar donations that might have gone through Act Blue that members of Congress have been asking for answers, but our Department of Justice. You don't understand. They're really worried to make sure Lori Laughlin and her kids are actually getting into USC under the right standards. I don't think Lori Laughlin is a good person. Do I think that it took a multi hundred person unit from the Department of Justice to go try and solve the college admissions scandal? Probably more pressing issues like the Chinese Communist Party. Why did we have to send a 20 person platoon to go arrest Roger Stone, a non violent offender? Why did we have to go send 13 FBI agents to go look into Bubba Wallace? Because there was a rope hanging from his garage. Meanwhile, the Chinese Communist Party has seamlessly infiltrated every level of government without anyone stopping them except President Trump. President Trump is the only person to stand up against the sinister satanic forces of China. I use that word intentionally. What China is trying to do is dark. It is evil. They harvest organs. They try to genetically modify their human beings, as you heard DNI Director Ratcliffe talk about. And now we have growing evidence that Eric Swal was compromised by a Chinese Communist Party spy. Dianne Feinstein was driven around by a Chinese Communist Party party spy for 15 years. China has influenced our country in every single form and fashion. But it doesn't stop there. What if I told you that the governor of Georgia made a special visit to the Houston consulate? And I do want to nuance this. It is normal for governors to meet with foreign ambassadors to try to solicit business and try to solicit investment. That's normal. However, Brian Kemp is seen pictured multiple times with high level officials from the Chinese Communist Party. And let's not even start with Hunter Biden. The question is, who in our country is not compromised by the Chinese Communist Party? So you see tactically and strategically, the Chinese Communist Party, the ccp, instead of fighting us outright, they infiltrated us, they bought us. They said, what's your price? And Nixon and H.W. bush and all the globalists, they opened us up with bad trade deals with China and we imported piles and tons of plastic that we didn't need in a massive labor arbitrage which made us poorer, China wealthier, and now they have us over a barrel. September 5, 2020. From Daily Signal.com, this BLM Inc. Co founder and pro communist China group are partnering up. And this article goes to show that Alicia Garza is partnering with the Black Futures Lab with the Chinese Progressive Association. I wonder why. Hawaii Chaeng known for her aggressive pushback. I might be mispronouncing it. I mean, no offense. I'm just reading a tweet against foreign criticism of China's handling of the Chinese coronavirus outbreak. Uyghur concentration camps and brutal police violence against Hong Kong protesters join the international outcry over George Floyd's death by tweeting I can't breathe. Hua Cha in. Imagine yourself in a private meeting with Xi Jinping and you're in charge of global domination for China. Let's pretend that's your daily job. You go to work and your job is to destroy America. That's your job. You wake up every day and you think about, how do I destroy America? And you're in this meeting with Xi Jinping and Xi Jinping asks you, so how are you gonna do it? And you say, well, we are gonna help financially support the groups that are doing it for us. We're gonna get behind BLM Incorporated, we're gonna get behind the Sierra Club. We're gonna shut down America's energy independence. We're gonna open their borders and before we know it, they're not gonna make vitamin C in their country, which we don't. They're not gonna make anything of critical nature in their country, which they won't. Now mind you what's really interesting, and I learned this in the last week. Did you know that China has tariffs on us? You see the free market purists that have been dominating the Chamber of Commerce and the Republican Party to the last 20 years say free trade is wonderful. We have free trade with China. That's nonsense. Do you know that we are not allowed to import hogs or pork into China? China is the number one pork market in the world. They have a fascination with pork. Not sure why, just part of their culture. And we are not allowed, unless we have serious tariffs and pay a huge price to import Iowa hogs and Iowa pork into China. Because China is protecting the their farmers and their homegrown pork industry. But when it comes to steel, China has been allowed to dump steel into our markets for decades. Why is that? It's because the Chinese Communist Party has purchased the Chamber of Commerce, which is the Chamber of China. And they've infiltrated every single level of government. They've influenced the United States Senate, the US Congress, governor's mansions, and not to mention rare earth minerals, antibiotics. I could go through the entire list. And so the question in the next decade will be, are we serious enough about the Chinese threat within our country to actually be unafraid of being called the R word? You see, the Chinese Communist Party, they've invested heavily in these Confucius Institutes on college campuses. The greatest weapon for the Chinese Communist Party is, is not a thermonuclear weapon. It is political correctness. Cuz it does not allow us to call out the Chinese Communist Party. You see, the Chinese Communist Party have. They have developed the new atom bomb against America, political correctness. Because it makes us unable to criticize China without being called a racist. The new Manhattan Project is now being developed at Brown University. You know what it's called? Critical race theory. The next D day is not going to be an invasion of the Chinese Communist Party coming into Seattle or Oakland or Los Angeles. Instead, the invasion is through our institutions that handcuff our conversation from being able to speak. And it's not even a few decades away. It's actually a few weeks away. So here's another way 2020 has thrown us for a loop this Christmas season. Look, lots of my go to Gifts are non starters this year. I mean, for example, how are you supposed to give concert tickets? There's no Lollapalooza. I can't give, you know, tickets to go see the Chicago Bulls because there's no one showing up. And so what am I giving for Christmas? Raycon wireless earbuds. I am giving people them because they're the best with seamless Bluetooth pairing and a comfortable noise isolating fit. By the way, Mr. Producer is actually wearing them right now. He's wearing them and he's got the watch, he's got the whole portfolio and he's doing a great job. The audio is amazing, comparable to what you get from other premium brands. Except Raycon start at half the price. Who can beat that? Best of all, these are people that you give the gifts. They can use them for calls or music. Or if they don't want to hear you anymore because you're making too much sense politically, they can tune out and they can listen to the Charlie Kirk show as well with raycon. So look, buyraycon.com Kirk they're being very generous this Christmas season, so they're offering my listeners 15% off. Buyraycon.com Kirk it's buyraycon.com Kirk so now that we've established the obvious Chinese Communist Party threat, what's happening with these lawsuits? Can we reverse this election? There's actually some good momentum that I want to share with you. I want to start with this article here. Texas is suing Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania and Wisconsin saying that there are so many instances of election fraud that their own electoral votes have now been disenfranchised. So there's a lot of momentum, everybody. And that momentum is because of you. You guys have helped keep the phone calls going, the rallies going, the public support going, and the pressure going. And considering the current composition of the U.S. supreme Court, we have Amy, Coney, Barrett, we have Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. No matter what Roberts wants to do, we have five fair justices on the US Supreme Court thanks to President Donald Trump and thanks to his commitment to building a strong judiciary. And so the question is this, will we be able to prove in court the amounts of irregularities? Because I think a lot of us throw around this term evidence. And yes, there is evidence. The question is, how do we persuade a court of this? And most importantly, how do we persuade a liberal judge of this? Because overturning an election, even if that election is fraudulent and flawed, we need to be very specific of how we argue these cases. Sidney Powell's lawsuit has just been thrown out of Georgia, which was considered to be the Kraken lawsuit. And so it's not about Sidney Powell. It's just in order to meet the threshold and the standard of being able to have a lawsuit proceed in a court of law, there needs to be not just whistleblower evidence. There needs to be very specific types of thoroughly vetted, presentable evidence. I asked producer Andrew to join us. He has been following the legal fights and all of the issues around voter fraud and what is happening in the courts very closely. And I wanted to make sure that we got everything as it happens in real time. What is now happening with Texas suing the other states?

