C (2:57)

Yeah. So it has been so frustrating to have people blow up about this. And we've stated. I've certainly stated publicly the reason I haven't weighed in on things is I am an eyewitness to events, and they've said, don't comment on things because anything you say can mess that up. I don't want to mess up any trial for the person who did this.

B (3:16)

That's 1,000% right. And I will say I wasn't an eyewitness. I was not there. I flew to Utah immediately to be with the family and the team, but I was not an eyewitness. So there's that. But I am aware that in my role as spokesman for Turning Point usa, which is another hat I wear, the things I say. I'm cognizant of the fact that things I say could negatively impact an ongoing investigation. All right. But I will weigh in specifically on this. This issue of Israel, because I know there's a lot of fascination, and I just want to say that, you know, we have to let free speech be our North Star here. Okay. Charlie was adamantly free speech, and I am not personally going to impugn anybody's character who is asking questions and looking for answers. All right? And I will say that that text chain is consistent with public frustrations that he voiced many times. And I know, Blake, you were in the trenches on a lot of this stuff because we were workshopping how we were gonna do the tour and what we, you know, he's gonna get asked about Israel. What was he gonna say? And this is consistent with things that he told his friends, people that are, you know, in the water, wider movement about his wrestle that he was going. And so I just want to say, like, what is the truth about the way Charlie felt about Israel? Well, it's complicated, and it's nuanced, and it was a wrestle that was going on for months. And it's probably somewhere between the Bibi letter and the text group text.

C (4:44)

I don't even think there's a between about it. I think those are entirely consistent with the exact same worldview. Charlie was not hiding things from people. There's going to. There's. People are going to try to make you fixate on a particular quote or a particular line to make you think that there was something hidden. There was nothing hidden about Charlie's views on Israel. Like Charlie, I worked with Charlie on every major issue that we talked about, you know, immigration, abortion, transgender stuff. And he thought about the Israel issue a ton all the time. It was in the news all the time. People cared about it a lot. He cared about it a lot. Just before the shooting happened, I finished reading this is a 700 page book about the history of the Israel, Palestine conflict. I read this book because Charlie said, blake, get really well versed on this, so you can help me whenever it comes up and just know stuff off the top of your head.

B (5:31)

Yeah.

C (5:31)

So I read it for that reason. If you want to know Charlie's views on the Gaza war, he wanted the war to end. He didn't want America to take Palestinian refugees. He was annoyed when people advocated that. He didn't want American troops on the ground there or with any other war. And he was upset when he saw stories about churches being damaged or Christians being killed. But at the same time, he recognized Hamas started the war. Hamas could end the war. Israel ultimately represented European civilization. Hamas represented Middle Eastern barbarism. And Hamas were the chief evildoers. And people who supported them were almost always supporting them for these bad, like, anti civilizational reasons. Yeah, that's what his view was. And he was public about that. And then as it continued, Charlie talked to young people all the time. He could see what was going on on the Internet. He could see among young conservatives there was a big shift to be hostile to Israel. There was a shift big time on the left, but it was also visible on the right. He could tell anti Semitism was rising in America and that upset him. Charlie was public about this. He loved Israel. He cared about Israel, and he cared about how that. And he wanted to give. He wanted to help the pro Israel movement.

B (6:41)

Yeah, and I want to. I want to play this. It's a long clip, but, you know, I said something on the Alex Clark show that was, in my mind completely consistent with Charlie's public views about Israel. And that is something that he also expressed very publicly on Megyn Kelly. Now, I know this clip has gone viral, but I think it's worth playing again. So here's Charlie in his own words with Megyn Kelly. Cut 65.

A (7:02)

And I will say this. The behavior by a lot, both privately and publicly, are pushing people like you and me away. Not like we're gonna be pro Hamas, not like we're going to, but we're like, honestly, the way you are treating me is so repulsive. I have text messages, Megan, calling me an anti Semite. I am learning biblical Hebrew and writing a book on the Shabbat. I honor the Shabbat, literally the Jewish Sabbath. I visit Israel and fight for it. And there's another article out in the Times of Israel today. I could read it on air. I was just reading before I got on. Charlie, what are you doing? Like, why are you. What am I doing? I'm sorry. Like, let's just take a step back here. Like, I'm an American citizen. Yes, I want Israel to win. Yes, I'm a Christian. But like, the sum of the mess. And you saw me, you've seen. I've been treated, Megan, by some. Not all. By some.

D (7:54)

No. It's very irritating.

A (7:55)

It's been so unfair.

D (7:57)

They were coming after you after a turning point. For, among other things, you had Dave Smith there. Dave Smith is allowed to criticize Israel. You had both sides. The Israeli side was not allowed to, though.

