B (2:32)

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, one of the most Startling facts that I don't think people know. And of course they wouldn't because the mainstream media is lying to them. It is fake news. I mean, there's no way about it. And we're not saying that the virus isn't real. That's not what we're saying. We're saying. Yeah, exactly. Never been the position. What we're just saying is there are still less hospitalizations in LA county today than there was in December 2019 before any of this started.

A (2:56)

Here's the way that I break down a lot of the virus thing. There is little to no chance that we are under reporting cases and underreporting current hospitalizations.

B (3:08)

That's right.

A (3:09)

We're definitely underreporting cases. Right. So. Meaning there's people out there right now that have no symptoms or slight symptoms that are not gonna get in the testing pool. But. So they say that all these deaths are because of the Chinese coronavirus. I have in my own life examples of people that were labeled on the death certificate as dying of the Chinese coronavirus that did not die of the virus. And if you are in the hospital and you're there for an unrelated reason and you get tested for it, you get treated as a case. But also what's really unusual. Have you seen how low the regular flu numbers are right now?

B (3:46)

They can't even report on the flu because there's too few hospitalizations. They can't produce a real report. Folks, this is shocking. And if you're not hearing this on whatever network you're watching, well, just keep it. We'll keep it vague. Then you're getting fake news. They cannot report on flus this season because there are too few hospitalizations. Straight from the CDC's website, by the way.

A (4:13)

And so there's very little chance that there are more people dying of the virus than what is being reported. Meaning that we're probably at the top threshold. Statistically, there's probably not more people than that. Deaths is a pretty final number. I think it's a lot less than that. Because just because you're being tested positive for the virus and you're dying doesn't mean that the virus was necessarily the reason why you died.

B (4:38)

Well, this was Heather McDonald's point in the City Journal recently where she said two thirds of all deaths arguably would have died anyways, even if it's half true. I mean, it's making your point, right, that a lot of folks tend to be over 80 that are the cohort that's dying at the greatest clip, which makes A lot of sense, because people over 80 tend to die faster than everybody else anyway.

A (4:57)

And mature societies and mature civilizations, when you're confronted with a crisis or you're confronted with something like this, you weigh the costs. You weigh the price. As Dennis Prager says, an act of mature person is someone who looks at something and say, what is the price of that? What is it gonna cost me? So what is the cost of a lockdown? What's the cost of a mask mandate? What's the cost of continually going through this? And is it actually going to do any good? And so despite all the lockdowns, despite all this, we're still seeing infection rates go up. We're still seeing more people that are saying they have it and are going into these testing centers. And what really is the. What is more clear than anything else is the lockdowns make people much poorer. They make us far less likely to succeed, far less likely to be able to actually develop therapeutics to conquer this virus. And the human cost of the lockdowns is so significant and so clear, whether it be the rise in suicide rates, the rise in depression, the alcoholism, the drug usage, that the lockdowns, I believe, are nothing more than a tactic and a strategy to want to keep America perpetually in a cycle of not just despair, but going towards almost a great reset, globalist direction.

B (6:11)

No, you're absolutely right. That's why we have to get behind guys like Danny Presti.

A (6:16)

There's a thing, though, because he just ran into a climate.

B (6:19)

And I. Listen, if it's proven out that. That he actually attacked cops, then of course, we don't support that.

A (6:25)

Which I find hard to believe.

B (6:26)

Which I find hard to believe, because this guy's been sort of. I mean, listen, one thing is certainly clear. He's taken a lot of heat for this. He's gotten death threats. He's been called a granny killer. All of these things that are terrible accusations, right? His story is that he got approached from behind by two big burly men. This is a story from the press conference. And that he ran away in defense of his life, that the cop didn't break his leg, that he has sort of like a. An ankle injury, but it's not a broken bone. I don't know what we're gonna. We're gonna hear more details about that. But it's not just Danny Presti in Staten Island. You've also got this video out of Los Angeles, Pineapple Hill, Angela Marsden. Her video went completely viral this week, and rightly so. It was heartbreaking. To watch, especially when Hollywood, 20ft away, has, you know, the exact same outdoor setup that's been given a. That's been given a permit by the. By the state and by the city. So the question then becomes, what are the true costs? What are you gonna do about it? And by the way, something looming over all of this is when are we gonna actually get back to normal? We actually have some great sound from this that I wanna share with everybody. It comes from the WHO special envoys. It's clip 13. Dr. David Nabarro, he was on Sky News over in the uk. He's basically predicting that we're not gonna be even with vaccines. All the promises that are being made, we're not going to be back to normal for two years. Can we play that clip?

