Senator Rand Paul (11:20)

Senator well, I think we don't know, but the only way to do it is to challenge it. So for example, I do believe Anthony Fauci committed a felony by lying to Congress. So you have to charge him with a felony, take him to court and then the court will decide whether or not the pardon is upheld. You can argue till you're blue in the face that you can't do auto pens and that maybe the president wasn't aware of it. But the only way to actually do this is you have to charge someone who is pardoned. I think Anthony Fauci is the most likely to be chargeable. There are other people. Hunter Biden could be charged as well, but someone has to be charged you have to take it to court and then you have to decide. I think in Hunter Biden's case, he actually did physically sign it. So he must have perhaps recognized who Hunter Biden was, and he also had to recognize the importance of signing it with Fauci. I'm not sure if he knows Anthony Fauci's name or is aware of the circumstances. He is somewhat distant from contemporary events and activities. So, you know, but the only way to figure this out is to take it to court.

Charlie Kirk (12:21)

Senator, remind the audience here just one more question on the Foushee thing. What did he lie about in front of Congress and what was the significance here? And I believe it was in part of your testimony and his testimony, your cross examination of him, where he lied? Please remind the audience about this.

Senator Rand Paul (12:36)

Anthony Fauci testified before Congress in a very vigorous and heated and animated way that the NIH never funded gain of function research in Wuhan. Well, this is directly contradicted by the actual people who were involved with the funding. EcoHealth alliance was the firm that the NIH funded that then secondarily funded the research in Wuhan. When EcoHealth's funding was stopped for a while, they then sent a letter back to the NIH when it started up again, and they said, thank you for restarting our gain of function research funds. That's one evidence. But another bit of evidence comes from NIH Interim Director Tabak, who when asked whether this was gain of function research, said, of course it was gain of function. So I do believe he lied. I think he lied repeatedly, and I think he was doing it to cover up any connection that he would be responsible because he had the bad judgment to fund this risky research in Wuhan that I believe ultimately became the pandemic.

Charlie Kirk (13:37)

Now, Senator, shifting gears, you were a phenomenal leader exposing how the intel agencies entrapped President Donald Trump during this whole Russiagate thing and actually how it also resulted in, unfortunately, unnecessarily, unnecessarily adversarial relations with Russia. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office has now said that Obama committed treason, that the Obama administration basically planted all of the seeds of Russiagate without commenting on whether or not Obama committed treason. Because you and I both have not seen the documents or the particulars that President Donald Trump has been briefed on. What's your thought on now what Tulsi Gabbard is doing to expose the deep state and the intel agencies that were turned inward against the American people and a duly elected president, Senator Rand Paul.

Senator Rand Paul (14:22)

You know, I Think Tulsi Gabbard is doing a great job on behind her 100% in the first Trump administration. I was sitting in the Oval Office with the president and we discussed whether or not John Brennan and Clapper should have their, their, their security clearance taken away. And I advocated with the president, and on the spot he called someone in, he said, take away their clearance, because I think they were abusing their power. I do believe in 2016, early 2017, right after the election, that they were using foreign intelligence agencies to gather intelligence on Trump campaign officials. I think that there were members of the intelligence community under the Biden administration, not under the Biden, under the Obama administration, that were abusing their office to collect intel. I think that they changed intelligence. The conclusion was, yeah, sure, the Russians tried, they tried. They bought $50,000 worth of Facebook ads, but they weren't very effective and didn't have any influence on the election. That was immediately changed or surreptitiously changed in December of 2016 after the election to make it look like, oh, what we will now say, our official line that will spread throughout government is that somehow Donald Trump's election was illegitimate and that it was based on Russian interference. I think this was a politically motivated and purposely done misuse of, of the intelligence power. So I think Tulsi Gabbard's correct in trying to expose this.

Charlie Kirk (15:53)

So you've been, you've been involved in all of this. And again, I think Brennan has. I agree with you. Brennan has not only abused his power, I think all roads lead back to the CIA. Let's play cut323. And I'd like to get your reaction. 323.

Rand Paul (16:07)

Which hunt that you should be talking about is they caught President Obama absolutely cold, Tulsi Gabbard, what they did to this country in 2016, starting in 2016, but going up all the way, going up to 2020 in the election, they tried to rig the election and they got caught. And there should be very severe consequences for that. After what they did to me and whether it's right or wrong, it's time to go after people. Obama has been caught directly.

