← The Charlie Kirk Show
Loading summary
Transcript25 lines
- [00:00]
Charlie Kirk
Hey, everybody. Charlie Kirk here live from the Bitcoin.com studio. I'm here in Washington, D.C. and you can guess what I'm up to here. Iran, Israel. I ask some questions that I think are important. Framing that is critical, and I want to Hear your feedback. Freedomarliekirk.com Our show is doing very well, so thank you guys for subscribing. Thank you for downloading. Tell your friends to do the same and download some more episodes at the Charlie Kirk show podcast page and text them to your friends. Right now. We are right there as number two or three in all of Apple news podcasts. So check it out right now and hit subscribe. Email us as always, freedomarliekirk.com and subscribe to our podcast. That's the Charlie Kirk show podcast page. Get involved with TurningPoint USA@tpusa.com that is tpusa.com Matt Walsh also joins the program and we have a amazing victory to share with you. Amazing. You're gonna love this. Buckle up, everybody. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
- [00:55]
Matt Walsh
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
- [00:57]
Charlie Kirk
I want you to know we are.
- [00:59]
Matt Walsh
Lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House F.
- [01:04]
Donald Trump
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.
- [01:15]
Charlie Kirk
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. Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of the Charlie Kirk Show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble gold investments@noblegold investments.com that is noblegoldinvestments.com it's where I buy all of my gold. Go to noblegoldinvestments.com okay, a lot happening right now with the Israel Iran situation. So missiles are going back and forth between Israel and Iran and more and more civilians are being killed in Israel. A hospital was hit in Israel and there is a moral distinction between the targets that Israel is going after and hitting and the targets that Iran is going after and hitting. I saw my great friend Dennis Prager in the hospital and he's fighting and he's doing better. He's fighting. He's still in a tough spot, but he is doing better. And he was able to actually speak to me, which was phenomenal. I saw him the other day. And he said, charlie, I watch your show every single day and we should pray for Dennis. He says, even if it is two sentences, please, please, this was his plea to me. Please remind people the moral difference between Iran and Israel. I said, you're right, Dennis, you're right. I said, I will do that. And I think that's very important. So Iran is targeting hospitals, Israel is targeting military sites and military adjacent type institutions. That's very important. So the Israeli government is starting to signal alongside us lawmakers who are doing more than signal. They're just saying it, that we need regime change, that we need regime change now. This is very important. Of course, I don't want the mullahs to stay in power. Nobody in this audience does. No one likes the mullahs. No one is sympathetic. And then some of the smear merchants online say, oh, Charlie, Kirk is a defender of the mullahs. Yeah, that's right. You know, in my private time, I think about how we can do our best to strengthen the mullahs. I mean, it's just an outrageous, ridiculous, sloppy accusation. Instead, what we're saying is that mass, sudden destabilization of a regime with no plan in place, no will of the people does not work, period. And so here's some questions that I have and we must repeat we trust President Trump's judgment completely. Here he is a man made for this moment. I'm here in Washington, D.C. having a lot of different meetings, meeting with a lot of different people. And I can tell you, President Trump, he is made for the high stakes, high pressure situation. And I trust President Trump to be able to solve this. After Covid, though, and after we've seen with all of the misleading narratives, I have been trained to challenge assumptions and ask critical questions. And I do have some questions that I would like the Israeli government or for some people to answer. I think it's very well intended. If Fordeau is bombed by either the Israelis commandos or the United States bunker busters, will it totally take out Iranian nuclear capacity? And if so, for how long? How hard is it for the Iranian government to build a bomb if you really want to? Was Iran slow walking towards a bomb or were they sprinting towards a bomb the last couple of years? How long does it take to sprint towards a bomb if you really want it? How long does it take to get a bomb if it's your number one priority of a government? I'm curious. I don't know. Here's another question. We have destroyed or Israeli has destroyed the uranium enrichment of Iran, how much uranium has already been enriched? I don't know the answer to that, but I think it's interesting. What assurances can we as Americans have that a bombing of such a facility will result in no nukes for Iran? I don't know the answer to these questions. And will that end the program permanently or buy us time? And President Trump has been so consistent here for 10 years. He's talked about nuclear, nuclear, nuclear. In fact, can you guys find a piece of tape here? Not about