D (7:51)

In my view, we have to go on treating this virus with enormous respect for quite a lot of months to come. And that will mean face masks and physical distancing have to be built into our lives. Otherwise the virus does just go on surging and causing further problems. I don't want to sugarcoat it. The reality is it'll be some months before we're able to actually dispense with all these precautions.

A (8:20)

So basically saying that this thing's never gonna go away, but I mean, it keeps these people perpetually relevant. I mean, these people, these epidemiologists have never really been in the focal point. I mean, Dr. Anthony Fauci and all these people, they have been warning against something like this for 30 years. And this is kind of their big moment. This is their. This is, it is the. As the Iraq war is to the war industry, the Chinese coronavirus is to the epidemiological industry.

B (8:46)

Yeah, yeah. It's kind of like this is the military industrial complex, Covid complex.

A (8:51)

And the left is okay with it because it's all things that they enjoy producing. Individual freedom, all of it.

B (8:56)

The left runs the institutions. So guess, guess, guess where business is booming right now. The institutions, they get to tell us all everything, what to do. And they're in power. They get to control things. Complete leftist instincts here at play.

A (9:09)

So we have. You guys are asking us about voter fraud. You're asking us about what's happening in these states. But there's a new study that comes out. I want you to think about this. Nine in 10 Democrats say the process worked well in the election. Nine in 10 Republicans disagree. So I was at a gathering last evening with very successful Christian Republicans. I'll leave it at that. And every single one of them, every one of them Believed the election was stolen from Donald Trump. Not only that, they believe that if he is not sworn in as president in January, they will never trust another election again. And with it, they won't trust their country. I mean, it was so clear to me how there is. This is the true divide here, which is, do you actually trust the process of which we put people into power? If the answer is no, then you're not gonna trust the people in power and you're sure as heck not gonna trust what they tell you to do. And then the disintegration only goes from there.

B (10:03)

Yeah. When both sides are getting further and further away, more polarized. Right. I mean, the polarization left doesn't even resemble an America that I remember anymore.

A (10:11)

No, but it's not. We can't even agree on whether or not the leader in charge.

B (10:14)

Yeah.

A (10:15)

Is actually a leader.

B (10:16)

Right.

A (10:16)

Forget about the issues, forget about topics and policies. We're getting to a place where we're going to say, you're not actually my leader. Good Ranchers began with the standard of bringing top quality, 100% American born, raised and harvested meat to families across America. This vision was instilled into them from their grandparents that owned community grocery stores and believed in trust, charity, and family values. Look, we've talked about Good Ranchers before. They sent us an unbelievable box of meat. And producer Connor, he brought it home and he said it was unbelievable. Seriously, he started talking about it uninterrupted for quite some time. It was perfectly marbled. It was unbelievable. In fact, he was sending us videos of him cooking the meat. We haven't been able to calm him down because then they sent us a ham and it got completely out of control. So look, Good Ranchers is a good partner. They do a great job. And as always, good ranchers is 100% American beef and chicken. And now they have pork. Steaks are always USADA choice and higher. Chicken is 100%, all natural, no hormones, and it's individually wrapped, vacuum sealed and ready to grill. So look, I'm gonna tell you this again. Good Ranchers, quality meat. You love your country, then you have to buy meat from our country. It's the envy of the world, okay? Most of the rest of the world, they don't have meat like we have in America. Here's what Good Ranchers do. You go to goodranchers.com you browse through their beautiful website, easy to use. So go do that. And then all of a sudden you say, I want to order dinner for the next two weeks. That's where good ranchers comes in, they send you a box of meat and then use that promo code Charlie. And they send you a free Berkshire hickory ham. Boom. Win. Problem solved. Love America. Goodranchers.com, promo code Charlie. And then just email us how much you love the meat. Thanks so

B (12:02)

much.