Charlie Kirk (16:39)

So, Senator, what potentially. I mean, just. I know we're hypothesizing here and speculating, but what potentially could Obama or any of the ringleaders of this, what could they be charged with? What could they potentially be. Brennan, how could they be held accountable? Clapper included? Senator Rand Paul?

Senator Rand Paul (16:59)

You know, there were stories even at the time, I remember in the transition to the Trump presidency, I remember people Talking about that the Obama administration was spreading things around to make sure that they couldn't be destroyed by the Trump situation, by the Trump administration. But what they were spreading around was misinformation. You remember the guy that did the Steele dossier? All of a sudden, he's flying across the ocean and meeting secretly with John McCain, who breathlessly believed everything this spy was telling him. He was basically duped by a spy with misinformation from the Clinton campaign, who McCain then comes running back and dutifully tells the Intelligence Committee what he was being given. So the intel the Democrats give the Intelligence Committee, the. And community. The Steele dossier. The Steele dossier is then given back to McCain, who then gives it back to the intelligence agency. So it all starts in one place, goes in a circle. And McCain was basically duped into being a part of ginning up this. This big hoax. But the one principle that's important above and beyond who gets prosecuted, even above and beyond Donald Trump, is we cannot allow our intelligence agencies to go after U.S. citizens, particularly the CIA. And I believe what they did in this instance is the head of the CIA, John Brennan, I believe, interacted with the head of intelligence in England and other countries to spy on U.S. citizens. I believe that those meetings in a bar, random meetings in a bar where they're recording Trump employees, I don't think those were random. I think those were ordered by the CIA, but they knew it was illegal to do themselves, so they got British intelligence or Australian intelligence or other countries intelligence to do their dirty work for them.

Charlie Kirk (18:44)

And so additionally, we could also say that Brennan could face, hopefully many years in jail for lying before Congress over the NSA spying, but that could be on the statute of limitations unless you put up a conspiracy charge. And so I want to just make sure we. We build this picture out even more. Because, Senator, you have been by far the best, in my opinion, of any senator out there talking about the abuses of the intel agencies. You've been so consistent and so principled, so I think you are uniquely positioned to talk about how we rein in the intelligence community. Where else should we be looking? Where else? Are there abuses? Are there missteps? Have there been overreaches? Because, as you can see here, the President has a demand to try to hold them accountable, which is far overdue. Where else would you recommend for this administration, this Department of Justice, this president to look for, to finally bring the intel community to heel?

Senator Rand Paul (19:39)

You know, I think President Trump's done more than any other president in my lifetime to begin this process by Appointing Tulsi Gabbard by appointing Cash Patel. These are reformers at heart. These are people who believe there has been abuses. Tulsi Gabbard was abused by this Quiet Skies program that targeted her and followed her and spied on her, got on the airplane to follow her around the country and around the world. So she knows firsthand what it's like. So I think she's ideally the person to be in that spot. We also know, I know from doing the research for my book Deception, the Great Covid Cover up, that we discovered that at the CIA, that even on the analysis of whether Covid came from a lab or from animals, that there were superiors reversing the judgment of different scientists at the CIA who came to the conclusion that, yes, it came from a lab in China, and then they were overruled by superiors, we believe, for political reasons. We believe that one of the reasons. And this was actually reported by an inspector general at the CIA, one of the reasons being that the analyst who came back saying that there was Chinese involvement in this laboratory accident, that this was fitting Trump's rhetoric and that it was too pro Trump and that they didn't want to say anything that would be supportive of anything Donald Trump was saying. So they were actually going to falsify or quiet any kind of CIA analysis that said the virus came from the laboratory because that fit into the Trump narrative or seem to be supportive of Trump. And this is really dangerous, that we have people at the CIA, analysts who are not reporting facts about our enemies or adversaries and trying to give certain facts and then let people, the policymakers interpret it, that they were actually withholding or changing the facts. If it seemed to support the president or any of the president's response to the pandemic.

Charlie Kirk (21:30)

Very quick, we only have a minute remaining. We found out the House will be recessing starting on Wednesday, coming back in September. Do you believe the Senate will stay in session to work on President Trump's confirmation? Senator RAND Paul.