A (8:08)

No, you're not allowed to. It's even worse than that. Again, I just want to repeat for the fifth time, I love Israel. I want Israel to win. But my moral character is now being put into question, Megan, not my decisions. Not like, hey, are you doing this? Is it smart or is it dumb? But no, I am a bad person if I do this. And I could go, I mean, you saw it, Meghan. It was trending on Twitter. Thousands of tweets and text messages. And if I were to be charitable and generous, I will say the people that are attacking me are in a hyper paranoid state because they're at war. And war tends to make things black and white. And you're a hammer looking for a nail. So I'm trying to be charitable, Meghan. Literally, I'm trying to cut as much slack as I can. Right? Big. Okay, what would it be like if all of a sudden I'm starting to see a pattern of behavior similar to what my grandparents saw in 1930s Germany Online? How would I behave? So that's like my charitable kind of over compensation spirit. At the same time, I'm like, but you're.

D (9:09)

It's.

A (9:09)

It's not defensible to be dumb, right?

D (9:12)

Yeah.

A (9:13)

So.

D (9:13)

And it's offensive.

B (9:14)

It's offensive to those of us who.

D (9:15)

Have been out there defending them in many instances against critics on our own side.

B (9:22)

So this text, this group check text, you know, he does say, you know, that he's leaving him no choice but to leave the pro Israel set. Here's what I want People to know Charlie said these things publicly and privately to us, like that he was frustrated. He would say something like that, and then he would go in a public situation and he would strike a more moderate tone.

C (9:42)

No, I wouldn't frame it that way. I would say he was frustrated because he didn't like.

B (9:49)

What I'm saying is he would be frustrated. But, like, the point when I say moderate tone, then when he would say something off the cuff, maybe to you or to me or to some other friend, like his public statements, he would kind of strike just a little bit more tender tone, if you will. And so here's the thing. I looked at that moment as like, he's just blown off steam. He's frustrated, he's venting. Right. And I just want to say, like, you know, he made that very clear under any circumstances that he was not going to be cowed or bullied into deplatforming Tucker, for example. He made that expressly clear to us. Would he have invited Candace? I have no idea. I think what he was saying in that text, he's like, keep coming at me, bro, and let's see what happens. Right. And Charlie was wonderfully defiant. He was wonderfully independent, and he would not, you know, he believed in the freedom of speech, and he felt like he deserved, as a friend of Israel over many years, the right to speak out and have criticism. So I will say one other thing, is that he's loyal. Charlie was loyal to people that he had shared history with. Right. He was asked. I think this may be what you were about to say, Blake. He was asked about Candace before in public, and he would always say, listen, we're friends. He would never say an ill word about her. And if people, you know, tried to force him to do that about Tucker or whatever, he would always be defiant because he didn't want to be morally blackmailed.

C (11:15)

Exactly. Exactly. Charlie was. He was loyal to people who had ever been friends to him, whether it was very old donors or just people who had worked with Turning Point. And, you know, as long as they were not attacking him, he would, you know, he would. He would not air any dirty laundry or, frankly, any disagreements he had with people. He did disagree with Candace on the Israel issue. He disagreed with Tucker on the Israel issue, but he also recognized Tucker had positions they agreed on. Tucker was a useful voice in the conservative movement on many things. And so he invited him to events, and, you know, they were popular events, and so he would react. Sometimes people would just say, yeah, don't invite him, or we're going to, you know, cut off some large donation. And that would make him angry. He would say this. Yeah, as you say, this is moral blackmail. And he's this, he's this Scottish guy. He's combative.

B (12:05)

He.

C (12:05)

His reaction to that is, you know, the classic like, screw me, no, screw.

B (12:09)

You, that sort of thing. It's one of my favorite parts about Charlie is just how defiant and independent he was. He was never going to.

C (12:16)

He could not be controlled by other people.

B (12:18)

You could not buy him. He was not bought and paid for. You could not control him with money. It just wasn't the way he was wired. He didn't actually care about money that much.

C (12:26)

And so what's going on here? What is going on here? You guys can look up what the text say. What is going on is character. Charlie, as I mentioned, he always. He loved Israel. He cared about Israel, he cared about the Holy Land. And he was aware there was a surge of anti Israel sentiment on the right. Charlie was thought seriously about this issue and was trying to chart a path forward for people who were sympathetic to Israel. He was playing the good cop here. He was saying, you guys don't realize how bad it could potentially get. You might have to. You have to change your pr. That's why he writes a letter to Bibi. You are losing the PR war. You need to change how you do your priority. You need to change your messaging to the American right. You might need to change what you expect from us that you're not going to be able to count on. Just, for example, unlimited military aid from America. That's just not going to be tenable going forward. So maybe it has to be a more passive relationship. Maybe you need to give more support towards America, some more support towards America. And for example, opposing Islamic migration into America. That's one thing he thought we could ally on. And he was trying to do all of this because he cared about the relationship and wanted to chart a way forward on it. And he would feel angry and upset when people would react to this by blowing up and suggesting he was an anti Semite or a hater. He would get angry about that because he knew it was untrue. And then he would sometimes vent about this. He would vent about this to people who understood that, who are pro Israel, people who shared his view on that issue.