A (12:04)

Day that Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, well, the day that we'll live in infamy. It was a surprise attack from the Japanese that many people thought that would never happen. Husband E. Kimmel was golfing on Pearl harbor back on December 7, 1941. We were obviously surprised attacked. I think over 3,000 people died on Pearl Harbor.

B (12:30)

Yeah. He was the four star admiral who served as the commander in Chief of the U.S. pacific Fleet during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

A (12:36)

Yeah. So he's forever known. His famous quote was that if only I could have died on Pearl harbor, then it would have made this whole process a lot easier because he had to live.

B (12:49)

He was the admiral who took the fall.

A (12:51)

Yeah, that's exactly right. And so it awoke what was called the sleeping giant. And obviously I didn't live through it. My father did not live through it. My grandfather did. My grandfather served in World War II, as did mine in the Pacific Fleet. I don't know if yours did.

B (13:05)

Yeah, in the Pacific Fleet. Yeah.

A (13:07)

And so my, my great, my grandfather was a pilot. And actually they used to call it the Army Air Corps, not the Air Force.

B (13:13)

That's right.

A (13:14)

And so, but it was looking back, that was America at its best, fighting a two front war in both the Pacific and the European theater against absolute and complete evil. Not just pushing back what we know of in Europe as total kind of the methodical, almost mechanized version of absolute evil which we now know in the Holocaust, but the complete and total takeover of Europe and then eventually the liberation of Europe. But we want to bring up the remembrance of Pearl Harbor. First of all, we don't remember our history enough, I think, in our country. I was just watching some television shows this morning and almost no one mentioned Pearl harbor at all whatsoever. And I think that's a really important thing that we do. But that generation left us a gift. They left us a gift that really we are squandering right now and not dissimilar from the two front war that was going on there. And this is all just a metaphor. I'm not saying that it's the same stakes or the same sacrifice. We're in the middle of a two front war right now in Georgia, where we not only need to win the Senate races But we need to expose all of this voter fraud that's happening in this country. And so a lot of people are saying, well, what are the next steps? Here's what we need. Here's what to pray for, here's what to look for, here's what hopefully will surface. We need a serious whistleblower in the next week to come forward and say, you know what? I was the organizer, I was the guy that scooped up the ballots, I helped fill them in. I will not be able to live with myself for the rest of my life. And here's where the Department of Justice and the FBI could have been doing a good job. They could have at least been threatening indictments. They could have been smoking this out so that people would have had their. Their minds would have been their worst captors. And they would have said, I might go to jail. I'm gonna speak out, offer me immunity. I'll tell you how this whole thing was done. And this is the disservice that the Department of Justice and the FBI did to our country because as they said, oh, there's no voter fraud. You know what all the criminals did?

B (15:11)

Whoo.

A (15:12)

I thought they were gonna come after us. I thought they were gonna indict us. But when you start to all of a sudden circle the wagons, the criminals would start to get nervous. They would start to speak out themselves.

B (15:22)

Such a great point. If you're a criminal and you even hear people on, let's say CBS or NBC saying investigations continue. Yes. Yeah. And the FBI threatening years in prison, I mean, that would start to take an effect. But when you turn on the news, if you're one of the criminals and you're looking and it says, this isn't real, this is the most secure election in American history, which is patently false, by the way, you start to say, they're gonna cover for me. We're get away with this.