Senator Rand Paul (21:41)

The good news is we've now approved more nominees than at any point in time in any president. So I think we've done a good job with this. I continue to advocate plowing forward. I am a chairman of my committee. I've approved a couple dozen by now. I get them as fast as I can get them. I put them through the committee. And so I've been a champion of approving the president's nominees and. But I think we've done a good job. I don't think there's probably a reason to change our schedule, but I think that we've done a good job and we'll continue to plow through the nominees as fast as we can.

Charlie Kirk (22:14)

Senator, thank you so much. We need to get those US Attorneys and those ambassadorships, so please stay on that. Senator, thank you for your time and for your insight, especially for bringing the intel agencies to heal. Thank you.

Senator Rand Paul (22:24)

Thank you.

Charlie Kirk (22:28)

Ask 10 people to define the word capitalism. How many different responses do you think you'll get? This is a word that comes up all the time, but does anyone know what it really means? Do you? Hillsdale College offers more than 40 free online courses. That's right. Free online courses on subjects like the book of Genesis, the rise and fall of the Roman Empire, the history of the ancient Christian church. It's hard for me to even say which is my personal favorite. You guys have got to take these online courses. They've recently launched a new course, understanding Capitalism, that I've been watching. In seven lectures, you'll learn about the role of profit and loss, how human nature plays a part in our economic system, why capitalism depends on private property rights, the rule of law, and above all, freedom, and why capitalism is ultimately a system that encourages morality rather than undermines it. Right now, go to charlieforhillsdale.com to enroll. There's no cost and it's easy to get started. That's charlieforhillsdale.com the register. Get C H A R L I e for hillsdale.com joining us now is Alex Marlowe. He is the author of a new book called Breaking the Law, a must read. President Donald Trump says congratulations on the new book. Alex. Tell us all about it.

Alex Marlowe (23:38)

Oh, thanks, Charlie. Thank you for plugging it. Yeah, it's a. This is my deep dive investigative research. I tend to pick a topic, spend a year on it. The last time I did it with the Bidens and before I did that with the corporate media. And this time I just noticed when the lawfare was building up against President Trump, there was clear coordination across the government, including from the Biden White House. And it was just not being explored. We were actually, despite all the news on it, we weren't spending nearly enough time on it because this was a true outrage. And we'd never seen American history, unprecedented levels of corruption and collusion designed to take down not just President Trump, but a movement and all the people within it. And I think the story that I get to tell is completely explosive. And while I'm researching this, we see what's gone on with all these district judges trying to single handedly execute a veto power over the executive branch of the US Government. Completely impossible. Unconstitutional, you would think. And yet it's gone on for six months and it continues to go on to this day. This is really one of the fights of our time, Charlie, and it's time we spend some time thinking about it.

Charlie Kirk (24:38)

So let me ask you, based on your reporting and in the book Breaking the Law, was there collusion between Fanny Willis, Jack Smith and Alvin Bragg? This was always something that was so suspicious that they all simultaneously come out with indictments. They all simultaneously kind of come out with effectively a. An indictment spree. Remember the rushed press conference by Fanny Willis?

Alex Marlowe (25:02)

Yes.

Charlie Kirk (25:02)

What is that? Tell us, Alex.

Alex Marlowe (25:04)

Yeah, so. Right. So I will share with you that there is clear evidence there was collusion from the Joe Biden White House with these various cases. One key example here is that Nathan Wade going to the White House two times for a total of, I think it was about 16 hours of meetings at the White House during the middle of this. Nathan Wade was only put on that case because he was Fannie Willis's boyfriend. And it was essentially a grift for them to be able to make money, to go on exotic vacations. Nathan Wade was a family lawyer. He was a nobody. He would never be on a case like this in a million years. Aside from the fact that he was had an opportunity to make easy government cash while he had a powerful girlfriend. And him doing this somehow also got him invited to the White House. There's no scenario that anything that Nathan Wade was talking about in that White House, other than how to get Donald Trump. We don't know the details of that meeting, but that's where the investigators need to begin. I don't have subpoena power, Charlie, but I can guarantee you that if I did, we would learn there's coordination. There was a collusion, that there was direction from the Joe Biden White House. Very apropos this week in the news with the Tulsi Gabbard stuff. And Barack Obama is very clear that this is coordinated some level. And because of disclosure rules, normal journalists can't get that information. It's now on Congress, the Senate, etc. They got to go in, they got to get that info now.