B (13:49)

Well, exactly. And just why I, you know, you know, didn't share this publicly. It was because this was a private message between Charlie and some people, some Jews and non Jews, where he was, you know, frustrated. He was Frustrated. And that would have felt like a betrayal to my friend because he never said anything like that publicly in, like a show. Right. He said, he said things with Megan that were very like, we just played him. I went on Alex Clark's show and I felt like I did a faithful job of expressing what Charlie. What I believed his genuine feelings were. Many of us are hopeful about the direction the country is headed, but after years of abuse and mismanagement, things could fall apart at any moment. That's why I and Americans from all walks of life have taken action to prepare for what's coming next. And that starts with having an emergency food supply. Storing food in your home is the right thing to do because we're living in crazy times. Which explains why so many people are preparing right now. You can get ready too, with a three month emergency food kit from my Patriot supply. It comes with delicious foods like creamy stroganoff, honey wheat bread and mushroom rice pilaf. The entire kit offers over 2000 calories a day. This food kit lasts up to 25 years. Who knows what our country will look like then? But when that day comes, you'll be ready. Now hear from Charlie in his own words.

A (15:07)

Just go to mypatriotsupply.com Kirk to and join millions of Americans who are Preparing today@mypatriotsupply.com Kirk that is mypatriotsupply.com Kirk.

B (15:20)

I just wanna add a couple final thoughts and Blake, you can take it. And then we will bring Mark Halpern and I know he's been patiently waiting. So one thing that I, again, I wanna reiterate, this is an ongoing investigation. There are things that are happening that I don't know about. I also, however, am cognizant of the fact that I, whatever I say could, first of all, it could negatively implicate an ongoing investigation. But I also want you guys to think about, you know, before you press send, before you hit publish, just think about, you know, maybe tainting a jury pool. Maybe the implications could be negative in that way. Another thing I want to say is that when it veers into, you know, attacking some of the people that love Charlie the best, the most and were closest to him, I just want you to, like, have pause and think maybe, you know, there's so many people around here, Blake, that haven't even had a chance to grieve yet fully, right? Because you go from this and then, and then, obviously, and I, again, I don't begrudge people or I'm not going to impugn their character for asking questions. Because I think a lot of it comes out of, like, love and respect for Charlie wanting the truth. And I just want to say, like, me too. I want the truth. That's why I shared that screen grab in the first place, because no stone unturned. But here's two things that I know about Charlie and I think you would back me up on this, Blake. Two things I know Charlie would not want to see come out of the investigation or just the, you know, people's fascination with this case. He would not want to see it divide the movement or divide the coalition because he worked so hard at helping build the coalition, the Trump coalition, and helping build the movement and the many players that play such an important role in it. And he wouldn't want to see it hurt. Turning Point usa this Turning Point usa, he loved, like, you can't believe it was his baby. He. He put so much time and energy into building Turning Point, into picking the people that could play in different roles. And I know that those are the two things Charlie wouldn't want to see happen out of this. But again, I actually totally am sympathetic. Like a lot of you have been lied to. A lot of us have been lied to by people that shouldn't be lying to us. Whether that be about COVID or lockdowns or even what happened with the President Butler. There's still open questions there. I am very sympathetic to wanting to get the truth of these things. But again, just because I don't say things publicly doesn't mean that we aren't asking questions privately or we aren't prepared pursuing things privately. And I think this is an example of that. And candidly, I'm just really, like, it wasn't mine to share publicly, but I'm actually just really excited that it's public. Okay. Cause I want the truth to be known. The truth was it was a wrestle. And actually, Blake, you know that probably better than anything anybody, because you were helping him really prepare on the Israel topic for this tour. And the last thing, and I've been asked to address this by a few people that are in really good faith, some people on our team. And that is Doge. The. That the idea that there was a concern about the finances, first of all, of Turning Point, first of all, of course, Charlie drove always constant improvement. That was one of the things that he was really fixated. He loved Doge so much that he made us make Doge shirts on the show. These are currently on the show website. And kind of down low, Charlie was A bit of a Elon Musk fanboy. He really loved that Elon built things in America. He didn't just make his money by selling financial instruments or pieces of paper or hedging bets. He builds beautiful things, well designed things. So he really loved Doge and wanted to sort of bring that spirit. And I just want to say every spring, he would kind of plan the fall audit and he would try and drive improvements. He wanted to know where every dollar was going. I just, you know, he just loved Doge. I mean, it's one of those. There's not a whole lot more there on the Doge thing, but, you know, this as well. But anything else you want to add before we bring Halperin in?