Andrew (31:43)

Right. So Texas, this has been sort of the big story of the morning. God bless Texas was trending on Twitter because I think, you know, a lot of the base is coming out and said, finally, somebody with some muscle is getting behind this fight. So I'm reading right here from Breitbart. The state of Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the US Supreme Court shortly before midnight on Monday challenging the election procedure in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on the grounds that they violate the Constitution. So one of the first questions that you should probably think in this instance is, well, why is this just now happening? And why can they go straight to the Supreme Court? Because you. You might know that Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis have been arguing state by state. They've been holding these hearings with state legislatures, and then meanwhile, every time their cases get dismissed at a lower court, they instantly appeal and they say, good, we wanted to get that out of the way quickly. We're going to the Supreme Court. Okay, but here you got the state of Texas that goes immediately to the Supreme Court. So how did they do that? Well, Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article 3 provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects. It is meaning the Supreme Court is the court of first impressions on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states. So that is the kicker. It's actually brilliant what the state of Texas has done here. So it's a maneuver, it's a legal maneuver that. That gets around all of these lower courts and takes it straight to the highest court in the land, where technically we have sort of like a five and a half to three and a half majority and a half to.

Charlie Kirk (33:26)

But also. Andrew, walk us through. So there are thousands and thousands and thousands of cases that try to get

Andrew (33:31)

to the Supreme Court every year. There's 8,000 cases on average, on average. And they take about 80. So it's less than 1% of cases get to the Supreme Court. So by having the. The might of Texas. And you've got a lot of friends there that probably are behind some of this action.

Charlie Kirk (33:49)

Charlie, I know a lot of people that are working very hard on this and turning point action as well. Working very hard, yeah.

Andrew (33:56)

So point is, Texas argues that these states violated the electors clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislature. So this ties back to our previous conversation of what's going on in Pennsylvania. In Pennsylvania, you had a heavily Democratic State Supreme Court, 5:2, Democrat to Republican, essentially gut Act 77. Now, Act 77, they're actually arguing is unconstitutional anyways because you have to change state election laws at the constitutional level, not at a law level. That's sort of a nuance there. Nevertheless, you had the state Supreme Court gut that law and make a bad thing worse. And they're arguing that that same thing happened in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. So Texas is going straight to the top. Texas, God bless Texas. Trending on Twitter. Then they removed it. Big conspiracy theory on Twitter this morning. But Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors. And this is where sort of all of these disparate pieces come together. Right. You've seen Jenna Ellis arguing this as well, that states have every right to appoint their electors. We had Tyler Bowyer on the program who's the COO of Turning Point.

Charlie Kirk (35:18)

Listed in a lawsuit.

Andrew (35:19)

Yeah, listed in a lawsuit. It's actually the Sidney Powell lawsuit here in Arizona. But he's alongside the other 10 electors. The state of Arizona has 11 electors, 11 electoral votes. But they're saying, hey, just because there's too much fraudulent activity, there's too many irregularities, you have to let the state legislatures, which are Republican controlled, appoint their own electors.

Charlie Kirk (35:44)

According to the American Psychological association, chronic stress is linked to the six leading causes of death. Stress has been implicated in heart issues, inflammation, obesity, mental illness, and more. Most people think of stress as caused by things like work, traffic, tense relationships, you know, all the list. So they focus on what they hope are solutions, such as meditation or going to the spa. But it doesn't fix the problem. To fight stress, proper nutrition is frequently overlooked. I personally have been taking magnesium for its health benefits. I take it every night. This is a mineral that helps most people and they don't even know it. Magnesium is the body's master mineral. Powerful over 300 critical reactions, including detoxification, fat metabolism, energy stress, even digestion is influenced by the presence of magnesium. If your body is giving you warning signs, why don't you listen to it? There's a new magnesium product called Magnesium Breakthrough. It's the ultimate magnesium supplement. Easily the best I've ever seen or experienced. Believe it or not, I actually have a lot of experience with magnesium. All seven forms of this mineral. The Charlie Kirk show is able to arrange for a special batch of it to to be set aside for our audience this holiday. And I guarantee it's the best deal available on this product. Seriously. With volume discounts combined with our custom 10% coupon code KIRK10, you can save up to 40% off select packages of Magnesium Breakthrough. That's an amazing value. And I promise that the deal is only available on the specific website buyoptimizers.com Kirk. You won't find that deal on Amazon or even the company's own website. Magnesium Breakthrough is the most effective magnesium supplement I've ever tried. Say goodbye to having to buy seven different bottles of magnesium to get the complete dose. Go to buyoptimizers.com kirk and use the coupon code KIRK10 to save up to 40% off select packages. Get the most full spectrum and effective magnesium product ever at the best price today.

Andrew (37:48)

So this is from Heather Cagle who is actually from Politico. She says the inaugural committee, which Charlie and I both had to Google, it's

Charlie Kirk (37:58)

basically like, it's like the prom planning committee.