the Iranian nuclear program, but President Trump talks about his uncle who worked at mit, and he talks about just the impact of nuclear. Do you remember in the first campaign, especially in 2016, he would go on five or six or seven minute rants about how horrific nuclear is? I think Blake knows what I'm talking about here. He would go on. He has been so consistent about if once things go nuclear, there is no going back. That's right. President Trump used to talk about how his uncle, Dr. John Trump, who was a nuclear doctor at MIT. I'm right. It's an unbelievable clip. He would say it repeatedly. And President Trump, this was a formative geopolitical experience for him when he was growing up, of how dangerous and significant a nuclear bomb in the wrong hands is and how it changes all the cards in the region and how you must take a country more seriously, even though they're a bunch of maniacs when they do not have a nuclear bomb. Look at North Korea. Some people I talk to on the street and in the grassroots have the impression, and I don't know if this impression is true or not, that bombing Fordeau will be a permanent setback for the Iranian nuclear program, that it's gone forever. However, there are comments from the Israeli government. Last couple of days they've said that, and it's. I'm paraphrasing, that a nuclear program is a mindset, that this is all just about buying time. Well, that's interesting. If you're saying that a nuclear program is just a mindset, then you're actually arguing for regime change. And in some ways, you can actually, all those roads end at regime change. That's one of the reasons why I have been so outspoken against regime change the last couple of days. And I don't know the answer to these questions, but I do know that Pakistan, which is not exactly a wealthy country and by all measures a very third world country, has nuclear weapons. So if Pakistan, because they have them, because India has them, and I'm not even saying that Pakistan shouldn't have Them I know Pakistan hasn't threatened us. That's not the argument that I'm making. The argument I'm making is that if a country wants to have nuclear weapons, it appears that you can actually get to nuclear weapons and that it's not just a technical capability argument. It's that if a government really wants them and they have the intentions to get them, the evidence shows that they can get them. Therefore, does that beg the question for the removal of a regime? Do all of these arguments and all of these roads lead to regime change? And I do want to say, though, we started the argument about a week ago saying that some people were saying, this is Israel's war, just let them bomb nuclear targets and get out. Why is it that some people are now saying, well, now we need to bomb the Ayatollah because the Ayatollah is actually the nuclear program? Those are two different arguments. Actually. Now they'll say they're the same argument, which actually, bizarrely, it is the same argument, but it's actually very different. Because a nuclear program will continue to be alive as long as a government wants a nuclear program. Because in the modern era, even a poor country that can put all of its resources together can get at least in the process towards a bomb. And I guess my question is, how many of you in this audience want to believe that it could be taken out solely from the air? When is there a reality that it actually only gets changed when the regime gets toppled over? And that's when we're getting into highly risky, very, very dangerous grounds. When we are starting to get into terrain where we want to, as a Western nation, impose and displace and have a regime change war. Now if the Persian people want to rise up and exercise self determination and they want to take back their government, we'll be the biggest cheerleaders for them. Of course we will. It's not even a question. In fact, I might even entertain. Okay, you can offer Internet service, you could do a little bit of nudging type stuff. If you're seeing the demonstrations are not radically Islamic, by the way, these are prudent decisions. But to do what Lindsey Graham is saying and saying that we have to go take out the Ayatollah, bomb the oil fields, take out the electricity and just do complete regime change by force. I'm sorry, look at Libya and there is another component here that people are missing. Why do you think Iran is holding onto their nuclear weapons so much? It's actually not in their best interest. Well, it actually is. There is One major reason why Iran refuses to give up their nuclear program voluntarily. You know why Libya. I'll explain more in a second, but first play cut 374.
- [11:41]
Donald Trump
I had an uncle, a great professor at MIT for many years. We used to talk about nuclear a lot. He understood nuclear very well. And even then, that was many years ago. My father's brother, Dr. John Trump, and I think he was the longest serving professor in the history of MIT, I think 41 years, very smart. We used to talk about nuclear and he used to talk about the power of nuclear. I'd say uncle John, you dunno, we're a briefcase the size of a regular briefcase would do damage that I don't even want to discuss. And we're a long way from that in terms of the advancement of that technology. And it's very bad, very scary.