C (19:13)

Yeah, I just. I want to really emphasize that people will use screen grabs of things to suggest there was distance between what Charlie personally believed and what he said publicly. And I really don't think there was. I think anything you can see in a screenshot from any group chat is also what Charlie was saying publicly. Charlie would say, publicly, I am frustrated by what pro Israel people in the US do to pressure people. I am frustrated.

B (19:39)

He thought it was counterproductive. He actually thought it was.

C (19:41)

It was making the problem counterproductive for the issue at large. And it was personally hurtful to him because he faced attacks that he thought were unjustified and that, you know, and were hurtful to him because they were people he considered friends and allies. And he cared a lot about that because Charlie, as I've always said, Charlie was a person who cared. He was a good person. He cared about the good of America. He cared about the good of the world.

B (20:04)

He was American.

C (20:05)

The good of American Jews. He cared about the good of Christians. And he saw that the Israel issue was important to all of those things, and he wanted to have a healthy way forward in that relationship. That is why he did the panel at Student Action Summit. That's why he would talk about this so much. He was trying to chart a good way forward in that. And he met opposition and obstacles that frustrated him. I saw it all the time. I talked to him about it all the time. I talked to him at length. How should we word things? Because this is something we have to be careful on and we have to be precise on.

B (20:40)

Yeah.

C (20:40)

And that's how it was. That's how he seriously took the issue.

B (20:43)

These chats, by the way, like, it was a place for him to feel like he could vent. Right. And so, anyways, I think we've hit all the points now. We're gonna bring in Halperin for reaction. And some more news that he's tracking Mark Halperin, 2 ATV. Next up with Mark Halpern. Are you there, gentlemen?

D (21:04)

I'm here.

B (21:05)

Well, I'm told you were watching. What are your reactions, Mark?

D (21:10)

Well, first, I want to say how extraordinarily brave and steadfast and inspirational you both have been along with your team. I see glimpses. I was in Arizona for the service, and I follow things closely, but I know I can only imagine what you both have dealt with. And I congratulate you. And I'll tell you that the folks in your life are lucky to have you around to help them guide through this, because never been anything like having to deal with what you guys have done so well. Well done, both of you.

B (21:38)

Thank you for saying that, Mark. And, yeah, I think, Blake, it's safe to say a little bit of this is uncharted territory. And, you know, I just. I want. You know, there's a very personal side of this where it's like we lost somebody that was tremendously close to us in this horrific way. And, you know, I get that it's given the profile of the situation that there are going to people that this was kind of an inevitability. Right. But what I am cognizant of is that really good people are getting caught up in some of it, and I don't think people necessarily mean to do that or I don't. Again, I do not want to impugn anybody's character here. I know there's just a ton of attention that's going to be on it. Go ahead, Mark.

D (22:18)

You want to talk about the Israel thing? You want to go back to the Israel thing? Is that what you're queuing up there?

B (22:21)

Oh, no, I'm just saying that. That people want to get the truth. And I. You know, it's something Tucker mentioned to me when he was on the show, and it was a really super valid point. And I immediately was like, yes, like, thank you for making that point, because people do want the truth. And I just want to, like, let everybody know that if you think, you know, you want the truth, I can assure you we want justice. We want the truth more, probably because.

D (22:46)

The show you two did with Tucker was incredible. You know, Tucker was Tucker and made it easier on you guys because he was so vibrant and. And jocular. But I really was impressed, again, with how you both shared so much during that. Look, it depends on how much trouble you want me to get into on Israel. Part of why I understand, I think the texts and, and some of the other things Charlie said and did related to Israel publicly that caused controversy is because I, I sort of shared that view, which is, you know, I'm an appreciator of Israel, I'm a supporter of Israel's and, and, and, and a respecter of Israel. But just like every American president I've ever covered, you have to stand up to your friends sometimes when you think they're making a mistake. And that applies also to the people in this country who are supporters of Israel, many of whom are wealthy and many of whom play politics at a very high level. And like other people who play politics at a high level who are rich, if you disappoint them, one of the leverage points they, they had is they say, well, if you're not doing what I want, I'm going to not give you money. That's not, that's not specific to a PAC or the American Jewish community. But they, they do it along with everybody else. And to say, I want to be more honest in public about my criticisms of Israel, and if that means certain people who would otherwise give me money, won't give me money, that's something to consider. And the musings in a text is not a lifetime of statements and point of view about Israel. It's a moment.

C (24:22)

And I would like to note. So this would happen with donors related to this issue. But as another example, I know that we pace. We faced pushback in 24 because Charlie was so pro life, for example, and there are some donors who are not as on board with that issue. And they would say, you know, you guys either need to dial it back, we'll be less interested. And he would say, too bad I'm pro life.