Andrew (38:00)

It's the party committee in Washington. The inaugural committee fails to pass simple resolution essentially acknowledging Biden as President elect after all. Republicans opposed. Hoyer, Democrat offered the resolution which failed 3 to 3. Other committee members are House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, minority leader Kevin McCarthy, Mitch McConnell, Senator Blunt and Klobuchar. So this is like actually heavy hitters.

Charlie Kirk (38:26)

So they can't order catering.

Andrew (38:27)

So they basically. Yeah, they can't. They can't. And I mean it's, you know, I don't think they're saying the resolution was very basic. Per folks with knowledge, it would have notified American people that Congress is preparing for inauguration of Biden and Harris in coordination with health experts as we observe this transition of power. I mean, it's very basic, perfunctory sort of Washington bureaucratic nonsense. But nevertheless, three Republicans, including McCarthy, McConnell and Blunt said.

Charlie Kirk (38:52)

So it's not a binding resolution. Basically, no, but it's. They can't begin to order the curtains for the Biden inauguration, basically.

Andrew (39:00)

Exactly. Which is, hey, there you Go. It hasn't been.

Charlie Kirk (39:03)

And it shows that Republican leadership is not backing down is what it shows.

Andrew (39:06)

Yeah. I mean, and here's really the argument. Right. So if you're out in the base and I've seen this a lot and I think it's actually something interesting for you to discuss, but a lot of people are saying, oh, this is all just to make the bass happy. Right. So we talked about Erik Erickson yesterday. One of his main frustrations in this time we're in is he says, oh, all these people that know better are just trying to make the bass happy. They're just doing the song and dance so they don't get a no, that's

Charlie Kirk (39:33)

actually not a gay. That's not at all what we're doing.

Andrew (39:34)

Yeah, exactly.

Charlie Kirk (39:35)

We actually know and see and believe that there is widespread and real voter fraud.

Andrew (39:40)

Yeah.

Charlie Kirk (39:40)

Well, there's a great piece here that we picked up from the Epoch Times. The move on chorus needs to deal with the facts of the election. Andrew, do you want to walk through that?

Andrew (39:48)

Yeah. I mean this is a. It's a response to Ross. I always say his name wrong. Duthat. But it's not how you pronounce it. Ross Dutho, some French name. Yeah. I don't know. He's basically. He's actually a brilliant, brilliant guy. I've read some of his books. I should know how to pronounce his last name as a result. Nevertheless, he's friends with the kind of David French types and the smarter than thou conservatives. This piece calls him a faux conservative at the New York Times. So he's a columnist at the New York Times, very smart guy. But he's basically been incredibly critical of Donald Trump as you would predict. But he wrote a piece of

Sidney Powell (40:34)

in

Andrew (40:34)

the New York Times, it says, why do so many Americans think that the election was stolen? And I think for him it was this sort of good faith effort to say, hey guys, take this seriously. We have a problem here. There's a lot of people that don't think this election was on the up and up. And so this piece basically says, in brief, this is a quote from it. I'd like to introduce Ross to that, to Occam's razor and what Occam's razor is. In short, all things being equal, the simplest and most forthright explanation is often the correct one. In the present case, the correct answer to Ross question is why do so many Americans think the election was stolen? Is this because it was? And I think it's a wonderful summation of Everything that we've been doing for weeks on this show is just to say this does not pass the eye test, the smell test or anything.

Charlie Kirk (41:35)

Just how normal people knew instinctively that their government was not being run correctly for the last 30 or 40 years. And President Trump represented a disruption and a hurricane that they could send to D.C. they know that this election was completely fraudulent. And so what's really interesting is how Democrats and how dark money groups are responding to this. So we were watching some cable TV this morning, really early, prepping for this show, going through all these articles, going through kind of what's happening in the news cycle, making phone calls to some of our sources inside, and this ad popped up and I couldn't really believe it. And I said, who's running this ad? And again, this is not my commentary here is not really about Bill Barr. I have plenty of complaints about Bill Barr, but it's this pro Bill Bar advertisement that all of a sudden is running on tv. Listen and watch this very carefully. And then let's kind of dive deep into what this really means. Why is the left running? Why are they running these ads? Play tape. Bill Barr, President Trump's Attorney General and loyal ally, America's top prosecutor and a champion of conservative values. Now, when it comes to the November

Tape Clips (Various Commentators) (42:39)

election, Bill Barr has said he, quote, has not seen fraud on a scale

Charlie Kirk (42:44)

that could have affected a different outcome. America has spoken.

Tape Clips (Various Commentators) (42:48)

The election was fair, the results accurate. Republicans and Democrats were elected to office, offices up and down the ballot.

Charlie Kirk (42:55)

It's time to move forward together. No one asked you to run that ad. No, I mean, I thought that everything's fine. You got the electors seated. You have the New York Times that says everything's gonna be fine. By the way, that pro Bill Bar ad is run by the Progressive State Leaders Committee, some left wing super pac. Why are they all of a sudden protesting so much, Andrew?

Andrew (43:19)

Well, I think it's because different polls are out there stating different percentages. But Cruz last night when he was speaking with Hannity, quoted that 39%, let's just say 40% of Americans think this election was stolen or that there was fraudulent activity happening. So they know that there's a lot of Americans, millions of Americans that are onto it. They know. And I think that's the famous Hamlet quote from before. The lady doth protest too much. Methinks. Methinks.

Charlie Kirk (43:52)

Which is the old Shakespeare quote.

Andrew (43:54)

Yeah. So that's what's really going on. And there's two scenarios. There's two possibilities here, right? One is they know they're guilty and they're trying to get out ahead of it and say, oh come on guys, even Bill Barr is saying this by a progressive group. Yeah. And by the way, and on Fox, which strange. So listen, I think that's one possibility that they know they're caught. The other possibility is the less conspiratorial, I would say, or the more gracious one is that they're trying to bring the country together, unity, build back better, all of that stuff, which I think.

Charlie Kirk (44:33)

Well, but what's so stunning about this is you would only run that ad, which is a multi hundred thousand if not multi million dollar ad buy if you didn't think there was something to these voter integrity fights that we're doing. It's the only reason you would run an ad like that.