Charlie Kirk (26:21)

Yeah, and so it is. It is a collusion. Is there a way to hold them criminally accountable for what they did to go after Trump? Can we start to get arrests here, Alex? Because I alongside so many people, want to start see perp walks, arrests and indictments. This seems like as if there were so many norms and customs that were basically forsaken. Alex, how do we actually ultimately get towards justice here?

Alex Marlowe (26:49)

Well, so first of all, there, all this would be illegal if we can get the hard evidence that I can only get observational evidence. I have a lot of, of interviews with people who are on Trump's team. People walk me through a lot of the behind the scenes stuff, but a lot of the things that me, as a civilian, as a person who edits a website, this is where the lawyers need to come in with government subpoena power, bring people in and I direct people where the investigations need to begin, because we are no doubt going to see high levels of illegal activity and the things that, if they're not illegal, Charlie, they absolutely should be. For example, take all these punishments against Donald Trump, these nine $90 million fines and $400 million fines. That's all cruel and unusual punishment, flat out. Just start from that premise. It just shows you they're willing to break the law, thus the name of the book, in order to try to get their guy. And when that failed, that explains we just had the butler anniversary when they tried to take him out by shooting him. And who knows what happened on that day because we never got answers to that either. There were clearly elements in the US Government that would take any means necessary to take out Trump. And this puts a lot of, I think, meat on that bone.

Charlie Kirk (27:57)

Alex, shifting gears here for a second.

Alex Marlowe (27:59)

Sure.

Charlie Kirk (28:00)

And this kind of ties all of it together. President Donald Trump was very animated in the Oval Office today. Let's play this piece of tape where he is calling for basically not just the indictment, but saying that Barack Obama is guilty of treason, which is punishable by death. Now, we don't know if this is a literal accusation of Obama being guilty of treason or kind of a heated moment. We don't know. But let's play this here. 319.

Rand Paul (28:30)

If you look at that, those papers, they have them Stone Cold. And it was President Obama. It wasn't lots of people all over the place. It was them too. But the leader of the gang was President Obama, Barack Hussein Obama. Have you heard of him? And except for the fact that he gets shot, shielded by the press for his entire life, that's the one. They look, he's guilty. It's not a question. You know, I like to say, let's give it time. It's there. He's guilty. They this was treason. This was every word you can think of. They tried to steal the election, they tried to obfuscate the election. They did things that nobody, nobody's ever even imagined, even in other countries.

Charlie Kirk (29:17)

These are fighting words. Alex Marlow, how do you interpret all of this?

Alex Marlowe (29:20)

Yeah, I think Trump knows that there's not been justice for him. There needs to be retribution, but not retribution in the revenge sense. There has not been justice for President Trump for his first term. The Russian collusion hoax hijacked that entire term. We spent years and years going along with this. You had a great talk with Tucker yesterday, Charlie. I really enjoyed that. I watched the whole thing. And, and one of the points that's made is that how do they get the whole New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post to take it seriously? This is how came from Barack Obama. That's how they got him to take it seriously. And that exact same pattern played out in the Biden White House where right after the midterm elections, we saw that top Biden officials going down to lower courts to try to look at Trump, to try to get Trump by other means. They're bringing in Nathan Wade up for some reason from Georgia up to the White House to meet. They got Merrick Garland appointing Jack Smith, who is a stone cold killer, who was totally unconstitutional and they tried to get away with it anyway. This is what they do. These guys fight political warfare 24 7. And that's why, as I say in your show, Charlie, basically every week we need to stay on a war footing. And that's what President Trump is doing.

Charlie Kirk (30:23)

We do need to stay on a war footing. So if you were to advise the president how to handle the proceeding of these potential indictments, how do we do this in a way that to not seem reckless, as you say, full of revenge?

Alex Marlowe (30:37)

Yes.

Charlie Kirk (30:37)

How do we pursue justice? Justice above all, because we have to pick the right indictments. We have to measure twice and once.