B (24:45)

Yeah.

C (24:46)

He just would not be bossed around on issues.

B (24:47)

Yeah, he faced. I mean, listen, I will tell you, Charlie was amazing at not being cowed by donors. And it just, like I said one of my favorite parts about Charlie, wonderfully defiant, like, completely independent minded. And if you pressed him, he would dig his heels in. And that's why we would joke. He'd be like, well, Tucker's gonna speak twice and you know, like, bring it not coming up. They would do that.

C (25:12)

But that's just how defiant.

B (25:13)

He would say that in passing or whatever. And I just want to say the other that's frustrating about this is again, there's an ongoing investigation. There is a suspect. Apparently they have a real good case. And I don't know because I'm not involved in all those conversations. But I can tell you that people that are feel really strongly about it, communication has been robust. And I can't weigh in on that because guess what? I could have negative implications on something that is really important. And so I think, listen, we've spoken about this issue. Free speech is free speech. People are fair to ask questions. I just hope that you think about the two things Charlie wouldn't want to happen. Dividing the coalition, dividing the movement and hurting Turning Point usa. That's what he wouldn't want. And I hope that we can all keep the main thing. The main thing are you ready to drop 20 pounds or more by the new year? At PhD weight loss, they've cracked the code with their Metabolic Reset system, a science backed method that gets your body to burn fat first. They tell you when to eat, what to eat and customize the program to your body's needs and your schedule. PhD weight loss is the only program that guarantees your success and your results. No starving, no endless workouts, no risky drugs. Just a smarter system that resets your metabolism, shrinks dangerous belly fat and keeps the weight off permanently. Don't take it from me, take it from Charlie.

A (26:37)

It works, everybody. PhD will help you too. They won't let you fail.

B (26:40)

Check it out when you call right now, they'll waive your consultation fee. You'll get two extra weeks free and they'll cover the cost of your food during the program. And just for booking, you'll receive Dr. Ashley's book. Five Steps to Reset the Scale. Hurry. This offer is only good in October. So call now. Mention the code newyear. Call 864-644-1900 and mention the code newyear. Mark, I just want to bring you in because it occurred to me immediately after Charlie was killed that you were one of the last interviews that he did on your show. And I just want to give you before we dive into some of this immigration news and things, I want to give you just an opportunity to reflect on the last month and I know that you were an admirer of Charlie's and give you a chance just to reflect on that.

D (27:34)

Well, I have a lot of thoughts about it and I've talked about it quite a bit. Last week on NextUp I had three of your stars, three college students, all of whom are involved in their chapters and have gone through the. I saw that the challenges that conservatives face on most campuses. I'll just tell you the three thoughts quickly and if you want to drill down any of them, we can. First of all, I have Been so haunted by the lack of understanding of Charlie on the part of people in blue America. Very well informed people in my life who'd never heard of him or didn't really understand him. And I think part of that vacuum has been filled by the haters and the people who want to mischaracterize what his life was like. So that's been a big focus of mine is to try to educate people in a non ideological way just to understand not just how important he was to the MAGA movement, but what an extraordinary person. I say unlike any other person in American history because of his moment in time where he was able to do so many things digitally. So that's one is my real focus to try to educate people who didn't know anything about him. Two is being at the service in Arizona. I wish everyone could have been there because unless you were in the room, I don't think from watching videos afterwards, I don't think you could feel what that room felt like. But I've been to a lot of events in my life, including a lot of services for folks and I think that was, that was a remarkable moment for, for those who are honored to be present. And then lastly, I tell people all the time who tell me because I've gotten emotional about it on my shows. I feel so sorry for you. I literally know over a thousand people who knew, including you guys, who knew Charlie better than I did. But there's something about his spirit, there's something about the manner in which he dealt with people. There's something about his place in this current moment in American history that makes this hit people very hard. And again, I've been hit hard by it without, without claiming a relationship I didn't have. And I found that even in people who didn't know him. And again, I'm sure you guys get hundreds more than I do. But I've gotten so many messages from viewers of my programs who say I didn't know him. Sometimes they said I didn't really focus on him, who are really touched by it. And this is young people, older people, you know, as a journalist I've covered a lot of deaths and including a lot of people who've been killed. I don't really remember anything that was as resonant as this for so many people in a deeply emotional way, often a spiritual way, but in a way that really hangs with people and continues to sit with them as they try to understand what happened.