Andrew (44:47)

I think they know that this election is so tainted and is so historically awful in the way that we have expanded the voter rolls, we've expanded mail in balloting, which again a bipartisan commission in 2005 chaired by former president Jimmy Carter said it is. Mail in balloting is the most presents the largest opportunity for voter fraud of all the different forms of voting that you can have. So we know that this election, just based on those two points, most mail in balloting in history, bipartisan commission says it's the type of voting with the most fraud. We know that this was a historically unprecedented election in the way that we ran it. We also know that these state legislatures, which is exactly what Texas is alleging, have completely gutted all the safeguards put in place by the state constitutions and by normal law abiding citizens to protect our elections. We know this is historically bad. They know it. They know that this is tainted. They know that they do not have a mandate to run this country because we do not trust them. We don't believe what they're telling us. This sit down, shut up, take it, move on. Chorus needs to acknowledge the fact that we're not gonna sit down and shut up. And that's why we salute Ted Cruz. We salute the state of Texas. God bless Texas. Because if we do not believe that this is true, if we do not believe the results of this election, then we don't have a republic. There is no mandate to lead. This will be four years of hell.

Charlie Kirk (46:16)

Well, and so the Progressive State leaders Committee advocates for progressive policies that promote fairness, justice and equity. They're the ones that are running pro bill bar advertisements on Fox News trying to tell you that there is no voter fraud. Don't look here. Listen. The only Reason they would be doing this is because there is voter fraud, because they did pull off a con job, they did steal this election, and they are trying to stop public opinion and they want to stop your grassroots enthusiasm. So you know what? You should take this. As you're getting close, they're getting nervous, they're getting anxious that you're getting close to the grand prize, which very well might be certain states saying, well, we are not going to seat our electors.

Andrew (47:00)

Exactly. This may feel. I mean, I've talked to a lot of people off air and behind the scenes, and they say, oh, Andrew, this is a long shot of long shots. This is a long shot of long shots. And I constantly remind them and I say, okay, sure, but, you know, a long shot didn't stop us from going to the moon. It didn't stop. We didn't stop a lot of great things from happening in history. So here's the point. You've got a very small number of states separated by a very small number of votes, and you've got millions of ballots that are in question. So when you actually, when you think about it, how many votes are we down BY In Wisconsin? 20.

Charlie Kirk (47:38)

20,000.

Andrew (47:38)

How many in Wisconsin?

Charlie Kirk (47:39)

11,000. In Arizona?

Andrew (47:40)

12 and 11. You take those three states, that's 40,000 votes, and you've got a different president. That's right.

Charlie Kirk (47:48)

And at least you have 270. They don't get the 270 goes to the House of Representatives. We win that and then Trump serves four more years. We need one state to break. That's what we need, one state.

Andrew (48:00)

When you try and present this as like, oh, we're all being a bunch of kooks and this is crazy. And this is a long shot, guys, move on, get over it. Like, this is, you know, you're just doing this to appease the bait. No, none of that is true. This is 40,000 votes separating Donald Trump from the White House. And it's an unprecedented election. We have never held an election like this. Never, ever, ever, ever, ever. And so, and you take a state like Florida that took 20 years to get absentee balloting, right? They were voting for, like, days leading up to election day. So we had all this wonderful early voting data out of Florida. We had all these same.

Charlie Kirk (48:38)

Florida knows how to run an election.

Andrew (48:39)

And then meanwhile, you contrast that with the same states that are getting sued by the state of Texas.

Charlie Kirk (48:44)

Well, Texas also ran a pretty good election, I have to say.

Andrew (48:46)

I mean. Yeah, And Texas, by the way, was the only state that, well, maybe not the only state, but the very high profile state that rejected Dominion voting systems because it was, you know, they three times. Yeah. There was not sufficient security measures in place.

Charlie Kirk (48:59)

And by the way, Donald Trump won Texas by six points despite all the polls saying that he was gonna lose Texas.

Andrew (49:05)

Yeah, I mean, I'd love to win Texas by 15 points, but nevertheless got a Dallas problem.

Charlie Kirk (49:10)

We're fix it long term. But six points is pretty convincing.

Andrew (49:13)

Super convincing. And we made gains in the state House level there.

Charlie Kirk (49:16)

Rio Grande Valley.

Andrew (49:17)

Rio Grande Valley, which we hadn't won in a century. So, yeah, I mean, listen, we're building a stronger, bigger, broader coalition. Trump himself got 11 million more votes. Right.

Charlie Kirk (49:27)

Andrew, you brought up a great point. If you can all of a sudden prove 12 to 14,000 votes of fraud in Arizona and then, and I think there's plenty more than that, Wisconsin, Georgia, one or two. You gotta get a couple of these states to start to break. Andrew, give us the update on the Sidney Powell lawsuit in Georgia. Let's play Sidney Powell and then Andrew, you can fill in the G. Sounds good. Sidney Powell.

Sidney Powell (49:46)

The American people have been defrauded from their lawful votes in this election, and that cannot stand.

Charlie Kirk (49:54)

So totally agree.

Andrew (49:57)

Let's talk about what happened today in that Georgia courtroom. A defeat.

Charlie Kirk (50:02)

Not the first one.

Andrew (50:03)

This happens in the process, but you got shut down today, at least in. In federal court.

Charlie Kirk (50:08)

Can you tell us about what happened?

Sidney Powell (50:10)

Yes, we were there for a hearing on motions to dismiss filed by every organization that you can imagine, even as interveners, where they had no place to be in our case. But the DNC and Perkins Coy law firm and everyone aligned on the left decided to file briefs in our case, and the court let them do that. And they argued against our complaint that alleges all the election fraud and multiple federal constitutional claims that arise from that that invalidated the votes of hundreds of thousands of Georgians who voted for President Trump. Some didn't have their votes counted. Some had their votes eradicated effectively by fraudulent ballots. The court wouldn't pay any attention to any of it. It was obvious the judge had made up his mind before he hit the bench. And he read from prepared notes when he granted the motion to dismiss. So we had oral argument, but I would say it was essentially meaningless except to the extent the public got to hear another federal judicial proceeding that didn't turn out the way it should have.

Charlie Kirk (51:18)

So, Sydney, can you give us a

Andrew (51:19)

little bit of a path forward? What happens next? We have had some difficulties in court, as you know. You still have the fire.

Charlie Kirk (51:27)

A lot of folks have faith, but the Electoral College is meeting next week.

Andrew (51:31)

So what's, how's this going to play out?

