Exposing the Enemy of the American People with Breitbart's Alex Marlow

Summary

---

The Charlie Kirk Show

Episode: Exposing the Enemy of the American People with Breitbart's Alex Marlow

Date: February 24, 2021

Guest: Alex Marlow, Editor-in-Chief of Breitbart
Host: Charlie Kirk

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Charlie Kirk welcomes Alex Marlow, editor-in-chief of Breitbart, to discuss Marlow's upcoming book Breaking the News. Together, they analyze the business models and structural incentives behind mainstream media, the increasing confluence between corporate interests and news coverage, and the broader threats facing individual freedom in America. The episode also covers positive trends on the political right, the role of independent journalism, strategies to counter Big Tech, and offers candid reflections on lessons learned from the 2020 election aftermath.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Premise of Breaking the News

• Media as Corporate Complex ([03:28 – 07:59])

  • Marlow describes spending a year investigating "the establishment media," arguing that bias has evolved into "executing an agenda" intertwined with corporate interests.
  • He says newsrooms are governed not just by politics but "the structure of these multinational corporations" who ultimately control the narrative.
  • “There are puppet masters...and this is not conspiracy stuff. It’s all in plain sight.” (B, [04:25])

• Ownership & Influence Motives

  • Discussion of Jeff Bezos owning the Washington Post as an “influence play” rather than a money play.
  • Importance of recognizing the "infinite levels of conflicts of interest" within establishment media.

2. The Evolution of American Journalism

• Past vs. Present ([07:59 – 09:49])

  • Kirk references historical investigative journalism (e.g. Ida B. Wells, muckrakers) contrasted with current deference toward powerful corporate owners.
  • “There seems as if there is...the sound of silence, to use the Simon and Garfunkel term, of the lack of investigative reporting that is done towards Bezos...” (A, [09:37])

• Scrutiny & “Cancel Culture”

  • Marlow recalls joining Andrew Breitbart to hold establishment press accountable and argues outlets like Breitbart now face more scrutiny than corporate titans.
  • Teases revelation in his book about a figure operating behind the scenes, likened to "the new Soros."

3. Plutocracy, Free Markets, and Big Tech

• America as a Plutocracy ([12:13 – 13:55])

  • Kirk and Marlow contend America is effectively run as a plutocracy, with both the government and mega-corporations sharing blame.

• Nuanced Understanding of Free Markets

  • Both push for nuance over ideological purity, noting that massive tech conglomerates should not be treated as mom-and-pop businesses under the law.
  • “Do you think that a company that has 280 million active users should be treated exactly the same as the donut shop...in Fort Lauderdale?” (A, [25:44])

• Big Tech as ‘Supergovernment’ ([29:47 – 31:08])

  • Marlow and Kirk raise alarms about Big Tech aligning with government interests, manipulating the flow of information, and exerting power over elections.

4. Election 2020, Mail-in Voting, and Conservative Priorities

• What Really Happened in 2020? ([32:47 – 43:42])
  • Marlow expresses frustration that too much right-wing focus was put on highly specific claims (Dominion machines, etc.) and not enough on legal, structural changes (mail-in voting, Big Tech suppression).
  • “What swung the election...was the cheap by mail and the big tech manipulating what people read. That was it.” (B, [43:42])
  • Both urge the right to unify on actionable priorities to prevent further erosions of free speech and fair elections.

5. Optimism and Positive Trends on the Right

• Cultural Shifts ([16:29 – 22:45])

  • Marlow signals a cultural shift: “the left is so uncool,” and people are refocusing on faith, family, and a richer life outside of politics.
  • Kirk highlights the growing difference between states, especially the “livelihood advantage” of places like Florida under Ron DeSantis.
  • “I see something I’ve not seen in about a year, which is smiles. People are smiling outside, which is a wonderful thing.” (A, [20:02])

• Leadership and Policy

  • DeSantis is praised as a model of bold, competent, conservative leadership, with both hosts noting how policy and substance outshine style.

6. Solutions & Future Strategies

• State-Level Action Against Big Tech ([35:53 – 39:40])

  • Marlow is cautiously optimistic about states leading the way in checking tech monopolies, such as mandatory opt-outs of content filters, fines for unfair political bans, and transparency requirements.
  • Kirk lauds the new offensive tactics: “We are using a tactic that we actually enjoy, which is challenging the tech companies.”

• Building the Next Generation of Institutions

  • Both suggest conservatives need to build new parallel institutions, from tech platforms to media outlets, echoing that entrepreneurial spirit.

• Call for Unity & Focus

  • Marlow stresses the right must avoid infighting over purity tests, recognize what truly matters, and unify before avenues for free speech are further restricted.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Media Incentives:
  “It has become less about left versus right and more about executing an agenda...so many of the key decisions...are no doubt due to the structure of these multinational corporations that control all of our news.” (B, [03:28])

• On Cancel Culture:
  “What is it about now? It's about destroying the individual...This is the thing that should really resonate with people in this Cancel culture moment we're in.” (B, [09:49])

• On Big Tech Power:
  "What if those people, those super governments, that's your word, I think, for the big tech...now they have the exact same interests as the actual government? ...They're working in concert together." (B, [29:47])

• On Right-Wing Unity:
  “If we can get on the same page on the right...that provides an incredible opportunity. And then we just spent the last three months fighting over Dominion voting machines. It's such a waste.” (B, [40:30])

• On Optimism in Conservative Movement:
  “The left is so uncool...I think people are getting it to at least a small degree. I see it coming through, and I hope I'm right about it, because it could be the beginning of something really beautiful.” (B, [16:29])