B (30:16)

Well, I think that's really well said. And yeah, I've been I think we've all been blown away at the resonance of this moment and how wide and how worldwide it's become, which is really remarkable. Sean Davis was on the show from the Federalist yesterday, and he was actually in Sweden when it happened, and he's sitting at a coffee shop. And, I mean, he was in a very terrible state. And I think somebody at the Register saw that he was American, and he just looked at him and goes, they got him. You know, it was when they arrested the suspect. And, you know, it was, you know, he's just sitting there at his table. And worldwide, in Sweden, they're following the news and he's trying to cheer up his American customer. And that was just one story out of many. Like, I've heard stories from Pakistan, I've heard stories from Israel, I've heard stories from Australia. I've heard stories from places you wouldn't expect. But, like, in a very real way, the just outpouring, the unleashing of this moment has hit, I think, the world in a really profound way. And it brings up questions about what does that mean for our political moment. You see the polls that show that there's Democrats or progressives at least, that seem to be endorsing political violence. You have this Jay Jones story out of Virginia. I mean, Mark, what does this mean for this moment and what are we seeing? How do we not have unanimity about political assassinations, political violence, bad. And what's happening?

D (31:45)

Well, it's one of the worst manifestations of how divided the country's been, not just for years, but for decades, and the lack of humanity that exists around disputes. And of course, the irony is, for, as I said before, for the haters who want to call Charlie a hater, he was the opposite of that. And his life was dedicated to understanding. He had points of view that not everybody agreed with. But the spirit of my work, including on Two Way, is here are alternative points of view. When people come on and say something you don't agree with, rather than say, I'll never watch that show again, say, thank you for presenting an alternative point of view. And that's what he did. And a lot of times I deal with people in one party or another, and I'll say to a Republican, like, who's going to be the Democratic nominee or Democrat? How's Trump going to do on this? And they'll say, I don't really do the other party. That's the other tribe. Part of Charlie's genius and part of his spirit was he understood Democrats very Well, he understood the left. He understood and was a student of when they succeeded and when they failed and why. And again, part of that was tactical and about being a political organizer and a political strategist. But part of it was his intellectual curiosity and his emotional and spiritual obligation to try to understand everybody, not just the people who agreed with him. And I think that's in too short supply. It's in too short supply. And, you know, it takes a lot to surprise any of us these days about what people will say on social media in a given situation. But the things they've said about a husband and a father and a son and a leader that have been just disgusting is the weakest word I'd use, is testament to how divided we are and how cruel so many people are, especially on social media, but not just on social media. And I think I'd like to be optimistic that this would be a force for change, but I don't see any indication of that.

B (33:47)

I will say, Mark, I've obviously seen it and it disgusts me, too, but the outpouring of the positive, I think is like magnitude 10 to 1 to the negative, maybe 100 to 1. Candidly, I think we make much of the negative because it is so vile and disgusting. But I just, I want to make. I would be remiss if I didn't say that I genuinely believe that the good of this has been just like it's been.

D (34:09)

Overwhelmingly agree. Totally. I want to just hate the negative so much.

C (34:13)

I want to express my personal gratitude, Mark, for your response to Ta Nehisi Coates's statements. I saw the video of it. It was very, very much appreciated.

B (34:23)

I won't say you were going off on Twitter about.

C (34:25)

I was about that, but Mark said a very nice thing as well. But we do want to hit the events that are unfolding as we speak right now. So I thought we should open with this showdown that's going on between the Democrat governors. We have Gavin Newsom, we have JB Pritzker, we have Trump throwing around the word insurrection act with regards to ice in ICE operations in these cities, in Chicago and Portland, possibly calling out the National Guard. We're really getting a showdown on the right. We're hearing people make comparisons to, you know, the nullification crisis or the secession crisis.

B (35:00)

People.

C (35:01)

I saw a photo edit of Hillary Clinton in a Confederate uniform because she made a tweet invoking states rights. So, Mark, you're more in the middle of us, so I thought you could give some good analysis on what's likely to happen here and what the stakes are for each side.

D (35:16)

Yeah. So there's the politics of this, right. There's the news cycle control and there's the 20, the midterms and then there's the, you know, the future political prospects of people like Gavin Newsom and we can talk about that. I'll start high minded though. Why do we have political conflicts in our system? It's when there are different ideals, two or more ideals that are competing. Right. I think everybody in America would say that crime has overwhelmed a lot of the country and that there's not a, there's not, there's a mismatch between the resources state and local officials have to deal with crime and what's necessary. And then on the immigration issue, same with ICE and other federal agencies in charge of in the individual states dealing with that. So I think everybody agrees that more needs to be done somehow in crime. And then there's another competing interest that I would hope everybody would agree with, which is federal military, active duty and reserve should only be used in situations where it's absolutely necessary to put them out on the street in what is effectively a law enforcement role and maybe an aggressive law enforcement role that should only be done when it's absolutely necessary. And the question is, is it absolutely necessary? Right now it's clear the President thinks it is. And a lot of people, the poll suggests a lot of people think yeah, the more the more the better. And I think it's silly for people on the left to, to be so reflexively against it when if I'm on the New York subway and there's people, I don't care if they work for state, federal or local. They're people good guys with and gals with guns. I'm happy to see them. So that conflict is playing out not at a high minded level of, of debate, debate and you know, honest discussions playing out more in the first thing I talked about, which is the politics of it, I think the President has the upper hand because he's shameless and ruthless and really understands the news cycle and, and he controls the flow of the human beings. It's easier to put the National Guard someplace than to stop them. And unless judges stop him, I think he'll continue to get his way and I think this will continue to expand to more cities and I think Democrats will continue to be flummoxed about why it is they're continually taking the wrong side of where public opinion is on this.