Sidney Powell (51:34)

Well, we're going to proceed immediately with an emergency appeal and we expect to get relief in the Supreme Court.

Charlie Kirk (51:42)

And so what Sidney was mentioning there, which is really interesting, is that these very expensive and elite law firms, Perkins Coy, they represent all the tech companies,

Andrew (51:52)

Facebook, just so you know, that's Facebook's law firm. They have offices all around the country.

Charlie Kirk (51:57)

$2,000 an hour type law firm.

Andrew (51:59)

Yeah, this is Democrat, deeply entrenched Democrat establishment legal legal teams.

Charlie Kirk (52:07)

And they have well over a thousand partners or attorneys. It's big crazy. It's one of the biggest law firms. So what she just said is they showed up uninterrupted.

Andrew (52:16)

Uninvited.

Charlie Kirk (52:17)

I'm sorry, uninvited.

Andrew (52:19)

And I think that's what it means is that behind the scenes you've got powerful players that are basically saying to all of their high priced attorneys and their most powerful allies in this space, they're saying, hey, get behind this. Shut this down. Again, the lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Charlie Kirk (52:36)

If it was such a bad case, why is all of a sudden Perkins Coin showing up?

Andrew (52:39)

This is a joke. If this is a joke, why?

Charlie Kirk (52:41)

Oh, Dominion. There's nothing to it. Venezuelan ties. Why is Perkins coy, with their $2,000 an hour legal billings, showing up in Georgia submitting briefs? Yeah, it shouldn't have been allowed anyway.

Andrew (52:56)

Yeah, exactly. Well, so this is what's interesting about this judge's rationale for dismissing this says. Additionally, I find that the plaintiffs waited too long to file this suit. Their primary complaint involves the Dominion ballot marking devices. They say those machines are susceptible to fraud. There is no reason they could not have followed the Administrative Procedure act to the rulemaking authority that had been exercised by the Secretary of State. This suit could have been filed months ago at the time these machines were adopted. Well, of course, that is a heck of a thing to say. I mean, you know, he's saying months ago, when these suspicion.

Charlie Kirk (53:36)

Months ago?

Andrew (53:36)

Yeah, months ago, nobody knew what Dominion was. Nobody knew what ESS was. Nobody knew what Smartmatic was. Nobody knew what Seidel was. I mean, that's just.

Charlie Kirk (53:44)

That's a poor argument.

Andrew (53:45)

It's a poor argument. And he says, furthermore, that the courts have convincingly held these types of cases are not properly before federal courts. Well, so these are state elections. So, I mean, listen, this is legal maneuvering. It's dismissive. Sidney Powell's right to Appeal in which she's going to do asap.

Charlie Kirk (54:04)

Does it make sense that the company who controls half of online retail eavesdrops on your private conversations at home? What about the idea that a Single company controls 90% of search results, runs your email service, and gets to track everything you do on your smartphone? Big tech and big data. They're more powerful than most countries are, and they profit by exploiting your personal data. It's time to put a layer of protection between your online activity and these tech juggernauts. And that's why I use ExpressVPN. Look, they're spying on you right now. We talk about this a lot on the Charlie Kirk Show. Do you want to protect yourself from spying thieves? Then it's ExpressVPN. Think about how much of your life is on the Internet. Sadly, every site you visit, video you watch, and message you send gets tracked and data mined. But when you run ExpressVPN on your device, the software hides your IP address, something big tech can use to personally identify you. This is camouflage, okay? This is the invisibility cloak, Harry Potter style, to hide yourself from ExpressVPN. Express VPN also encrypts 100% of your Internet data to keep you safe from hackers and eavesdroppers on your network. And ExpressVPN does all this without slowing your connection. That's why it's rated the number one VPN service by CNET and Wired. What I like most about ExpressVPN, and I use it every day, you download the app on your phone, one button, you're protected. So stop handing over all your personal data to Big Tech, the monopoly that we talk about a lot on this program. So do something about it. Don't just complain. Protect yourself. It's ExpressVPN, the only VPN I trust. ExpressVPN.com Charlie E x p r e s s vpn.com Charlie to get three extra free months free, go to ExpressVPN.com Charlie right now to learn more. Andrew, do you want to keep on building that out?

Andrew (55:51)

Yeah, I mean, it's just. I just find it really absurd that they're basically saying, how come you didn't file your complaints about Dominion before? I bet Sidney Powell didn't even know Dominion was a thing. She's constantly said over and over again, she's shocked at what she's uncovered. She had no idea. How did these things get through? How come the ownership alone of Dominion voting system is so questionable? And this is not conspiracy theories. It does go back to Venezuela. And Hugo Chavez basically became a dictator, but he won election again and again and again in these very convincing landslide victories where he was expected to lose on a few of those occasions. And they essentially inverted the results. And it's a wild thing when you go to a place like Miami and Florida and you meet all these Venezuelans that have fled. They're Venezuelan exiles living in the United States. I mean, this is one of the reasons why Florida went so convincingly for the president is because they were fleeing this banana republic. No institutional integrity systems that we have in South America now.

Charlie Kirk (57:08)

We use their voting system.

Andrew (57:09)

Yeah, and we use their voting system. I mean, this is not conspiratorial. We have CNN clips that confirm this. And so for this judge to say, well, why didn't you file this back then? Nobody knew any of this except for the people that probably pulled it off. Right now, listen, I don't know that votes were getting switched. I can tell you that very reputable people, including Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren, are on the record, just as I think in 2019, complaining that these systems were vulnerable to cyber threats.

Charlie Kirk (57:43)

That's back when the left used to care about this.

Andrew (57:45)

And that was back before. If that were true, it would hurt them. But now they don't want to talk about it because their guy got in. Nothing to see here. Move on. But before, they were actually saying, hey, there's reasonable reason to be to be suspicious here about these voting systems. So, anyways, I think it's a really valid question.

Charlie Kirk (58:08)

Okay, do you want to walk us through this Texas lawsuit? Because a lot of people are asking us about that.