Alex Marlowe (30:45)

Alex Marlowe, I love this question. I use the word justice over and over again. That's the right branding. Never make it sound like you're doing this just to settle political scores. Because I think scores should be settled. But you can't, you can't verbalize that to people. That's not going to convince anyone who's not a deep base voter. And then you let the facts fall where they may, they're going to be bad. We don't have to hit a grand slam every single day. Let's try to get some facts out there the way Tulsi Gabber did last week. Gets people engaged, gets people excited. It starts exposing the bad guys for who they are. And we do have to trust the process to some degree. There's a great country with a great system. Relative to the others, we have a lot of flaws in our system, but overall, it's pretty good. So we just need to start turning over those stones and trust that in the end, Trump is going to be vindicated. I think that's the approach. And we've got a little bit of time to do this because we've got another three and a half years of Trump's administration.

Charlie Kirk (31:35)

So now, Alex, I want to play another piece of tape here. Let's go a little deeper, because I know you really care about this law for lawfare stuff. Yeah. And what they did to Donald Trump. So your book Breaking the Law talks about the literal lawfare against Trump, but honestly, Russiagate was Lawfare 1.0.

Alex Marlowe (31:50)

Absolutely.

Charlie Kirk (31:50)

Through other means, try to stop the Trump administration through deep state actors and deep state manipulation. So let me play this here. I believe. Yeah, this is Obamagate. So this is. First, let's play Tulsi Gabbard saying there's hundreds of documents that prove Barack Obama directed this treasonous conspiracy play. Cut 252.

Tulsi Gabbard (32:10)

Over 100 documents that we released on Friday really detail and provide evidence of how this treasonous conspiracy was directed by President Obama just weeks before he was due to leave office after President Trump had already gotten elected. This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an issue that is so serious, it should concern every single American because it has to do with the integrity of our democratic republic.

Charlie Kirk (32:40)

Alex, your thoughts on this?

Alex Marlowe (32:42)

Here's the deal. Russiagate is absolutely part of lafayer. This is the whole point. James Comey leaked records of his interactions with Trump to gin up the Russia controversy. Who did he leak it to? A guy named Daniel Richmond, a professor at Columbia Law School. The whole point was to be able to use legal means to prompt a special counsel investigation into Trump and his fake ties to Russia in order to tie up the administration. This happens over and over again. Look at the FISA surveillance. Judge Boasberg, one of the stars of lawfare, he had. He was one of the top. He ruled that former FBI attorney Kevin Kleinsmith, one of the top Russia gate hoaxers, shouldn't get prison time. This is all coordination across branches of government to sabotage Trump. This is what we talk about when we talk about the deep state.

Charlie Kirk (33:27)

Right now, over 7.5 million businesses in America are thriving on TikTok. We certainly are. We're reaching the next generation rather successfully there. Businesses that employ more than 28 million people. But behind the Stats. It's the stories that really matter. Like Dan O Seasoning from Kentucky who use TikTok to reach new customers and grow from a one man show to a team of 45. Or Arizona taco King in Arizona able to employ over 28 people and pay them well thanks to the foot traffic TikTok brings in. Or she mechanic in Georgia who expanded her auto shop and hired new employees with the support she found on TikTok. Their success means jobs, support for families and stronger local communities. Because when small businesses thrive on TikTok, so do the communities around them. Learn more about TikTok's contribution to the U.S. economy at Tiktokeconomicimpact.com that is Tiktokeconomicimpact dot com all right. Check out Alex Marlowe's latest book, Breaking the Law. Yesterday I was a guest on the Tucker Carlson program. It's getting a lot of views. People are really enjoying it. I want to play a piece of tape here, Alex, and then get your reaction. Play cut308. The growth has been in what we call pink collar jobs, jobs that men would rather sit at home and kind of just be, you know, slovenly than be caught doing because it's just so demeaning to how we as men are wired. They're not about creation or risk taking or value proposition or boundary pushing. They're kind of about, well, here are the rules and the norms and we must enforce them. By the way, there is a rule. They're mom jobs. Exactly. And you know why they're mom jobs? Because these women aren't moms. These women play mom at work because they don't have kids at home.

Alex Marlowe (35:11)

That's dark, man.

Charlie Kirk (35:13)

It's true. Alex Marlow, your thoughts.