---

Important Timestamps

• [03:28] – Marlow explains the thesis of Breaking the News and goes deep on the corporate structure behind media bias.
• [06:51] – Discussion about why media outlets never challenge the interests of their corporate owners.
• [09:49] – Marlow on media’s focus on attacking individuals while protecting institutional power; teases “the new Soros.”
• [16:29] – Marlow shares the best thing happening in America: a renewed focus on faith, family, and non-political pursuits.
• [20:02] – Kirk contrasts different states’ approaches, praises Florida’s handling of the pandemic and governance.
• [25:44] – Debate over treating tech giants like Google the same as small businesses under the law.
• [29:47] – Analysis of tech companies acting as supergovernments and their impact on elections and free speech.
• [32:47] – Marlow on misplaced right-wing focus post-2020 election and missed opportunities for real reform.
• [35:53] – State-level actions proposed by DeSantis and others to combat Big Tech, optimism about state initiatives.
• [40:30] – Marlow urges the right to stop purity-testing and unify on critical issues before it’s too late.

---

Conclusion

The conversation between Charlie Kirk and Alex Marlow offers a multidimensional critique of establishment media, corporate influence, and Big Tech’s growing power. Both host and guest call on conservative audiences to abandon purity tests and unite strategically while championing the American tradition of rugged individualism and entrepreneurial innovation. The episode is both a teaser for Marlow’s investigative book and a rallying cry for the right to build resilient alternatives in media, tech, and culture.

Book Plug:
Breaking the News by Alex Marlow – available for pre-order; includes revelations about hidden power brokers and media corruption, promised to be revealed in detail upon release. (See [12:13], [44:43])

Call to Action:
Listeners are encouraged to stay informed, support independent journalism, and, if subscribed to the show, email [e-mail] for a chance at a signed book giveaway.

---

Transcript

[A]

Hey, everybody. Today on the Charlie Kirk show, editor in chief of Breitbart.com, alex Marlowe joins us to preview his new book where he believes he has found the new George Soros, who might be a man or a woman or someone who identifies as neither, who is influencing all of American politics. He also talks about his new book, Breaking the News. And we get into some very specific good news and not so good news about the future of our country. Alex is very smart and he runs Breitbart.com if you want to support our program, go to CharlieKirk.com support. That's CharlieKirk.com support to get behind our team of editors, of researchers, our whole team that works very, very hard to make this whole program possible. @charliekirk.com support. Email us your questions. As always, freedomarliekirk.com Alex Marlo is here. Buckle up, everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.

[B]

Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House fol. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy. His spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point usa.

[A]

We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. It may be a cliche when you say you are what you eat, but it's the absolute truth. Eating the right foods ensure you get the right nutrients into your body that are essential to maintain your health and vitality. It's also true if you are not getting enough fruits and veggies every day, you could seriously be deficient in those nutrients that are so vital to your health. Can you imagine how you'd feel if you were eating 10 servings of fruits and veggies every day? Do what I do because I can tell you from personal experience, it is a game changer. I take six daily capsules from Balance of Nature. Just knowing I'm getting the vital nutrients sourced from 31 fruits and veggies every day makes a huge difference in my life. Join me and experience the balance of nature difference for yourself for a limited time. All new preferred customers will receive an additional 35% off and free shipping on your Balance of Nature order. Use discount code Charlie. Call 800-284-68751 or go to balanceofnature.com and use the discount code Charlie. That's balanceofnature.com discount code Charlie. Hey, everybody. Welcome to this episode of the Charlie Kirk Show. I am very excited. I'm thrilled, actually. I saw it on my calendar this morning. I said I got to talk to somebody very smart, which we try to do every day, but we don't always. We're not always successful. Alex, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show.

[B]

Charlie, it is a pleasure to be on with you. As I was just telling you off air, I only reached out to maybe three friends. We announced a book today. My first book, I only reached out to three friends who I want to talk to right away, you being one of those. So I hope that means some of your audience, too, because I trust you a lot and I'm not world's most trusting person. As editor of Breitbart, I've been burned a few times over the years, but you got one of the first calls.

[A]

Well, thank you, Alex. And the book is called Breaking the News. I want to just talk big picture because I want to have you back on. When we're closer to launch day, everyone should go buy a copy. And our audience loves to be aware of books and things that are happening. Tell us, big picture, 35,000ft. What is the hypothesis or the thesis of the book? What are you positing? And then why did you write it?

[B]

Sure. So what I did is I spent about a year doing really deep investigations into the establishment media. And we all know that the media is biased, but it felt like over the last couple of years, since Donald Trump really came down that escalator that it has weaponized, it has become less about left versus right and more about executing an agenda. And then I started to dig in more, and it became even more complex than that. And you start realizing so many of the decisions that are made inside of our newsrooms are based off of corporate interests. And then you start out pulling back that thread, and you see that so many of the key decisions that are made are no doubt due to the structure of these multinational corporations that control all of our news. You're an independent guy, and I'm an independent guy, and there's a handful of other independent guys in media. But for the most part, the vast majority of stuff we're consuming, there are puppet masters who are there. And this is not conspiracy stuff. It's all in plain sight. It's all there. And if you know, any outlet that you're reading from in general is aside from a few of these individuals that pop up are these big Corporate leviathans. And so the book really starts delving into those connections, what they mean and exactly the extent to which they're corrupt. They're just. It is unbelievable, Charlie. It was a year of investigation. I have a small team of researchers, including some people on loan to me from Peter Schweitzer Shop Gai. He's the best in the game at this stuff. And I tried to do what he does. The political establishment, but for the media establishment. And you know me, I'm not easily surprised by stuff. I'm kind of grizzled veteran in the news business. I was surprised multiple, multiple times and I'm happy to get into some of the details and a lot more as we get closer to the day.