C (37:26)

How about the ICE dimension of things? We have a lot of Open defiance of ice. We've had these sort of low level attacks on ice. Do you think there's an advantage Trump has where attacks on ICE will be seen as attacks on the government generally or attacks on law enforcement? Or will it, will the Democrats be able to spin it as this is an attack on this, you know, Trump Gestapo as some of them are calling it?

D (37:51)

I think in general the President has the upper hand on, on almost anything related to immigration. And I mean, you know, people are not just violently protesting but we had one incident at least of someone shooting at ICE facility and killing people. So the, the predicate I think is there. Look if, if, if, if federal forces, whether military, active military reserves or, or extra ICE or FBI, whatever it is, if they're involved in excessive use of force or violence that leads to loss of life, I think the, the, the symbolism of it could change. The media is in a strange place right now because right so much of this through the filter of the media. The media is pulled back on its reflexive anti Trump and I think that gives the President another advantage he doesn't typically have. This is Lane Schoenberger, chief investment officer and founding partner of Y Refi. It has been an honor and a privilege to partner with Turning Point and for Charlie to endorse us. His endorsement means the world to us and we look forward to continuing our partnership with Turningpoint for years to come. Now hear Charlie in his own words tell you about why Refi.

A (39:02)

I'm going to tell you guys about yrefi.com that is yrefy.com why refi is incredible. Private student loan debt in America totals about $300 billion. Why refi is refinancing distress or defaulted private student loans. You can finally take control of your student loan situation with a plan that works for your monthly budget. Go to yrefi.com that is whyrefi.com do you have a co borrower or why Refi can get them released from the loan. You can skip a payment up to 12 times without penalty. It may not be available in all 50 states. Go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com let's face it, if you have distress or default to student loans, it can be overwhelming. Because of private student loan debt, so many people feel stuck. Go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com Private student loan debt relief why refi.com.

B (39:52)

So here's a poll. It's image 277. Here's what's interesting about it. 78% of Americans support deporting illegal immigrants who commit crime. But there is less support when it comes to deploying the National Guard. Okay, so. But the argument for deploying the National Guard is that these ICE facilities are under siege. You have to protect your personnel and you have to bring law and order. How do you square the circle or circle the square here? And it seems like there is civil unrest, there is quasi insurgent forces or blatantly insurgent forces in these cities. What do you do if you're the Trump administration?

D (40:34)

I wouldn't waste the money on the polling because this is moving too fast. There's too much ambiguity. These are not black and white things for people. I wouldn't know how I'd answer those, because it's going to depend on the circumstance. There's no election anytime soon. The president's. The president's fate politically, the party's fate politically will rise and fall above all else. And where the economy is next year, above all else, by a lot. So this stuff gets a lot of attention. It's in the news. The economy is not as sexy as these things, but I just don't think it has much implication, either the polling or the political ramifications. What I think the Trump administration should do is they should protect, you know, law enforcement officials and they should continue to try to fulfill their campaign promises, which is to close the border and deport people who are here illegally, starting with people who've committed violent crime and, and do it in a way that, that respects American traditions. As I said, I don't think any president should be so quick, such a short, you know, tripwire to put military on the ground. I just think it's not consistent with American traditions, but it doesn't mean it should never be used. And if they can't find another solution to protect the ICE facilities, I think they'll have a lot of popular support for doing it if they do it the right way.

B (41:48)

Well, and that's the key here, right, is you got Tina Kotech and Oregon, you've got JB Pritzker, Gavin Newsom, Karen Bass, Brandon Johnson, these local and state officials that are essentially refusing to cooperate with federal authorities. And you had this crazy story out of Chicago, the stand down order, where you get an ambush, the lady's wielding a weapon, a semiautomatic rifle, and there's some reporting that would indicate that, yeah, maybe there was some police already there, and that's the way they're spinning this. But why wouldn't you rush resources to an ambush on federal Law enforcement and federal agents. I mean the lack of cooperation is in a sense, Mark, the justification of for bringing even more National Guard. Because if you can't work with local law enforcement to protect you, then you need more of the National Guard to protect you. Mark, real quick, we're gonna get into this spying story, but tell people where they can follow you. Give us your coordinates.