- [12:21]
Charlie Kirk
Phenomenally morally clear and consistent. There's been national focus on eating only the healthiest of foods and that's great news for balance in nature, their method of producing a vibrant nutritional supplement is second to none. While so many others use chemicals and additives, Balance in nature is made solely from whole food ingredients, while other methods sacrifice nutritional quality for the sake of profits and volume. Balance in nature's advanced vacuum cold process involves freeze drying the fruits and veggies into a fine powder, helping to retain as much nutritional value as possible compared to the other inferior methods which cut corners and at your expense. Balance of nature packs a nutritional punch and that's the whole reason for taking balance of nature, getting the most nutrition for the sake of your health. Use my discount code Charlie to get 35% off plus free shipping and their money back guarantee, you must use my discount code C H A R L I E. Call them at 800-246-8751 and use discount code CHARLIE or order online at balanceinnature.com use discount code CHARLIE to get 35% off plus free shipping. Why is Iran holding on to these nuclear weapons? Well, first I'm going to tell you about Libya. Remember with Muammar Gaddafi, which by the way was regime changed thanks to Hillary Rodham Clinton and the entire U.S. state Department, one of the greatest failures in the Middle east and Libya is still in civil war. And Libya was in revolt at the time, but Gaddafi voluntarily gave up his nuclear program. Qaddafi voluntarily gave up his nuclear ambitions. And what did that result in? That resulted in him being literally sodomized and thrown in the streets. That was a signal to all of the Middle east that if you voluntarily give up Your nuclear program, you lose all your cards. Iraq is a similar situation. Saddam was not popular, he was awful. Hence Dick Cheney promising us that we'll be welcomed as liberators. But when you just go and blow things up and blow up a basically stable regime, which I'm not saying the Iranian regime is basically stable, you unleash a lot of forces that you can't control. That is why the population of Iran matters a lot. There's no clear popular legitimacy for whatever replaces it. Any outsider regime usually involves installing exiles from abroad who often prove really unpopular with the natives like the Shah was. And that happened in Iraq big time. And Iraq has several different ethnic groups. And again, if the people of Iran want to have a bottom up revolution and Persia wants to be Persian again, great, fine. But Iran is holding on to their nuclear weapon because they've looked at Iraq and Libya. They say, oh really, you must be a sucker to want to give up your weapons of mass destruction. Look at Libya, you give up your program voluntarily, you go get sodomized because we lied to Gaddafi, we told Gaddafi, you give up your nuclear weapons and we're going to be fine. Instead it's oh, you give up your nuclear weapons and you're going to go get sodomized. Secondly, it's one of the few rallying cries that Iran has to maintain legitimacy. This is from Sean Davis. When the U.S. government and NATO helped overthrow Gaddafi and destroy Libya after he voluntarily gave up his weapons of mass destruction in good faith, they communicated to every regime on earth to never give up their weapon programs and never negotiate with the United States. That one act did more to set back non proliferation than potentially any single moment in modern history. Iraq showed that American intelligence was not to be believed. Libya showed that America and NATO were not to be trusted. And Afghanistan showed that America was not to be feared. Beautifully said. Any of the disagreement that you're seeing right now is the fruits of a 30 year failed neoconservative project. And we are reckoning with those mistakes now. And those forces are still on the hill like Lindsey Graham and James Lankford calling for a regime change war. Because then once you have regime change, you break it, you buy it. Now if Israel is going to do regime change, obviously they have the right to do that. But is that going to suck America in? If Israel does regime change, what's next? Who's going to take the refugees? How many refugees will there be? What happens if a worse leader takes over Iran? It's a real question, what happens if you have a more charismatic leader that now has 2,000 ballistic missiles. And that leader says, I want a bomb in six months. What do we do then? This is why how President Trump is handling it is perfect. You do not know what President Trump is going to do. And let me kind of cue you in on something. The unpredictability is the point. The fact that I don't know and you don't know and Iran doesn't know is the greatest power he could possibly exercise over these maniacs. The fact the US Military could blow Tehran to smithereens, and he's saying, get out of Tehran now. That's power. And President Trump means it when he says it. And President Donald Trump is balancing all of these things, and he and only he is positioned to be able to solve this problem. He has earned our trust. We should continue to give it to him. The world is waking up to the power of gold. National banks are scrambling to secure it. According to the World Gold Council, central banks added 1,000 tons of gold. And in 2024, the third straight year of net gold buying, they understand what many investors don't. Gold is real money. Unlike paper currency, gold's value doesn't disappear with inflation, reckless government spending, or market crashes. Now, Noble Gold Investments makes it easy for you to claim your share. As our new administration works to reverse the economic chaos of the past. Market swings are inevitable when uncertainty rises. You. You need something solid, something to keep you on the path to financial freedom. Gold can be that foundation. And right now, when you make a qualified investment, Noble Gold will send you a free 10th ounce of a cold coin. Visit noblegoldinvestments.com that's noblegoldinvestments.com the world is turning to gold. Shouldn't you be looking into doing that, too? Joining us now is one of my favorite people in politics and commentary. His. His takes are phenomenal on X and his podcast and he deserves a lot of credit. We're going to talk about a victory, a victory that the grassroots deserves credit for, that President Trump deserves credit for. And also our guest, Matt Walsh. Matt Walsh is the host of the Matt Walsh show, filmmaker of Am I a Racist? And what is a Woman? First up, Matt, it is Juneteenth. I see that you're in the office working today.