[A]

Yeah, just tease it enough so people press purchase.

[B]

Right. And if I could give people a little incentive, I'm looking at Amazon right now. I'm number six on books, which is a very pleasant surprise. I'm too behind Bill Gates. So I know everyone likes beating Bill Gates at this point. So I would like to beat Bill Gates.

[A]

It's called breaking the news. I want to ask you a couple more questions about that. Then I want to get into the news of the day. So let me make sure I understand this correctly because I think it's fascinating you're looking at the business model of these news companies, not just the bias, but actually what is their monetary incentive, which I think is brilliant. And if you look very carefully at who takes out the full page ads on the Sunday edition of the New York Times, if you look very carefully at the ownership structure of the Washington Post, which we know is Jeff Bezos, if you look at actually who places the advertisements on CNN in primetime, lowly watched yet overly priced network, not network, but cable television on the 7, 8, 9 hour, you'll find that there is this confluence of interest, for example, the pharmaceutical companies, the hospital lobby, the college cartel is a great example. So one of the easiest kind of wins for a journalist would be to send investigative journalists to investigate and audit the finances of the cartel of the colleges. Right. Harvard, Princeton, Yale. Well, who do you think is buying these full page advertisements on the Sunday edition of the New York Times? It's Harvard or it's one of the Ivy League schools. Can you talk about how the incentive structure of some of these corporations is to pander to specific corporate interests, when in reality that's where a lot of the investigative journalism should be done?

[B]

Yeah, this is a. You're really onto something. So if you look at. Let's take something like an NBC Universal. NBC is part of a huge conglomerate that has entertainment interests and theme parks and distribution of movies, and they own sports arenas. And the news business is just a small percentage of that. And so you start seeing that their choices on what they investigate, what they highlight, where their politics are, they never stand in the way of the corporate interests of the entire conglomerate. And that's why you start seeing things where you think that the. What would a Jeff Bezos be interested in a Washington Post? Why would he want to own a Washington Post? The Washington Post is worth maybe a quarter of a billion dollars. He's personally worth $100 billion. It's about influence. It's never been a money play. It's always about an influence play. And when people start thinking about this logically, it's gonna dawn on them that there is infinite levels of conflicts of interest and you just can' virtually a single narrative. You're reading the establishment press, there's almost always something that's conflicting with you getting the information you should be getting as a consumer.

[A]

There's something that Glenn Greenwald said many years ago and I never actually used to risk. I never used to understand him. I used to just kind of, I would be the first one to admit it, kind of just label him in the left wing box and just kind of move on. But I think he's a lot more courageous and honest than I ever gave him credit for. And I'm not afraid to admit that and see, and you've seen that in recent years. But he used to say something a couple years ago, I listened to him on some podcast and he said the corporate media. The corporate media kept on saying that and I just kind of dismissed it as typical Bernie Sanders Bolshevik anti capitalist talk. But what I have realized is that the corporate media does not represent American values or free enterprise values. It represents a very. It's almost a racketeering class of protecting incumbent corporate interests for a very specific agenda. Can you talk about how American journalism has changed over the last hundred years? Because it was American journalists In the early 1900s, Ida B. Wells and the muckrakers that used to investigate the most powerful people on the planet. Now, you might have think that some people think that was done unfairly. It was probably done more aggressively. But I still think it's always a very healthy thing to have powerful people challenged. There's a very. There seems as if there is. You can almost hear the sound of silence, to use the Simon and Garfunkel term of the lack of investigative reporting that that is done towards Bezos. That is done towards the people that control everything. In fact, Alex, I would one, a argument I would make, and I would defend it, is that Breitbart.com has come under more investigative journalism, more scrutiny, more investigations top to bottom, almost press colonoscopy, than the richest man on the planet, Jeff Bezos, previously. Would you agree with that?

[B]

Yeah, I would 100% agree with it. And you're drawing a very apt comparison, as usual. This is. I got into this game with Andrew Breitbart as his first employee about. I guess it was about 14 years or so ago when I started with him in his basement, because he was one guy who wanted to take on the establishment press. He wanted to show people what a small group of dedicated, focused truth tellers who had a good time doing it, what they could do to take on the man, to take on the establishment. And yet you see so much of media. What is it about now? It's about destroying the individual. It's, oh, Charlie, Kirk's built something. How do we destroy that? Breitbart's built something. How do we destroy that? And this is the thing that should really resonate with people in this Cancel culture moment we're in. There's one portion of the book that I can't tease too much, because I think this is one where I really want people to focus on it when the time is right. And I've been able to heavily guard this material for a year, which has been no small task in and of itself. But there is an individual you're going to meet who is the new Soros. This person, he or she is. Her or his tentacles are in so many places, not just in the establishment media, but also in the activist media and in Democrat Party politics. And when you see the way he or her operates, it will be so clear that, oh, yeah, this is a genius business model. If you fund everything and you act like there's all of this institutional agreement. There's not institutional agreement. There's one person with purse strings who is shoveling money wherever that person thinks it will best serve their agenda. And once this becomes apparent to people, it's going to dawn on them this could be happening 100 different times in this country. Because now we're at this age where we do have a plutocracy. We have this aristocracy. And you know what? I could live with it, Charlie, if they would allow people like you and me and Breitbart and Turning Point to be able to have our operations without having to endure this public colonoscopy by media, as you say, 24 7. At least treat us fairly. At least treat us on. At least investigate the people who are the media reporters of the New York Times as much as you're investigating us. If you do that, then maybe we'll be more hands off. But for now, we have to fight harder. We have to fight much harder to expose these people because they want power for power's sake, and they're accumulating it at a rapid rate, at a stunning rate.