D (42:47)

I work on NextUp on the Megan Kelly Network. Just go to NextUp Halperin on any platform and you can listen to it as a podcast, watch on YouTube shows twice a week. Today's episode drops later. Michael Knowles is one of my guests. We talk about Charlie actually and also Doug Sosnik, the Democratic strategist. If you wanna understand the Democratic Party, he's your best bet. And then I do two shows a day on my two way platform. Twoway TV can again find us on YouTube wherever you want. Those would be the two main places to find me two way.

B (43:19)

I just wanna give you a little bit of kudos here. Charlie thought your political analysis was among the best in the space and you had a very clear mind. You predicted things pretty accurately and you were amazing during the 2024 election. So check out Mark.

D (43:34)

Very kind. I thought he thought I was the best, not amongst the best.

B (43:36)

Well, he tells a lot of people.

D (43:39)

Downgrade.

C (43:40)

All right, so I think let's hit this topic. So we've been, you know, this Arctic Frost thing has been getting revealed over the past several weeks and especially now we have the story that the FBI requested phone records of eight Republican senators. This appears to have been related to their investigation of election disputes in 2020. The New York Post has is quoting someone who says it's worse than Watergate. But Mark, how about you give us your analysis of that situation?

D (44:11)

Well, we should always be suspicious whenever the executive branch does criminal investigations of legislators. It just, you know, it's a sensitive area and, and for sure we need to know more. But the notion just that it's always wrong for there to be investigations. A member of Congress, that's just not, you know, then, then look at history. Lots of members of Congress have been indicted by the Justice Department, sometimes by just farming controlled by the same party as the legislature legislator. Not always though. So I want to know more. But I think people who are saying it's worse than Watergate, we just don't know enough. All they did, and again I'm not minimizing it because we need to know more. All they did was get the metadata of some of their phone calls around January 6th we need to know why they did that, how they chose the senators. They did, but on the face of it, it's not worse than Watergate because just all they did was get metadata. And that's not worse than Watergate, at least as far as we know right now.

B (45:05)

Yeah, I mean, there's another image here that we can throw up, by the way. It looks like it's 276 this Jack Smith tracked private communications calls of nearly a dozen GOP centers during J6 probe, FBI says. And 286 another image J6 probes, phone records of Republican lawmakers. So this is, I mean, I appreciate you not veering into hyperbole here, Mark, but it's pretty disconcerting. And I mean, there was a lot of conservatives that were looped into this investigation and I'm, you know, even turning point. So this is a pretty far reaching thing and really uncomfortable as we learn details about this, especially given our proximity to some of this.

D (45:51)

Yeah. And look, once you have an independent council, both parties have found this out. They, you know, they hand out subpoenas like I hand out cotton candy at the carnival. You know, they just, they give it out to anybody who wants it. And, and, and we need to know more. There needs to be accountability. But no one was indicted. Nobody went to prison. And I'm not minimizing it. I just want to be clear. But let's follow the facts rather than just say anytime a special counselor, anytime the FBI looks at the records of a, of a sitting official that's meant to intimidate him or it's meant to be political. It might have been, I want to know, but we just don't know that yet.

B (46:27)

Yeah, well, there's, you know, definitely no Democrats on this list. It's Senator Lindsey Graham, Bill Haggerty, Josh Hawley, Dan Sullivan, Tommy Tuberville, Ron Johnson. Who's the great Ron Johnson? We should get him on the show soon. Cynthia Loomis, Marsha Blackburn, and Mike Kelly from Pennsylvania. Rep. Michael Kelly from Pennsylvania. Pretty crazy stuff. We got a minute here left, Mark. Any final thoughts, any closing bits of wisdom you want to share?

D (46:54)

Just ask everybody to be inspired by, as so many have been, by Erica Kirk's forgiveness and capacity to forgive. I think that is in too short supply in our society. And I think people on the left and the right and the middle and everywhere around should be inspired by someone's capacity, capacity to forgive in an unthinkable situation and maybe start to forgive more people in their lives. And, and I've taken that to heart and been inspired by it. And, and I cite it regularly. And, and, and I hope people consider how hard that was as compared to forgiving folks in their lives.

B (47:26)

Yeah, well said. Mark Halperin, Two Way tv, next up on the Megyn Kelly Network. You're doing great work, my friend. We'll have you on again soon, I'm sure.

D (47:34)

Gentlemen, thank you. Honored to be on.

B (47:37)

Thank you so much for just being a steady hand in the midst of this and helping people that maybe don't or didn't to help better understand Charlie and what he was all about. That means a lot to us here and it didn't go unnoticed. So thank you.

D (47:52)

Grateful to you both for your leadership through this hard time. Thank you.

B (47:55)

Thank you.

C (47:57)

For more on many of these stories and news you can Trust, go to charliekirk.com.