A (15:51)

Yeah. And we know that crimes happen every single day. I know some of you guys are emailing us. We already have whistleblowers. We have 100 whistleblowers. You're right. But we need a whistleblower from within. We need a whistleblower from within the actual process that this was done. The criminal infrastructure. Cuz look, a judge at some point can look at all this data and say this was a flawed election. And for any Republican out there that is not willing to fight on this, we are going to remember. And the best example is this. We go back in time again, we could talk about so many things that we used to think were true. And then all of a sudden we know the opposite. Look back to Richard Nixon. You understand, looking into the idea that Richard Nixon ordered or at least knew about the Watergate hotel raids was a conspiracy theory. What we need right now is we need the quote Deep Throat, we need the person that comes out and speaks out against it. And if you guys don't know your history and you think I said something inappropriate, well, then go do your research. So let's go through this Daniel Horowitz article on voter fraud, election fraud. And Daniel Horowitz is a lawyer, right? Yeah, he's very smart for the Blaze. He was on with Mark Levin.

B (17:06)

So yeah, our friends at the Blaze, he's done a phenomenal job. He's actually been great on coronavirus as well.

A (17:13)

He's been phenomenal.

B (17:13)

Yeah. So I think we have a clip here. He was on with Levin on FOX on Sunday night. Very, very good segment. Let's go ahead and play that clip to get us into this segment.

E (17:23)

Well, Mark, it's great to be back with you. And look, what we found was magic. I mean, returns and political scientific data that we haven't seen before where when it comes to mail in ballots, of which there were many 2.6 million, it turns out that they always seemed to skew against Trump even relative to other Republicans. And they always seem to favor Biden even relative to other Democrat candidates. So comparing apples to apples.

B (17:52)

Yeah. And so what he's talking about here, the math is phenomenal, how it works out. I mean, you gotta see this. So here's taking directly from his article, he said here are the facts. We know that 2.6 million mail in ballots have been counted in the Pennsylvania election returns. And just so you guys know, we were in the break, we were talking about an article from September from the Wall Street Journal warning about Pennsylvania's mail in madness. So this was stuff that we were talking about President Trump was talking about. Now here's our after the fact analysis. So here we go. So we know that 2.6 million mail in ballots have been counted in the Pennsylvania election returns, in addition to nearly 4.2 million election day votes. We also know that from the secretary of State that Trump won election day votes, 2.7 to 1.4 million. But we are to believe that Biden won 76% of the mail in ballots. So just to put it in perspective, 76% is way above the flip. That's statewide, we won nearly 80% of mail in ballots.

A (19:00)

That is a lot of Republicans vote by mail. A Lot.

B (19:04)

Tons of.

A (19:05)

In fact, Republicans used to outpace Democrats in voting by mail, which is why Democrats used to attack vote by mail.

B (19:11)

Right.

A (19:11)

Which is why Jimmy Carter used to attack it, which is why all the special interest groups used to hate vote by mail. Because older Republican voters used to do vote by mail.

B (19:18)

Right. Well, and one thing we're not saying is that in our current iterations, that it doesn't skew Democrats. It does. It does still mail in ballots skew Democrat.

A (19:27)

We know that as of now, but

B (19:28)

that's not what we're saying.

A (19:29)

But it's not 80, 20.

B (19:30)

Yeah. So yes, mail in ballots overwhelmingly skew Democrat. Like election day skew Republicans. But they were not all from Democrats. We know that 64.7% of those votes were from registered Democrats, 23.7 from Republicans, and 11.6 from nonpartisan or other parties. What does this mean in simple arithmetic? And so basically what they do is they break. Daniel breaks it down in this Horowitz crunch the numbers and shows that Biden won 95% of returned Democrat mail in votes, 21% of returned Republican votes, and 80% of returned independent votes. And he still wouldn't have come up short of the margin that he needed for victory. So let me play that back. He would have had to get 95% of Democrats, 21% of Republicans, which does not happen. Remember, folks, Donald Trump is the most popular Republican president among Republicans in modern American political history. It's like a 95 or 96% approval rating. He is not losing 21% of the Republican vote, nor is he is he gonna lose 80% of the independent vote. The independent vote in Pennsylvania, we know skewed just slightly. Democrat was like in Pennsylvania. According to exit polls, Biden won 52% of independents. He did not win 80% in the mail in vote. All that said, he still would have lost the Pennsylvania election had he won 95% of Dems, 21% of Republicans, and 80% of independents. So the fact that Biden somehow made up the margin of victory after election day mail in ballots is so hard

A (21:06)

to believe, it's incomprehensible.