[A]

That's right. And I think that what is so important about the book you're writing, and I don't even know who you're talking about, I could venture a couple guests, I might call you later because I'm super curious, which is why everyone should go buy the book. Because if you have. If you have me curious enough, I will go buy. I think actually we are gonna. We bought a couple books. We're gonna do some giveaways with the book, actually on our podcast, anything you want. And so we're gonna. If you'll sign them, Alex, I'm gonna give them away that we purchased them so you guys can tell us, you listen to it. Show us you're subscribed and email us freedomarliekirk.com we bought a couple. We want to be supportive of that. I think we do live in a plutocracy. The sooner people realize and admit it, the better. Don't just try and hide behind carefully crafted free market sound bites to try to convince yourself we don't live in a plutocracy. You could say that it's partially there because of government interference. And I would say that, and I would argue it. I think that part of it is because we've used the force of government to allow these companies to grow too big. I also think it's because of technology. I also think it's because at times we haven't regulated them enough. I think that's a nuanced position. We should be unafraid to have that kind of, you know, like that multi tiered analysis where it's as if it's either communistic Bolshevik socialism or, you know, we're have Somalia. Like that's basically the paradigm that everything exists. And I'm just exhausted with that kind of conversation in our country.

[B]

It's very lazy. And you're a thinker and I know you're on audiences too, or they wouldn't listen to your show. And I think of that way, Breitbart's audience, which is such an Edge for us because the left and the people. I know I'm cutting you off, but this is, I think, a really important emphasize. They don't want to think, they want to be told what to do. And this is a huge advantage for us because we can start bench pressing them intellectually and that's going to be the key to the future.

[A]

And when you do think about things, you're going to have nuance and you're also going to win over public opinion because I think a majority of people are somewhere in the middle of, okay, we want to nationalize everything versus everything that tech companies do is wonderful, beautiful, and must never be challenged. There's probably a pretty reasonable middle that I think most Americans embrace. So, Alex, the book is breaking the news and we're going to have you on. As these things start to get uncovered, I have to give you a compliment on air. Your marketing strategy is brilliant because you have just teased me to want to go buy even more books. So that was, that was as good as it gets. Alex, well done. And I think you probably learned from the Schweitzer man because he's very good at that. That tactic I've seen replicated in different sort of manifestations the last couple years. So well done. Look, a lot of people are emailing me about Mike Lindell and some people have even asked me, how do I help Mike Lindell, Charlie? How do I get behind him? I don't know if you just knew this, but he just got sued. He's under attack by a lot of different people. And I could tell you now is the time to help Mike Lindell. If you want to help him and help his crusade to fight for our country, you could do that by buying a MyPillow. They won't go flat. You can wash and dry them as many times as you want and maintain their shape. You can get a Queen size premium MyPillow for 29.98, regular for 69.98 and that's a 40 savings. All MyPillow products come with a 10 year warranty and a 60 day money back guarantee. So if you want to get behind Michael Lindell, I know a lot of you have been moved and have been convicted to support him. You're saying, you know what? I want to support Mike Lindell and Charlie Kirk. Well, you could do that together. Only here on the Charlie Kirk show can you support Mike Lindell and get a product in return. A pillow, by the way, it's not just, you know, oh, support Mike Lindell. You Get a beautiful pillow. So go to mypillow.com and click on the Radio Listeners Square and use the promo code Kirk. You'll always get a deep discount on all MyPillow products, including the Giza Dream Bed Sheets, the MyPillow Mattress Topper, and MyPillow Towel Sets. Or call 800-875-0425 and use the promo code Kirk. If you want to help out Mike Lindell, I know a lot of people do, go to mypillow.com use the radio listener Square promo code, Kirk. I want to kind of get to current events here, and so I'm going to ask you an unusual question, and it's a question I ask a lot of people. What's the best thing happening in America right now?

[B]

I would say right now that the best thing that is happening in America right now is I'm hearing more and more people talk about things that they're doing outside of politics. We've been so obsessed with politics 24 7. I'm obsessed with it. I'm totally addicted at this point. I probably need to go to some sort of a talk therapy to get over it. But I'm hearing more and more people talking about recommitment to faith, recommitment to going outside, recommitment to reading a book and not hanging out on social media. A commitment to family. I've never heard so many people in my generation talk about having kids, and I feel like. And talk about their pets again. And it feels like that people know that we need to beat the left. We need to beat whichever Democrat runs again in four years. But we also need to balance our lives in the meantime that we're in a fight for the next generations. We're not in a fight for right this second. And I felt like we haven't had that in a very long time. And I'm very heartened by it. And I actually think it will help politically. I think that the right has a huge opportunity right now because the left is so uncool. This is the first time in my life that the left has been so uncool. They were always the cool crowd. I grew up in la. It was undeniable. The left were the coolest people. They're the biggest dorks on the planet. They're so hysterical. They're so unlikable. If you look at their Twitter feeds, you couldn't roast it. Charlie, if we got together with five your Funniest friends and spent the whole weekend trying to parody what the left does on Twitter every day. We could never beat them. They're that horrible. And I think people are getting it to at least a small degree. I see it coming through and I hope I'm right about it because it could be the beginning of something really beautiful if I am.