- [19:34]
Matt Walsh
I am. You know, I was a little concerned that you would start this segment without wishing me a Happy Juneteenth, but thank you for acknowledging this. Very important this. I still have to keep working. I have to keep working. You know, as podcasters, we're crucial to the, you know, ongoing functioning of the United States. But that doesn't mean that I'm not celebrating this really important day.
- [19:52]
Charlie Kirk
Somebody has to fund the reparations and that will be us. So, Matt, there was a huge victory yesterday at the Supreme Court. That really was something that you started in Tennessee and you started even before that of your decades long work criticizing the transgender industrial complex. Walk our audience through this triumph at the Supreme Court yesterday.
- [20:15]
Matt Walsh
Yeah, this was a, this was a huge, I think, a historic win at the Supreme Court, which the Supreme Court found that our law that was passed here in Tennessee banning the mutilation of children in the name of, quote, unquote, gender affirmation or gender transitions, they found that that law is valid, that that law is not unconstitutional, that we in fact do have the right in Tennessee to regulate and ban these kinds of barbaric practices. Which means, of course also that the dozens of states across the country that have passed similar bans, those bans will stand now. And it also means most importantly, really, that there is no excuse for the Republicans in Congress right now to not federal ban. So all of those things are now totally on the table. This was a crushing defeat for the trans lobby, for the trans activists, and I think for the gender transition industry, the gender butchery industry. This was, you know, the fight continues in a lot of ways. But, but also I would say this was, this was probably the final nail in its coffin. I think this was the fatal, this was the death blow to the gender butchery industry. So just a great, a great day all around.
- [21:28]
Charlie Kirk
Yeah. And so why explain how. I think I understand that. But this now allows states to pass similar laws. It's not yet a nationwide ban. And it's very clear that the Supreme Court did not weigh in or issue an opinion on the merits of child mutilation or gender transition. They did just say that this does not impact the equal protection clause. So explain that a little bit further, Matt, and give the argument a little bit deeper as to why this is a death nail in the coffin of the trans industrial complex.
- [22:02]
Matt Walsh
Right. The Supreme Court didn't find that these kinds of practices themselves are unconstitutional and therefore this doesn't become a nationwide ban. Now, I think they could have found that that would have been great. I think that actually not only is it not unconstitutional to ban the practices, but the practices themselves are unconstitutional because they infringe on the human rights of children. So they could have gone that far. They did not expect them to, but they went as far as they needed to because it enables States to pass these laws. And as I said, there's, there's, there's no reason not to. And it found, I mean, the argument on the other side was of course, an absurd. They have no good arguments. They're defending something that's literally indefensible. But their argument, such as it was, was that this was somehow an infringement on the equal protection clause because it discriminates. The laws that ban these procedures discriminate based on sex, which, which makes no sense for so many reasons, starting with the fact that it doesn't do that. Actually, what the law says is that you cannot castrate and mutilate a child for the sake of changing their gender. No matter the sex of the child, doesn't matter if the child is male or female. You cannot do that. So it doesn't discriminate based on sex. And also, and this was an important point and you find this in the majority opinion, and this was something that during the, during the arguments came up quite a bit, which is that, okay, if this is, if this is somehow unconstitutional, it's, it's, it's a violation equal protection clause, then there must be that. It must be discriminating based on some sort of immutable characteristic. But the problem is that even the pro trans side will tell you that transgenderism, if it even exists, if it's really a thing at all, which it isn't, but if it is, even according to them, it's not an immutable characteristic. It can change by the day. You know, if I wake up today and say that I'm a woman, then I am. If I wake up tomorrow and say I'm a man, then I'm a man. So even according to them, it's not immutable characteristic. So the whole argument just doesn't, just doesn't work. And the reason why I think it's the nail in the coffin, the fatal blow is because this was their only, this was the trans activists only hope was that the courts would bail them out. And trans activists for years have been very confident as all, as the, as the tide turned against them culturally and dozens of states passed these laws, they were very confident because they said, hey, the courts will bail us out. They always do. The courts are going to come back around and say, you can't do this. That was their, that was their only hope. Because if the courts don't bail them out now, they're left with what? Just the argument. Now they have to go on a level playing field, right? And they have to actually make the argument for why we should be chemically castrating children. And they can't win the argument because the argument's insane. I mean, this is not even an 80, 20 issue. I think this is like a 95, 5 issue, really. The number of Americans who actually think it's okay to chemically castrate children is vanishingly small. And so their only hope was some sort of bailout from the courts, and it didn't happen.