B (21:09)

Technically, nothing's impossible, but it's way past implausible. So, I mean, this is just part of his analysis that again, I don't want to steal all of Daniel's thunder from the show on Wednesday, but this is part of a growing case of irregularities in this election.

A (21:25)

So, Andrew, what's it gonna take for a judge to say this is so obviously stolen and this does not make sense? Can this stuff hold up in a court of law?

B (21:33)

I mean, I think a lot of stuff can hold up in a court of law. I mean, here's the truth, folks, and this is why, whether it's lockdowns or whether it's voter integrity, the base has to rise up and create so much noise, and they have to rally and they have to get in the streets and they have to call and email and cause a fuss. This is not a time to sit back and accept it from your betters. This is a time to make noise and fight back. Why? Because judges are human. Judges are human beings just like everybody else. And if they know that there's pressure on them to get to the bottom of it, they're much more likely to get behind it.

A (22:10)

They're not robots. They are influenced by public opinion. They're influenced by potential backlash.

B (22:14)

They know if they have the backing.

A (22:16)

That's right.

B (22:16)

The people.

A (22:17)

And no matter how much they try to convince you otherwise, they are absolutely open to public pressure. And so here's what I'm failing to understand, though, which is this case is actually growing in merit, meaning I have not heard strong counterarguments from the nonvoter fraud community, which is the left and the Democrats. We're seeing more pundits, Andrew. We're seeing more cable news coverage actually going towards this, which is the opposite of what people would think. Right. You and I were texting last night. We're seeing more people. Mark Levin dedicated a whole hour to this.

B (22:51)

Steve Hilton. Same. Yeah. And weeks ago, Steve was not touching this issue.

A (22:55)

And Steve's a great friend. It's not about Steve. No.

B (22:57)

Steve's a fantastic human being, but now he's in the fight. Why? Because the evidence is mounting. The smoking gun video out of Georgia, even though Raffensperger. The.

A (23:06)

What is Raffensperger's response to that, though?

B (23:08)

Oh, he's saying that it's common. This is common practice.

A (23:11)

It's common just to have ballots underneath the table.

B (23:13)

Commentators like Erik Erickson are saying the same thing,

A (23:17)

actually. Curious. I'm not trying to be overly antagonistic. What is the explanation.

B (23:21)

That's the explanation that we're all hearing is that this is common practice.

A (23:25)

That's like saying murder is common in Chicago. That doesn't mean that it's okay.

B (23:29)

Exactly. So the thing that they cannot explain in this video is why were the media told that counting had stopped? Why were the observers removed? Why was the Republicans not in the room? Right. So there was a lot of questions that remained to be answered. Here. And these are tens of thousands of votes that are unaccounted for.

A (23:50)

No, no. But just so I understand Erik Erickson's argument and the kind of people that are defending the system, they think it's okay that someone wheels in ballots, hides

B (24:01)

them under a desk, and then just leaves it, kicks everybody out and then starts counting them out. Yeah. And then it just happens to correspond. That tweet from Eric Trump that we saw, the timestamp on the video, if you look at when the vote spike happened in Georgia, that was statistically, again, highly implausible. They tend to correlate. Now, is it just those ballots? Probably not. Is it a combination of a couple things? Absolutely. The fact that they line up is highly suspicious.

A (24:30)

And so it was. Some people are saying they're not suitcases, but storage containers. So if they say this happens all the time, do we have footage of this happening somewhere else then in State Farm Arena?

B (24:43)

No, you know, I don't think so.

A (24:46)

So but then why wouldn't we have footage of this happening somewhere else?

B (24:48)

Well, the fact that they were hidden and removed after they told everybody to get out. And we've got the GOP chair in Georgia saying that, yes, we were told the county stopped, the counting had stopped, and that we were kicked out of the room.

A (25:00)

But Eric's not dumb. Eric Erickson?

B (25:02)

No, He's a smart guy.

A (25:03)

How does he come to a conclusion that this is okay? I'm just trying to see it. What am I missing here?