[A]

I think there's a lot of wisdom to what you just said. I didn't know what to expect, but I expected a thoughtful, wise answer, which is exactly what I got, which is the left wants to turn everything to be political. They want sports to be political. They want what you eat to be political. They want how you transport yourself to be political. They want your children to be political. And so your argument is that the more people get back to actually the human aspects of living away from just every single decision must be a political decision. That's actually gonna hurt the left, that's gonna hurt their power struggle because basically they're gonna say, well, aren't you guys participating hourly? And minute by minute in the revolution, it kind of someone says, you know, I didn't like Trump, he was kind of a jerk. But no, actually I'm going to go drive my fossil fuel car like and go hunting. Screw you. You know,

[B]

and I think that brings people to our side. Having a well rounded life, having a family, having a. I know you talk a lot about God on your show and your faith and that's, that's very important. It can't just be one note. I think the one note stuff is a total killer long term politically. And I think the right is getting that. And that's my favorite. Dude. Can I ask you because, you know, I'm an interviewer mostly, not an interviewee. Can I ask you, what do you think's the best thing going on right now?

[A]

There's a couple things and I try to keep our show optimistic and forward thinking. It's so easy and so tempting. Just focus on everything wrong that's happening. We do plenty of that too. And by the way, you got, you have a great show too. Everyone should listen to it. The problem is I don't get up early enough on the West Coast. 6 to 9 Eastern every morning, so it's really early. It's 3 to 6 if you're on Pacific Time, it's on SiriusXM. Is it 124 or 28? I can never.

[B]

125. Yeah, the Patriot Channel. But also on their app you can get as a podcast and we put up some clips at Breitbart so there's a few places to find it. But that's really good.

[A]

I think two things that are happening that are really positive. Number one, I think that the differences between states has never been more dramatic. And I mean it in a non political way. I'm just talking about livelihood. I'm here in Florida. I'm looking out my window and I see people without masks or their children. I see something I've not seen in about a year, which is smiles. People are smiling outside, which is a wonderful thing. And I think that we're starting to see how different states that have made decisions politically and not contradicting what you're saying at all actually leads to better and happier and more prosperous lives. And they're able to exist that way?

[B]

No, I think they work together. And in fact, just the word Florida would have been a perfectly good answer. Maybe if I take a mulligan. Cause I was down there for your conference in December and I can't tell you how many friends are moving down there. And it feels so logical. Yeah, it's the. I think, and like very close friends. I think my editor, my book is moving down there. I think my sister's moving down there. I mean, there's just so many people. And I feel stupid because I can't do it yet. I got ties to other place and it feels like, of course everyone should be in Florida right now because it's working better. People are happier, people aren't as bummed out. And people are understanding that a guy like Desantis, who's the leader there. But it's really a whole culture that you can be a strong conservative and get the job done. You don't have to roll over the left. You don't have to be this wishy washy establishmentarian type. You can paint in the bold colors that Reagan liked. And that actually converts more people. More people. It resonates with people. Go ahead.

[A]

And we were talking about this earlier, which is that some people love Trump's style. I know a lot of people that didn't like Trump's style. However, DeSantis is proving that actually Trump's ideas and his agenda are 60 or 70% coalition building ideas. If you really do isolate the style, which DeSantis doesn't have a unique style. I mean, he's pretty direct. He says some funny things and he stands up for what's right. And he's more combative with the pressure than I think other Republicans would be because of Trump. But he allows his decisions to be the forefront of the news cycle of what he's doing. Right. And I'm not criticizing Trump in either way. I think that there was a brilliance to what he was able to do to liberate the American conversation. With that being said, I think at times we spent way more time focusing on a specific comma that might be missing from a tweet rather than actually the really interesting substantive policy. And you and I spend a lot of time on that. But I think DeSantis is actually proving, this is why I'm so optimistic about it, that we're actually a much more conservative country than we give ourselves credit for. I actually think we're far more likely to swing in that direction if we do a couple things correctly in the next couple of years.

[B]

I think you're correct on this, and I think we're going to see the people who are leading the party, the Republican Party, the next few years are going to be the people we're talking about. But also a lot of the people who are emerging have a good sense of humor, too, which I know DeSantis does. But. But he's super smart and he's super principled, and that, to me, is just interesting. And look, I love people. You don't have to be a genius for me to love you as an American citizen. And there are a lot of people who are not super. They're not intellectual heavyweights that do incredible, make incredible contributions, but it is. You gotta admit, it's exciting when there's a guy who is that high IQ and that bold who is running a major state like Florida. It just doesn't happen that often. You get a few guys like that. Tom Cotton's like that. There's a few guys out there who like it. But DeSantis got a unique set of gifts, which is. It's fun to watch from my vantage point.

[A]

You just said it. You said it perfectly. High iq, courage, big population, big stage. That's a tough combination.

[B]

Very tough and fearless of the media because he's coached up. He's coached up on the same. He's steeped on the same stuff you and I are, Charlie. He's thinking about through the same stuff. The thing is, he also uses his platform. You know, he's getting the best experts. When he's talking about COVID he's not winging it. You know, he's briefed. He's coached up on it. Whereas Cuomo is briefed by MSNBC and CNN and his dumbo brother, Fredo. It's a. It's a. It's a. Why? How come no one talks about this? And I do have a big Section on this in the book contrasting the media that treated everything DeSantis did like it was gonna backfire. None of it did. And everything Cuomo did like it was gonna go incredible and everything went catty wamp them. And the media should be held to account, honestly. There should be a class action suit over the media's malpractice with regards to New York and what was happening there.

[A]

Well, and do you see the new metric that they're using for the meter on msnbc? I don't know if you saw this or not. So prior CNBC and MSNBC had daily infections, hospitalizations, deaths. I don't know if you saw the new number they have on msnbc. People successfully vaccinated. They've changed it from a negative metric to a potentially positive metric. And it's just like almost immediately.