Alex Marlowe (35:16)

First of all, Charlie, congrats on the amazing appearance. I watched the whole thing. I learned a lot. I thought you were at your best. Super high energy, very crisp. I don't think you missed a syllable. I think you spoke cleanly for two hours without making one. One verbal faux pas which we in the broadcasting world very. I doff my cap to you in that one. But this was your most important.

Charlie Kirk (35:34)

That is phenomenal feedback. Thank you. No, I, I'll let you continue. But only you. Very few people would pick up on that. Yeah, but that's. That, that's tough. It's, it's, it's tough. It's like, it's like, it's basically like not having an incompletion in NFL terms, but keep going.

Alex Marlowe (35:48)

Yeah, that's right. 21. It's 21 straight completions. It's pretty sweet. No, it's one of these things where it's the we know you're well read and you're well connected, but it's also, it's, it's more entertaining when you're smooth too. So it's great. And but this is your most important point, this is the point that needs to be made, is that we are and I know this because as a millennial, I know that people my age and younger are there's a big disconnect between my age and younger and older generations, particularly the boomers, about the way the economy is structured. They are not seeing the wholesale differences, particularly with regards to the way the economy has been feminized. And, and this is creating a lot, this is going to create a lot of downstream problems. First of all, the debt addiction and then the spiraling that people do to try to get out of it where they dedicate their lives to things like sports betting and crypto plays. And I'm not saying you should be free to do that stuff. I'm just saying it's incredibly toxic for most people to do that. And then when women are out earning men, then men are not going to be attractive to the women. And for me and you, Charlie Natalist, people go out and say go get married, have a family. I it's going to be very hard to convince young men who cannot out earn women that they that that's a possible scenario for them. So we could be as persuasive, as convincing as we can if the economy does not allow for young men to be men and make money, enough money to support a family, that we're going to have massive problems that are potentially existential threats to this society.

Charlie Kirk (37:19)

And so what did you make of then the political ramifications of our chat? Again, I encourage everyone, you can check it on YouTube. We'll post the entire thing on the Charlie Kirk show podcast page. Right now it's up on Tucker's page. What do you think this means politically, Alex Marlowe?

Alex Marlowe (37:32)

I think registered Republicans are still with Trump through the Israel stuff, through the Epstein stuff. But what you've been talking about, at least sometimes Charlie and I think is important point that needs to be emphasized is that there's a lot of people who are new to the coalition are not registered Republicans. They're not even reluctant Republicans like I am. They're people who don't want anything to do with the Republican Party. They just like the idea of Donald Trump, someone who's super successful super funny is knocks things down and exhibits those classic alpha traits. That resonates with them, gives them confidence over a sleepy Joe Biden or a feminized Barack Obama or Kamala Harris. And so they like that. So how do we keep those people in the coalition? We're not gonna be able to keep them in that coalition if they don't feel like they can get ahead in Trump's economy more than they can in other with other presidents. And that is a fear. I've got six months into this administration, I, I give it an A. I know you gave it an A as well. Just kind of the border stuff alone gets the job done. But there is much more we can do to try to reset things for younger generations so that they can partake in the American dream.

Charlie Kirk (38:33)

Alex Marlowe, you're doing a phenomenal job. Check out Breaking the Law. That is Breaking the Law. And thank you for the kind words of our conversation that we had with Tucker Carlson. And it was honestly it was great to be able to have a two hour format to talk about a couple issues that don't always get the long form attention, unfortunately. So often we get long form attention on stuff that is not immediately consequential. But what could possibly be more important for family formation? We're a very pro family show when that you can own a home. And I ask the question again, when was the last time you washed a rental car? The answer is probably never. You don't get your rental car's oil changed when you rent. You don't take where you live as seriously because it's not your own. Your politics changes, your attitude changes, your philosophy changes when you are an owner. And we need to make this generation owners and make sure we bring the lost boys back in to be leaders of the civilization. Alex Marlow, congrats. Come back anytime. I think we have you on once a week. Breaking the Law by Alex Marlo. Alex, thank you so much.

Alex Marlowe (39:37)

Thanks Charlie.

Charlie Kirk (39:38)

Thanks so much for listening everybody. Email us as always, freedomarliekirk.com thanks so much for listening and God bless.

Rand Paul (39:46)

For more on many of these stories.

Alex Marlowe (39:47)

And news you can trust, go to charliekirk. Com.