Andrew (58:12)

Let's do it. Freedomarliekirk.com so, State of Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the US Supreme Court shortly before midnight on Monday challenging the election procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on the grounds that they violate the Constitution. So one of the first things that we need to explain in this instance is how did Texas get to the Supreme Court when other litigators like Jenna Ellis and Rudy Giuliani have been essentially barnstorming the nation in all of these six battlegrounds. Yeah. And they've had their cases dismissed. And what they do instantly is they appeal. And you'll often hear somebody like Jenna Ellis say, hey, thanks for turning us down quickly. That's the main thing. We knew you were gonna turn us down. We're on our way to the Supreme Court. So what's so genius about what happened today with Texas and why it's a big deal? Why this story On Breitbart that I'm reading from by Joel Pollack, who's a friend of the show, why it has 20,000 comments right now, which is a lot, is that they found a loophole, essentially a legal maneuver that got them right to the top of the food chain here, which is the Supreme Court. So here's the kicker of how they were able to do this. Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article 3 provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states. So that's the kicker. Article 3 states that because it's a dispute between two states. In this instance, we're talking about Texas versus Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, with. So they have to determine it because it's two states going back to back here, going up against each other.

Charlie Kirk (60:00)

That's brilliant.

Andrew (60:00)

Yeah, it's super smart.

Charlie Kirk (60:02)

So I should text Landry, who's the Attorney General of Louisiana, to do the same thing.

Andrew (60:07)

Bring it on.

Charlie Kirk (60:08)

I'm gonna do that.

Andrew (60:09)

All of them. You know, Phil Klein, he's the former of Kansas, but I'm sure he knows all of them. He should be calling them and telling them to do the same thing.

Charlie Kirk (60:16)

Why is the Republican association of Attorney Generals not on this?

Andrew (60:20)

Maybe they are. I mean, maybe that's where the start.

Charlie Kirk (60:23)

I know Ken Paxton. He's a cowboy. Yeah, he's definitely doing this. And there's a lot of people that are freaking out for good reason.

Andrew (60:28)

Yeah, Ken Paxton's American hero, in my opinion. So he was the one, by the way, just as an aside, that took all that heat during COVID that said, I would rather take.

Charlie Kirk (60:38)

No, it was Dan Patrick.

Andrew (60:39)

Oh, is it two guys?

Charlie Kirk (60:40)

Lieutenant Governor of Texas.

Andrew (60:41)

Yeah, you're right. It was two guys. Okay, so. But that was still a good quote. He took a lot of flack for saying he wanted his kids to live free in the state, in this country, even if that meant he had a greater risk of contracting Covid. Anyway, so these are the merits of the case. So Texas is arguing that Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin violate the Constitution because they violated the electors clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Okay. So in the Constitution, the electors clause grants state legislatures the authority to do these sorts of things. Right. So to change election laws at the state level, something Charlie always says and something we repeat, it's a mantra here. The United States was formed by the states, not the other way around.

Charlie Kirk (61:34)

The United States, the states Created the federal government.

Andrew (61:36)

Yes, exactly.

Charlie Kirk (61:37)

The federal government did not create the states.

Andrew (61:38)

So embedded all over the Constitution are little clauses like the electors clause, which says the states have the power. Each state is not actually electing, is not sending millions of votes to the federal government to pick a president.

Charlie Kirk (61:52)

They elect human beings.

Andrew (61:53)

They elect human beings who are electors. Tyler Bowyer is an elector in the Senate.

Charlie Kirk (61:57)

Our COO at Turning Point Action.

Andrew (61:58)

Exactly.

Charlie Kirk (61:59)

Turning Point usa.

Andrew (61:59)

Turning Point usa. He was here in this seat where I'm sitting yesterday, explaining this because he's named in a lawsuit here in Arizona. So states appoint electors which then pick the president based on the Electoral College. You have to get 270 or more to win. That's what this is, 270 people. So that's a provision within the Constitution that is essentially empowering officials at the state level, as opposed to the federal level, to be directly involved in the selection of a president. And so what they're saying is that these states violated it, that they took the power out of the legislature's hands, the state legislature's hands, and they gave it to a Supreme Court in the instance of Pennsylvania, which has a 5 to 2 democrat majority. So it's a completely partisan Supreme Court in Pennsylvania, Just highly partisan, five to two. If you're taking a case that is argued by Republicans in Pennsylvania, that chance, it's not gonna happen. You're five to two, you're out. And that's what happened. Pennsylvania Act 77 was a law that was passed in a bipartisan fashion and in 2019 that allowed for no excuse mail in voting. What that means is I can request an absentee ballot without an excuse. I don't need an excuse. I don't need to say that I'm bedridden. I don't need to say that I'm gonna be living in France. I can just say, hey, I want one. Okay, great. But it did have certain provisions and it had certain deadlines and it had certain safeguards. What happened in that instance was that the Supreme Court gutted it in a case. They gutted all those provisions because of COVID So they used Covid. And this is what we've seen all across the country. This is why this, this is an issue. This is why it's an issue at all. This election is historically out of, like, it's just terrible.

Charlie Kirk (63:45)

There's no precedent.

Andrew (63:46)

There's no precedent. There's no safeguards. The laws and the safeguards have been gutted. This is why we keep seeing across the country rejection rates for absentee ballots and mail in ballots plummet. So in the past year, for example, I think in Pennsylvania was 3% rejection rate. Now it's 0.3%. So how do we go, how did we accept so many more ballots, even though there's millions more being cast? And another thing we know is that when ballots are cast by newcomers to the absentee system, they get rejected at a greater rate because it's confusing. You miss certain things, you read the instructions wrong, whatever it might be. And yet we have this phenomenon happening all over the country. So Texas is saying these states have violated the Constitution and the Constitution's equal protection clause. So the equal protection clause, and I know you know a decent amount about this, but it's essentially a lot of the wonks behind the scenes are arguing that it's actually the equal protection clause. If Trump is going to overturn this election, it might be because of the equal protection clause. That might actually be the strongest legal footing he has to stand on.

Charlie Kirk (64:50)

And so some of you guys are asking, well, why is it that every one of these states have different ways of doing things? Again, the Constitution actually calls for a state based system to elect our president. It might frustrate you, but if we had a federal system, it could very well be worse. Yeah, There would be no, there would be no Texas or Florida that would be able to do it the correct way and go about it the right way.

Andrew (65:11)

There would be no Texas or Florida that would be able to sue the federal government or take these cases to the, to the Supreme Court.