[B]

Yeah. And this is the point why I say that bias is not enough. It's not enough to say that it's biased. This is about achieving goals. And the goals are to empower the status quo, the powers that be, and to destroy the American individual, which has always been the biggest threat to the globalists and the conformists and the corporatists. And this is what I'm trying to champion. It's not an anti free market thing. I love the free market. It's a. I believe it. This is a pro individual narrative that I'm talking about. It's about the American individual, the rugged individualism that makes us so unique. It's about freedom of speech, it's about freedom of will. And this is what we gotta get back to. And I think we can do it. And you look at Florida and that's what's happening.

[A]

I find myself when I debate privately or discuss with the Puritans on the free market side, which again, you and I have talked about this at length. We grew up in that literature. I have a lot of respect for that love. Milton Friedman, Lewd von Mises was a brilliant guy. Murray Rothbard. And I find myself agreeing with almost everything they have to say on the price system, on how profits work. And then I just asked some very simple questions, such as, do you think that a company that has 280 million active users should be treated exactly the same as the donut shop that is Sal's Donut Shop in Fort Lauderdale, Florida? And he really is not going to. He's perfectly comfortable with that one donut shop. And they say, yes, the law must apply equally to all people. And I say, I complete. I agree with that. As a soundbite I say, but that's just, that's a pretty foolish thing to implement on MOS, to say that a company has 280 million users and AI technology and 29,000 people that are working around the clock in Menlo park, all of which hate our country, just on Google search, just on mind manipulation, that somehow Sal's Donut Shop is the same sort of existential threat to our freedoms and liberties. And that's where you and I start to say, no, I want more people to be like Sal's Donut Shop. I'm gonna protect that sort of freedom. But then also I'm not gonna treat Google, which obviously come and I'm talking about to have the same as if they have the same sort of daily incentive or ambition as Sal's Donut Shop.

[B]

Right? And so I just want a free flow of ideas, a dialogue, which now, if you have a free flow of ideas and dialogue, you get thrown off of social media. But we were checking in, Charlie, we spoke about this on your show six months or so ago, about how we looked at some of our traffic at Breitbart from Google on searches for Joe Biden and how it went from like 30,000 page views a day and like a million impressions a day or something like that to zero. And it was early May, right in the run up to the election. Cut it off. No Joe Biden traffic for Breitbart whatsoever. And I checked in on it yesterday and it's still zero. It's like they literally, you cannot get to a Breitbart story unless you type in a Joe Biden story. Unless you type in the word Breitbart, it will never show up generically. If we break a story, if we have something exclusive, if we have Donald Trump giving us an exclusive quote about Joe Biden that still will not show up unless you type in the word Breitbart. And this is not the free market. This is my manipulation. And they're doing it in plain sight. And that's why you talk about the Sal's Donut Shop, why it's so important. That is not how Google is operating. Google is sitting around and they're trying to convince you to have a certain viewpoint by what they feed you, to read and to learn and to look at. And once we understand that, then we can get a little more nuance in how we deal with it. And we want to encourage people to get rich. I'm all for it, but it is now when they're in the mind control mode and they're Doing it openly. They're doing it openly. You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist. Why did Breitbart traffic go from 30,000 to zero for the search? Joe Biden a day? Was it just an accident that happened right before the election? If it is, you're lying yourself.

[A]

It's also just economies of scale. I mean, if we're really looping in, if we're going to have just a purely academic argument around the free market and we're going to compare the backbone of American business, which includes Breitbart.com with a couple hundred employees, to that of which is the combined GDP of all of Eastern Europe of $1 trillion. I mean, it's just, I think that's a fun, you know, discussion for a 19 year old that just got introduced to economics at Stanford. I have no interest in governing our country just on pure idealism or soundbites. And I say that as someone who understands and respects the literature as a general principle. But if you act as if these are uncompromising edicts that we can never ever violate, I think that that is a very dangerous thing. Alex, I want to ask you something else, please.

[B]

I couldn't get. Because it was too thought provoking. Because I was thinking about this in the concept of now. What if those people, those super governments, that's your word, I think, for the big tech. What if now they have the exact same interests as the actual government? And that's what we're seeing with Facebook and Google and with Mark Zuckerberg, with those drop boxes in Georgia, could have swung the whole state of Georgia. They benefited Democrats putting those dropboxes that he was paying for, to get those cheap by mail ballots, to get them collected and counted in one of the most crucial swing states. It's a. They're working in concert together. And we're supposed to think over the next four years that's going to get better unless we start being very vocal about it, start making demands. And here's another thing, Charlie, because you're a powerful guy, we gotta start building our own stuff. And I know it sounds impossible, but we have to do it. It sounds impossible, but the idea that Amazon, which was selling a few books from Jeff Bezos garage or whatever, is now so unfathomably big, it's one of the biggest movie Studios now in 20 years, that sounds impossible too. That has to be us. It has to be us. And we need that entrepreneurial spirit. And I hope that's inspiring to your audience that it can be you, you listening out There you could be the one who does this.

[A]

That actually is a great segue to the next question I wanted to ask you. But before we get to that, you had another. You triggered another thought that I wanted to. Two things in particular. Number one to the supergovernment piece, and this is something I'm going to mention at my speech at cpac. I'm only talking about big tech and I am going to make, I'm going to make the argument if you do not support breaking up the tech companies, you're a corporatist, not a conservative. And I think that's the right place to say that.

[B]

Great, great framework.

[A]

Yeah. And that, and I think that that's the, that's the place that we need to say it. And then I just asked the question, what who has more power, the Kremlin or Google? And I make the. It's not even close. I mean it's not even close. Now I'm not asking who is more evil. I'm sure there's plenty.

[B]

That's a provocative question.

[A]

No, that's a truly provocative question.