B (25:09)

I think that it's confirmation bias on his point. I mean, I think he's a really smart guy, but I think that he's been. He calls himself an election attorney, a lawyer, and so he knows a lot. But one of his main arguments is that these machines are not connected to the Internet. There was a video that he put out on Instagram a while, like, last week saying that it's not connected to the Internet. He must have repeated that line 10 times. But the truth is there's very valid and backed up by sworn affidavits that say, no, these mobile machines were connected to the Internet. And then there's this highly suspicious update that happened in Georgia on the Dominion voting systems. So. And, you know, and there's a report out of Ware county in Georgia as well that's alleging that there was some vote tabulation issues that may or may not be real thing. Again, Eric Erickson contends that that. That is not something that we need to get all up in arms about that. It was actually, but it's not the Same.

A (26:06)

It's Raffensperger and that kind of whole group in Georgia.

B (26:09)

The bottom line is we need signature verification.

A (26:13)

Well, signature verification would be great, but we're dealing with five or six different things, which is, where did these ballots come from? And is it really customary practice? She hid them under the table. It'd be one thing if you kind of just left them open there and everyone went through it, but you kind of just pull them out as if you're. You're executing a heist.

B (26:30)

Well, and if it was customary, why do you remove everybody? Why are there not.

A (26:35)

See, they said that didn't happen, though. Yeah, I mean, this is where the bureau or the Georgia Attorney General need to look into this.

B (26:40)

Yeah, exactly. We're all at the end of the day, we're all relying on secondhand information here. But, you know, we've had Rudy Giuliani on this show, and by the way, he does have coronavirus and he's in the hospital. Apparently he's doing really well. And we're praying for Rudy, of course. But, you know, ultimately, I think the overwhelming mountain of evidence, whether it's the statistical improbabilities that we see in Pennsylvania. By the way, one thing I failed to mention in Pennsylvania, this whole day of versus mail in ballot, not only would he, Joe Biden would have had to win a ridiculous percentage of votes. That just does not make any sense. If you assume that the exit polling was at all accurate, Biden would have still lost by 213,000 votes in Pennsylvania. Had the rest of the votes followed exit polling trends, he still would have lost by over 200,000. Remember, Trump won the state by just over 40,000 in 2016, and he well

A (27:35)

over performed his votes well over performed. Did you know your family can save over $800 a year just by switching to PeerTalk from Verizon, AT&T or T Mobile. Look, I looked into PeerTalk. They do a great job. So listen carefully. What could your family do with an extra $800? It's like a stimulus. I have a stimulus package and a cell phone plan. It's pretty amazing. It's peertalk. Same coverage, same bars as the big carriers, but they charge you half. You definitely don't need to sacrifice customer service. Their team is based right here in the United States. And some of the nicest people you'll ever talk to don't wait. Switch today. You can be your phone and your number or choose from a massive selection of the latest iPhones and Androids, get unlimited Talk, text and 2 gigs of data for just 20 bucks a month. And if you go over on the data usage, they don't charge you for it. Grab your mobile phone and dial £250 and say Charlie Kirk. When you do, you'll save 50% off your first month. Dial £250 and say keyword Charlie Kirk. PureTalk is simply smarter wireless Producer Andrew what's going on with Alito in Pennsylvania?

B (28:38)

Right. So what's at issue here is something called the safe harbor deadline, right? So little backstory. Representative Mike Kelly has filed an election challenge. Originally, Alito had ordered that the defendants provide a response by December 9th. And this all gets into some sort of complicated legal maneuvering, right? So theoretically, and this is what Jenna Ellis has alleged here on this show, is that electors, the Constitution is clear that the states appoint the electors, the electors vote for president. Okay? Now, since the drafting of the Constitution, states have formulated all these laws and there's calendar dates that have been put on the calendar. Now, Phil Klein, who you also had on this show from the Amistad Project, former attorney general of Kansas, has said the only date that matters is January 20th.

A (29:37)

That is in the Constitution.

B (29:38)

That is in the Constitution. Now, we also have the dates of December 8 and December 14. This is when electors get appointed and then seated.

A (29:48)

And then they. But those dates are arbitrary.