Charlie Kirk (65:17)

Well, the brilliance of Ken Paxton and the brilliant of Ken Paxton is Texas suing Georgia, as you mentioned, Article 3, and the precedent is the only way to remedy state conflicts. I think this was decided first in the Commerce clause or it was either Marbury v. Madison, it was one of the first lawsuits, consequential lawsuits. When you have state conflicts, which actually does not happen very often, by the way, it goes immediately to the United States Supreme Court. Is that right?

Andrew (65:45)

Yeah, yeah. Because of Article 3, which says the court of first impressions.

Charlie Kirk (65:49)

I don't think it was Marbury versus Madison was the national Bank.

Andrew (65:51)

I think, nevertheless, this is what the Texas lawsuit says. This is pulling a select from their lawsuit. Certain officials in the defendant states, again, those defendant states are Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Certain officials presented the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail and voting. The defendant states flooded their citizenry with tens of millions of ballot applications and ballots in derogation of statutory controls as to how they are Lawfully received, evaluated and counted. Whether well intentioned or not. These unconstitutional acts had the same uniform effect. They made the 2020 election less secure in the defendant states. So remember when people tell you that this was the most secure election in American history and when the social media platforms and you posted about it and they said this is contested, this was the safest election. Mail in balloting is very secure. No, no, it's objectively not as secure. It's objectively less secure. And again we always go back to that bipartisan commission, election commission chaired by former president Jimmy Carter, that said mail in balloting is the least secure way to vote. So this is essentially what this lawsuit is hinging on. It's saying this was the least secure election in those defendant states. Those changes are inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non legislative entities, again that don't have the power to do so. Yet they did it anyways because of the pandemic. So so much of 2020 you can relate back to this pandemic. I feel like the only major piece of this year's news that wasn't like about the pandemic was Soleimani. Like it was like Soleimani was the big news story was January. And then everything else has been pandemic.

Charlie Kirk (67:49)

But then there's race riots too.

Andrew (67:50)

No, that's pandemic. That was pent up pandemic energy. You locked up a whole people for months and months and months and then it just took, you know, they didn't have jobs, they didn't have fun, they didn't have outlets outdoors. You locked down their kids playgrounds. And then all of a sudden you give them one excuse to write and guess what they're gonna do?

Charlie Kirk (68:12)

They're gonna write. So the decision I was thinking of that probably applies to this most is McCullough v. Maryland, which again Marbur versus Madison, all these M's, Marbur versus Madison, McCulloch versus Maryland, which was the Supreme Court decision that defined the scope of the United States Congress's legislative power in relates to state legislature. So basically the dispute, and again I'm reading here from an academic paper, is basically the national bank and a tax on the state of Maryland imposed on it. And in the ruling the Supreme Court established the necessary and proper clause which gives the federal government certain implied powers that are not necessarily explicitly enumerated in the Constitution. And this is the big part, that the federal government is supreme over the states. And so states ability to interfere with the federal government is limited. Therefore the states, all of A sudden can't say, well, this is where the precedent for the Civil Rights act and all this came in. But more than that, the US Supreme Court can say to Georgia, you're not allowed to all of a sudden violate the equal protection clause just because you're Georgia.

Andrew (69:17)

Yeah. So there is a limit to state sovereignty. And we see this also with items like immigration. Right. Immigration is one of those buckets that has been argued in courts that necessarily.

Charlie Kirk (69:28)

Which I think this is wrongly.

Andrew (69:30)

Well, yeah, but it's necessarily federal because we have to be able to trust the people traveling within state boundaries that they have entered the country legally, which requires a federal oversight. Army, Navy, these types of things also have federal oversight. So there's legal maneuvering, there's nuance with different issues. But this is one particular issue, as you just pointed out, where the Supreme Court is sovereign. It controls ultimately, it's the arbiter of the situation.

Charlie Kirk (69:59)

There's a Latin term for this. I'm gonna think of it. It's. It might be stera, deceit, decisis, something like that. That's about right. It sounds right. Anyway, again, sounds good. My Latin and my Supreme Court a little bit rusty. Okay. Article three is not stere decisis. Yeah, I think that's right. I think that's right. Yeah, I think that's right. So you guys can email us your questions. Freedomcharlicirk.com I want to ask you this one. Courtney says this. Isn't it part of the genius in the lawsuit that these states will have no protection under the Safe Harbor Act. Quote, under the Electoral Count act of 1887, Congress must count the electoral votes from states that choose their electors and resolve any legal disputes over the choice by the act's deadline.

Andrew (70:41)

Yeah. So this is what we're dealing with in Pennsylvania, and this is why. What happened with Alito? So for those of you who don't know, Alito had originally, again, different Supreme Court justices are sort of appointed to different states to handle emergency filings. Right. So in this instance, you had Parnell and Kelly file an emergency brief before asking for emergency relief to the Supreme Court. And Alito was the person, is the justice in charge of Pennsylvania. So he was the one that said, okay, sure, I'm gonna set a deadline of December 9th originally that says Governor Wolf and the state of Pennsylvania have to present their defense of why they think this case has no merit by December 9th. Well, then he moved it up to December 8th. And the rationale largely, is this safe harbor idea. Right. So the safe harbor Essentially says that these states are gonna pick their electors, assuming there is no pending legal disputes. Okay, well, on the 9th, they would have picked them. There wouldn't have been. There would have been no pending legal disputes. Right. But on the 8th, if you get this done and Alito says, actually, I'm gonna hear the case at the Supreme Court, I'm gonna grant you emergency relief. Let's have it in front of the full court. Well, then there's still pending legal challenges to picking the electors. Therefore, you can't seat electors. And so to your point, to our very smart viewers point, if the Supreme Court is now involved in multiple states, then there would be a constitutional question that you could argue. Yes, there's pending litigation and challenges in all of these states. Therefore, you can't seat electors, which is a big deal.

Charlie Kirk (72:26)

And also, you put all this together, there's different legal challenges that are happening simultaneously. We have the Pennsylvania, the interstate one with Texas, not to mention the Amistad Project has lawsuits all across the country happening. Phil Klein, right?