[B]

Definitely pleading the fifth on that one.

[A]

That's right. And I would. Right. The point is who has more power? Right. And that's. And then you should ask, well then what are the preventative mechanisms from them not abusing that power? Anyway, I think that sort of. Of conversation needs to happen. But that's also to your point about building new stuff. This is why I try to get every new social media app I sign up for. I have our team do it. You know, Dave Rubin's thing, rumble.com, parlor before they destroyed it, Death Star style. I actually am maybe just call me an idealistic believer that maybe someone might figure this thing out and at least disrupt them a little bit. So anyway, but I, I think that's a really good segue to the question I wanted to ask you, which is, so you said, what is the best thing happening in America? What do you think needs to happen that is not currently happening right now in order for us to accomplish our shared objectives of saving this country?

[B]

It's a great point. I think that unfortunately the right is not focused on the right stuff. This has been my biggest frustration and it's very hard to articulate without coming off as a whiner. But there was so much that was done to fix the 2020 election that was legal, that was done in plain sight, and we spent a lot of time on voting machines and whether or not Mike Pence could single handedly overturn an election and we didn't spend nearly enough time on the fact that all these voting rules were changed. And you see this Data like in 2016, according to Ballotpedia, about 6% of mail in votes to Georgia were ruled ineligible in 2023%. So why is that? It was because the rules were changed for signature verification and they were signed off on by Republicans. That's the state of Georgia right there in a nutshell. It was just given away by Republicans in the state. Then we talk about big Tech, how we talked about breaking up big Tech. And I give President Trump credit for threatening Big Tech, which of course, Joe Biden is no threat to Big tech. But there needed to be more that was done. There needs to be more people that take the tech establishment to break them up, to bring antitrust, whatever it is. That's a little outside of my expertise in terms of how to fix it. But I can tell you right now that if you don't start turning over every leaf, looking at every option, free thought in America is going to be a fraction of what it was. Here's my biggest warning on that. For any Republicans that are listening who are in power, if they keep shutting down the dialogue. And I know your platform, Charlie. I'm platform too. It's a cancel culture is horrible. It has not taken all of us off the playing field quite yet. But what happens when they do take all of us off the playing field? What does that look like for this country when there's no dialogue? The alternative to no dialogue is not just the left wins all the time. It's the right gets very angry and the country goes to a much darker place. And again, I disavow all political violence. I make that clear all the time when I'm with you. But it's the, you don't wanna do this. You don't want to shut everyone's voice down. That is wrong. It's wrong morally and it's wrong in terms of statecraft. It's wrong. You can't run a nation state that way.

[A]

That's exactly right. And I share your views of the condemnation of political violence. And you and I both understand when you shut up an entire country or dialogue or discussion, that people are going to resort to means that are regrettable for that society. And that's just a very basic fact of human nature. And it shouldn't shock or surprise anyone when that ends up happening. So I want to ask you, though, Alex. So I hate to. I shouldn't say I hate to, but I. We're focusing on Ron DeSantis, he's now getting his state to stand up to these big tech companies, which is a really promising trend other states seem to be following. Is that a positive development or is this just kind of more of a. Is this more kind of just a box checking thing to say? I did something about. Is this a serious thing?

[B]

I'm generally a cup half full guy. So my thought is people are playing with options. I don't know if there's a clear path to success. And even you and I, you know, we're into breaking up big tech. But even that, what does that look like? How is it broken up? What's the process? You know, how do you separate the various companies? And you don't want to be entirely unfair because that's just, you know, you don't want to totally impose. You don't impose our will. We want it to be a democratic diplomatic process, too, but we need to start looking at what the options are. And I love to hear it, and I love. So I don't know if it's gonna work, but I'm optimistic that it's not box checking, that it's a genuine effort. And it's gonna come from the states.

[A]

I think.

[B]

I think it's gonna come from the states. It's not gonna come from the federal government at this point, because we don't have time to wait for the federal government because Democrats certainly aren't gonna help us. And I do think some of the states is where it's going to be ground zero. I mean, do you have any thoughts? Because you probably thought about more than I have.

[A]

Yeah, I think it's a promising development. I read the DeSantis speech. I actually read the transcript, which I thought he did a really good job of. Texas followed suit similarly, where they said through the state legislature, signed by the governor, they're going to find these tech companies if they do not change their behavior, which I think is a really interesting idea. I'm meeting with a bunch of attorney generals in Arizona next week about this, and I'm just going to be really interested to pick their brain because I know that there has been. Jeff Landry, for example, is terrific from Louisiana.

[B]

He's amazing.

[A]

And I know.

[B]

Great, too.

[A]

Yeah. And they're really.

[B]

Generals are the tip of the spear here.

[A]

They really are trying their best to figure out what options they have at their disposal. And to their credit, this is somewhat of uncharted territory. There's not a lot of precedent that can help them, but I think they really are. They're Trying their best. So I am optimistic the states are doing something. I really am. Do I think it's enough? Probably not. But I think that your point to President Trump. I think President Trump highlighted this issue correctly. Do I wish he would have done more? Absolutely. I wish he would have instructed the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice Antitrust division. On top of five or six other things he very well could have done to these tech companies that would have made their life very difficult. Maybe they would have conform than fix some of their behavior, all the while also going after their monopolistic practices.