B (29:50)

Those dates are. They're arbitrary to a point. And this is what is getting. This is what's behind this particular. What we think is behind moving this up from the 9th to the 8th. So he had previously Alito, Justice Alito, who again was appointed by President George W. Bush, who had some good ones, and Alito and some not so good ones, had previously ordered that the state's lawyers respond to Kelly, who's the Republican Representative Mike kelly suit by December 9, a day after the safe harbor date, which would mean that Congress cannot challenge any electors already named in accordance with state law. The law frees up states from challenges as long as it settles all legal issues and certifies results prior to the electoral college meeting. Okay, so that's the key here. The law in Pennsylvania frees up states from challenges as long as it settles legal issues and certifies results prior to the electoral college meeting. So that would be on the 9th. So by Justice Alito moving this up to the 8th, he simplified the legal challenges that are possible here. So if he rules in this emergency injunction that actually this, that Pennsylvania violated the state's constitution and that actors besides the state legislature change the electoral rules. If he does that on the 8th, well, then by the 9th, there's still legal challenges pending. They can't seat electors. This is a massive, massive change. Meaning.

A (31:19)

So if that ends up happening.

B (31:21)

Yeah, if the.

A (31:22)

So who needs to rule that way?

B (31:23)

If Kelly wins his case. Mike Kelly, who represented Mike Kelly.

A (31:28)

If they win and they're arguing in the court.

B (31:31)

This is before the Supreme Court right now. Yeah. This is an emergency. So Alito is in charge of Pennsylvania. This is an emergency injunction that the state of Pennsylvania has filed. And in as much as that's concerned, if you get it, if he rules in the state in the favor of Pennsylvania, Mike Kelly, on the 8th, there's still legal challenges. They don't get to seat electors.

A (31:53)

So Alito solely rules on this or the entire United States Supreme Court.

B (31:57)

I think this is gonna be an Alito, and then I think there becomes a larger court ruling that comes into play at that point.

A (32:03)

So Alito has to grant relief. Alito, grant relief.

B (32:07)

Yeah.

A (32:08)

And if he doesn't, then that's not good.

B (32:10)

I'm a son of a lawyer. District attorney.

A (32:12)

Yeah, yeah, exactly. So if he doesn't, that's not good. It's an emergency injunctive relief.

B (32:17)

If this fails at the next step, it's gonna be. It's gonna be bad news. I mean, there's no way around it. But if it succeeds, then it sort of makes way for a lot of other things to happen in all of these different states that are. And we have.

A (32:31)

If it succeeds, then it could set a precedent. I mean, but every district is overseen by a different.

B (32:36)

It gives momentum. Okay. Again, and what we talked about, how the judges have. They're human beings, and they see what's going on in the culture. This will force CBS and NBC and CNN and Washington Post, and they'll largely push anointing. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, exactly. I mean, this is justice. Alito is a solidly conservative justice. So in one, on the one hand, a lot of people aren't gonna be surprised by this, but he's not a

A (32:58)

Trump appointee, so not that it would matter. But if he grants relief, then potentially the electors could not be seated if the other lawsuits.

B (33:09)

Right, because under state law, they are. You know, they have to have every legal challenge behind them in order to seat the electors. This would mean it's not behind them. They're still dealing with a legal challenge.

A (33:22)

That's the big deal.

B (33:23)

Yeah.

A (33:24)

And we're covering that live.

B (33:25)

Yeah, well, just after.

A (33:27)

As it happens.

B (33:27)

Yeah, just after. Mm.

A (33:29)

And so who's arguing then?

B (33:31)

This is Mike Kelly. I think this is. You know this is the House of Representatives there versus the state's lawyer.

A (33:39)

Got it. Thanks so much for listening everybody. If you want to email us your questions, it's freedomarliekirk.com if you want to get involved with Turning Point USA, the fighting force to save America, it's tpusa.com where we play offense with a sense of urgency to win America's culture war. And again, if you want to email me something and you're interested in something, it's freedomarliekirk.com thanks so much for listening, everybody. God bless. Speak to you soon.