Andrew (72:40)

Yeah, Phil Klein's got a lot. I mean, here's what's interesting is Phil Klein and the Amistad Project couldn't speak any more highly of them. They're filing in all these states, right. And they're breaking down their legal challenges by different vote buckets, basically, that they're challenging the legitimacy of different vote buckets. Now, again, I bring this back to the top for a reason, that this is an unprecedented election. This may feel like a long shot. This may feel like craziness. This may feel like there's no hope if you break it down. We got a vote margin in Arizona of 10,457 votes. In Arizona, Phil Klein and the Amistad Project challenged the legitimacy of 305,563 votes. So just think about that 10,500 vote margin. He's got 305,000 votes tagged as saying, these are illegal votes. Now, again, you got to think about this. And this isn't again, but we've talked about it off air. But just for you guys listening, there's two different tracks. You've got the sort of Dominion Cybersecurity Smartmatic track that City Pal is really going after. And there's other lawsuits alleging discrepancies here. And then you've got this mail in balloting issue. Now, the theory, and I think it's a pretty solid theory, is that the Democrats basically went into this election, they said, Donald Trump is the devil. He is the worst thing that we've seen since the 1940s it's the only

Charlie Kirk (74:12)

thing they could unite behind.

Andrew (74:13)

It's the only thing that they can unite behind. And this is actually a really fascinating side tangent that we could go on about the pending civil war within the Democrat party. But you've got this man that they've all united behind and they think, they genuinely think this, they genuinely think that they are saving the Republicans, potentially saving the world by defeating Donald Trump and doing it through this sort of color revolution. This I guess non violent means. Right. And so you've got multiple players in theory. Now this is a building legal case, a building theory, building idea. But you've got old school Democrat machine politics at play in the cities like Milwaukee, Detroit, these Democrats strongholds, Philadelphia. We had Robert Kihaley on the show a couple weeks before the election saying, hey, I've got from Trafalgar Group who turned out to be the most accurate pollster in the country. He had us, he had Trump up by a couple points in Pennsylvania. And I'll never forget, he said, and you said, so you think he's gonna win Pennsylvania? You remember his answer?

Charlie Kirk (75:19)

He said, unless there's the massive fraud. And everyone laughed at him. Yeah, not everyone.

Andrew (75:23)

He said, well you gotta beat Biden by two or three or four points in Pennsylvania just to overcome the fraud that's built in. So this is old school Democrat city politics machinery, the machinery that stuffs ballot boxes. Well, and it goes back a long time.

Charlie Kirk (75:37)

You know, it goes all the way back to Aaron Burr. And so Aaron Burr, who many of you remember in American history, got shot. Yep. But he actually built the New York political machine.

Andrew (75:46)

Oh no, he shot Hamilton. I apologies.

Charlie Kirk (75:49)

Well, he was in a duel.

Andrew (75:50)

He was in a duel. It was an honor duel, old school style. And he shot Alexander Hamilton, our nation's first Secretary of the Treasury.

Charlie Kirk (75:58)

So Burr, interestingly enough, he was vice president under Thomas Jefferson. But Burr raised a bunch of money to go solve a water problem in New York, only spent a little bit of money on that. And he ended up establishing the bank of New York, ended up becoming JPMorgan Chase as it is today, and ended up becoming the center of all political corruption on the east coast. He'd fund politicians campaigns, he'd pay for their bills. And that was kind of the start of where all the vote counting nonsense happened. Cause Aaron Burr wanted to create a political machine there anyway. That's how far back.

Andrew (76:33)

Well no, the machinery does go far back and a lot of these places have not been had Republican, I guess, political representation or rule majorities in decades and decades and decades and they've become corrupt. Which single party rule, Just look at the state of California. It becomes corrupt. When they have a super majority there in California and things devolve quickly, doesn't keep them honest. The point is there was multiple tracks. One is, you know, I think with a wink and a nod, what happened was, you know, the powers that be said, hey, this election, do what you always do, just do a little extra. I think that's one track. I think the other track is they told us what they were gonna do. They said, we need mail invaliding. The pandemic has happened. We need mass mail invaliding. So why did they start saying that? Why did they start yelling that from the rooftops? And then meanwhile, you have Trump saying, this is gonna be a disaster. None of this is legal. We're gonna be mired in the courts. So when they tell you this was crazy. No, everybody was predicting this. Yesterday we pulled up an article from September in the Wall Street Journal talking about Pennsylvania's mail in madness. Right? So let's go to Pennsylvania. The Amistad group has isolated 121,297 illegal ballots. The margin there, 81,000 right now. This has nothing to do with ballot stuffing. This has nothing to do with midnight, midnight or 1 o' clock in the morning. You know, there's big ballot stuffing, these spikes that we all talk about. This is just procedural stuff. So illegal votes counted. Estimate of ballots requested in the name of a registered Republican by someone other than that person. They have that at 53,909 legal votes not counted. Estimate of Republican ballots that the requester returned but were not counted. 44.892. 44,892 ballots. Illegal votes counted. Electoral electors voted where they did not reside. That's 14,000 plus illegal votes counted out of state residents voting in State. That's 7,400. So this is just double votes, 742. They've isolated all these different buckets and they've. So just on a simply procedural. So there's multiple ways you could attack this. You've got old school machinery, Democrat machinery. You've got mail in ballot madness. And these electors or these state governors, and oftentimes state supreme courts overruling the legislatures, then you've got just lax policies. You've got. There's multiple different axises of attack, axes of attack, as I've heard it said on this election, that make us all obviously question it. Not to mention the wonderful article out of the Federalist, the five miracles that Biden magically pulled off where he basically

Charlie Kirk (79:19)

this article here, new analysis shows Biden winning nearly impossible margins on mail in ballots. Pennsylvania.

Andrew (79:24)

Yeah, that's amazing. Basically there's just if exit polling holds in Pennsylvania after election night, Biden still comes up like 2 or 300,000 votes short in Pennsylvania. He would have had to win a statistically basically impossible amount of mail in ballots. So that's so listen, is this conspiratorial? Not at all. What's conspiratorial is to allege that everything was fine.

Charlie Kirk (79:53)

If you guys like what you hear and you want more of it, I can tell you where to go. It's charliekirk.com support. Email us anything you want us to see. Freedom charliekirk.com and your go to place for news and information should be charliekirk.com if you want to get involved with Turning Point USA, it's tpusa.com tpusa.com talk to you soon everybody. God bless. Thanks so much.