[B]

So. So with DeSantis, his plan, which I went through at Breitbart really closely and we have great reporting on it, people want to kind of dig into the details. A few of them that are probably worth highlighting is one of them is this, this mandatory opt out for big tech content filters, which is something that we proposed at Breitbart, which means that you can opt out of the content you don't like. It's not that the Facebook has to filter. It is that you can just choose. I don't want this content. And that is the certain thing that where people actually get to choose your own adventure online. And you don't have the powers of be telling you you can't have Breitbart. If you want Breitbart, you can have Breitbart. And if you want to choose to be super close minded, then you could choose not to have it. It seems very rational. And DeSantis wants that something at Breitbart we've been lobbying for for like three years now at this point. Other stuff in it is fines for locking out candidates for political reasons, transparency around some of these decisions. All of this stuff seems very straightforward. And he's gonna be using the attorney general's against or his attorney general, I guess, against tech companies that violate some of these conditions. And so he's making it so that they're gonna have a big headache if they really feel like we need to start banning these people. And it turns out it ends up just being politics in the end. So I like it. I think it's a terrific place to start. And we gotta start somewhere. And this could be the point place.

[A]

Just from a tactical viewpoint. I love the idea of playing offense and I love the idea of keeping the pressure on using Solinsky's rules for radicals. This is actually the closest that we're actually getting to using their own rules against them because we're making the enemy live up to their own book of standards. We're keeping the pressure on. We are using a tactic that we actually enjoy, which is challenging the tech companies, something that you and I are actually, you know, excited to do. So I think it's brilliant in that sense. Do I know it? Do I think it's enough? I don't really know. So, in closing, Alex, final question here and thank you for coming on. It's breaking the news. Check it out. I can't wait to learn more about this. What is one thing that you've learned recently that you think would be helpful if other people came to the same conclusion that you did? What's one thing that you learned the last couple months, last couple weeks, you said, huh? I didn't know that. Or I'm looking at something differently that I want more people to know.

[B]

Yeah, it's really a great question, and some of it is I probably already. I already gave in the opening to this. But I do think that the biggest thing going is on the right, where we prioritize our time has been my biggest frustration since November 6th. And there's a lot of people who will prioritize their time in a different way in service of a similar cause. And we're falling in this trap where we're dismissing people who have ideas that are not passing a purity test. Like, for example, I was always a skeptic that it was the Venezuelan voting machines in Frankfurt that was really what overturned the election, because I thought it was Google and the new rules for the coronavirus that were obviously not based in science. They were based on wanting to get Democrats elected with more mail in ballots. I've been banging that drum. And then when people saw that I wasn't on board with the talking all day about the big tech. I'm sorry, the flipping of the ballots, you know, people kind of mad at me and stuff, and I was getting negative messages and negative phone calls on radio. And I think that that's very. It's not a wise move on the right. I think the right has a lot of opportunity to fix some of this stuff now before they throw us all off the Internet, before the Democrats get more power. I think we're much more powerful than we think. And if we can get on the same page on the right, I'm not talking about unifying with Joe Biden, who calls us all the antisemites, and why supremacists, but on the right, I can see a unity in the conservative movement. It does seem like Trump's ideas prevailed, his principles won the day. People are pretty much in Agreement now on Big Tech is a threat. China is a threat. Immigration is a threat. NAFTA was terrible. We were in too many wars. There is almost total consensus on the right that provides an incredible opportunity. And then we just spent the last three months fighting over Dominion voting machines. It's such a waste. And I wish we would stop it. If we would stop it, we're probably going to dominate the next few elections.

[A]

I think that's a great point. And the biggest thing that I learned the last couple months is the ability is how people want to believe something when they see that there's an injustice. Which I think it's the most interfered election in American history. From the tech side, from the balloting side. However, I was pushing back constantly in a different way of people that were emailing me saying that Mike Pence was in Gitmo like Mike Pence is not in Gitmo. Okay. And I think that that that sort of deviation from yes. Reality was very. Was very destructive. And I think that we need to stand. And by the way, that doesn't mean I've done more coverage on these topics than most. And you have. Have too. And we're unafraid to take it on. We're not avoiding it. At the same time, I refuse. I refuse to add oxygen into something that I believe is pathologically untrue. I'm not. Again, the Frankfurt Venezuelan thing. I'm a skeptic. I don't know about that. People I get emails from. People that believe firmly in that. Yes, and I'm a skeptic.

[B]

Yeah, exactly. And we covered every newsworthy detail of all that at Breitbart. But I. But we did do it skeptically. We're not trying to keep the information from you guys. Absolutely not. We put it all out there. The issue is that wasn't what swung the election. What swung the election with the cheap by mail and the big tech manipulating what people read. That was it. If we fix those two things, if we come back to a system where people show up on election day with an ID and they vote, unless you're in the military and you absolutely cannot get to a polling place, if we restore that and we made it so that Zuckerberg and Bezos and the freaks over Google stopped targeting people who disagree with them politically. And Jack Billy Goat Dorsey, if we got those guys to start playing fair, it's over. The right is going to start dominating for generations because we're coach up on the values. As I said, we're all lockstep on the values. So now we got to get back on the playing field on those two issues. That's my take.

[A]

I agree. Trump was the great political liberator. He has changed the Republican Party and politics for good.

[B]

Good.

[A]

And if we take a cue from all of a sudden courageous and popular and populist conservatives like Ron DeSantis, I think we win everything. I think that the conservative movement is going to be dominant in five years, and we are. And it's going to be unbelievable. Okay. Breaking the News by Alex Marlow. Alex, you must come back. Thank you so much for joining us, everybody. If you guys show us you're subscribed to the Charlie Kirk show, email us freedom charliekirk.com we might send you a signed copy of Alex's book as soon as it comes out with all this very specific and interesting developments that he's uncovered. So make sure you do that, Alex.

[B]

Thanks so much, Charlie. You're a swell guy. Appreciate it. Appreciate your whole team.

[A]

Thank you. Speak to you soon, Alex.