- [25:07]
Charlie Kirk
So this still allows blue states to continue their butchery. And these trans sanctuary states, what does this mean for the nationwide ban that you and I are seeking, including President Trump's phenomenal executive order that he wrote that is now currently in the courts somewhere? Does this impact it at all? And how are we going to advance a nationwide ban and bring that to reality?
- [25:36]
Matt Walsh
Well, I think Representative Marjorie Tilly Greene already has a bill that she wrote that codifies Trump's executive order on this exact issue. And the way that it impacts it is that it means that there's just no reason not to do it. You can absolutely pass this bill. And it's one of those relatively rare cases, times in politics where the clearly morally right thing to do is also clearly the politically popular thing to do. Things don't always line up that way. There are plenty of times when the right thing to do is not the politically popular thing, but in this case it is. So this is a, this is a total winner for Republicans and you have to do it because as you point out, you've got these trans, these so called trans sanctuary states like California. And listen, we're protecting kids in Tennessee and that's fantastic. But children in California have to be protected too. Like just the fact that a child happened to be born, was cursed with being born in California, shouldn't mean that now they're going to get chemically castrated and butchered and injured for the rest of their life in these permanent ways. And so we have to pass this ban and it's a total winner because what it means is that the Democrats are going to have to get up and they're gonna have to make the case on the record for why it's okay to cut the breasts off of 15 year old girls and castrate 12 year old boys. And I'll tell you right now, they don't want to do that. They do not want this fight. They don't want to make this argument. They'd rather it just go away. They're hoping that Republicans will be happy with the Supreme Court victory and then move on like it's the end of it. And that's why we can't do that.
- [27:08]
Charlie Kirk
No. And you saw Elizabeth Warren come out yesterday saying that this was insensitive to young kids and their parents. Okay, let's have that debate out and open. Let's make 2028 or the 2026 midterms partially about whether or not we should have a castrating business in this country that profits off of the removal of genitals. How public opinion has switched on this topic the last decade is amazing. Can we get Asa Hutchinson on Tucker Carlson? Can we get that? Remember this? Matt, I want to replay this. That was one of the, that was one of the seminal moments when Asa Hutchinson, neoliberal, called himself Republican governor of Arkansas, went to defend the chemical castration of children on the Tucker Carlson program like seven or eight years ago. And Tucker called them out. Republicans used to be for this. Not anymore. If you guys have private student loan debt, this is the best way and the best chance to get out of it. Y Refi is not a debt settlement company and they work with each borrower individually tailoring each loan to each borrower specific situation. Can you imagine being debt free and not living under this burden anymore? Be unburdened by what has been. Go to yrefi.com do you have a co borrower? Why? Refi can get them released from the loan. You don't have to ignore that mountain of student loan statements on your kitchen table anymore. Why? Refi supported our campus tour. They're going to support it again in the fall. They supported our Young Women's Leadership Summit, our Student Action Summit. All of our events are brought to you by Yrefi. They're phenomenal. Bad credit is accepted. And if your private student loan debt is keeping you up at night and ruining your life, it doesn't have to just call yrefi. Go yrefi.com why refi does not care what your credit score is. Go to yrefi.com let's face it, if you have distressed or defaulted private student loans, nobody is coming to bail you out. Go to yrefi.com y r e5 Matt, I do want to ask you about Israel and Iran in a second, but I just want to just put one last question on this. First of all, you deserve phenomenal and enormous credit. You were fighting on the trans issue before I was, before anybody was. When it was not an 8020 issue. When Republicans seemed destined for surrender. When Jenner went on the front page, I think of Vogue magazine and Republicans were like, oh, that's it. Let's just put our hands up. You were uncompromising with incredible rigidity, and you're like, nope, we're not gonna do this, actually. We're gonna dig in. And now it's like seemingly unpopular. Even on the more mainstream prior trans stuff, it's unpopular and just gross and disgusting. Matt, walk us through the decades long journey from 2015 to today on the public opinion battle that you were heavily involved in.
- [29:58]
Matt Walsh
Yeah, you know, I always say that I. I don't know that I don't know how much public opinion actually changed. I think that, you know, if you, if you were to go back to, say, 2019, 2020, and you were to ask, you know, do it, do a poll of everyday Americans and ask them about the trans issue and should men be a lot of women's sports and bathrooms and should we be doing these kinds of gender transition procedures of kids? I think you would have found many more people than you'd find today who would be. Who would answer in the affirmative. But I don't think that most of them actually believed that at the time. So I don't think that the trans activists never actually persuaded anyone or I think they persuaded very few people. What was happening for about five, six, seven years is that they successfully scared people into silence. They used emotional blackmail very effectively. They. There was this emotional blackmail campaign that was just ruthless and relentless, and for a lot of people it just blindsided them. And this was being done not just with public, not just with the public generally, but most sinner, you know, most nefariously with parents. Parents who'd never even heard of the trans issue really were all of a sudden being told that, oh, if you don't let your kid transition, they're going to kill themselves. And a lot of parents just, they didn't know how to respond to that. It's like when you're being told that as a parent, it's very jarring. So I think that's what happened. I think that's what happened for the first, you know, half of the decade where this fight's been going on is people were scared into silence. And then it just became a process of letting people know that. It's like, we all know this is not right. We all know this is crazy. We all know that Bruce Jenner is not really a woman. We all know that. We know that. And it's okay for you to say what you know to be true. And the thing is, you know, that's the thing about kind of a mass hysteria is that it can we've seen this happen with COVID We've seen it happen with BLM and George Floyd. We've seen it happen many times over the last decade in particular. But the good thing about the mass hysteria, there could be anything good about it, is that it comes on very quickly, but it can also be broken. You can break the fever very quickly, and it just takes a few people at first who are willing to stand up and say, no, this is right. This isn't right. This is crazy. We all know this is crazy. And then few people say that. A few other people sort of will meekly stand up and say, yeah, you know, I think he's right. And then before you know it, the fever is broken and the mass hysteria has faded away.
- [32:19]
Charlie Kirk
Matt, very quickly, you have an opinion on the Israel, Iran conflict that is shared by a lot of people under the age of 30, not necessarily people, you know, in their 50s or 60s. What is that take. What is that opinion? Make the case.
- [32:33]
Matt Walsh
Yeah, Look, I usually don't pay. Foreign policy has never really been my bag. I like to pay attention to America. I'm very much America first. I care about America's interests. That's all that matters to me.
- [32:43]
Charlie Kirk
I.
- [32:43]
Matt Walsh
That's all that matters to me when it comes to foreign policy, when it comes to foreign conflicts, is how does this affect America? And if the United States is going to get involved in any kind of conflict, I need to know that we're doing that because for American interest, because it is necessary to protect American lives. And if it's not necessary for that, if we're doing it, you know, to free some other group of people, if we're doing it for some other country, then I'm not on board with it. So what I'll say about this is, look, it is true, as many people have pointed out, that President Trump has been very consistent. Iran can't get a nuclear weapon. He has been saying that for well over 10 years. He's very consistent about that, and that's true, and I respect that. And I also think that, that Trump has earned a lot of credit and leeway when it comes to foreign policy. I think he's been pretty brilliant on foreign policy going back to his first term. That being said, you know, there are voices, Lindsey Graham among them, but not just him, who are calling for not just dropping a bomb to get rid of their nuclear facilities, but actual regime change, war in the Middle East. And I think that that's a very real possibility. We know how these things go. And as America first conservatives, we should be standing up against it and saying no absolutely not. We know how regime change wars go. We've seen them over the last 40 years they never work out. All that ends up happening is you have more instability, you have factionalization and then oh guess what you also have a new flood of refugees quote unquote who are coming into Europe and the United States and absolutely against it and I think that we should all be against it.
- [34:13]
Charlie Kirk
I completely agree the difference between bottom up and top down. If the Persian people want to take back their government with self determination and self government then God bless them we'll be cheering for them. Have western imposed regime changed that will be a catastrophe that we will fight against. Matt excellent work. Congratulations. Thanks for all that you do. Thank you.
- [34:30]
Matt Walsh
Thanks Charlie.
- [34:31]
Charlie Kirk
Thanks so much for listening everybody Email us as always freedomarliekirk.com thanks so much for listening and God bless.
- [34:39]
Donald Trump
For more on many of these stories and news you can Trust go to charliekirk.com.