The 'Seditious Six' + AI Amnesty

Summary

---

Episode Overview

Title: The 'Seditious Six' + AI Amnesty
Date: November 25, 2025
Host: Charlie Kirk

This episode of The Charlie Kirk Show dives into two major issues:

1. The ‘Seditious Six’: An in-depth discussion around a video released by six Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Mark Kelly and Representative Alyssa Slotkin, urging military personnel to refuse "illegal orders." The episode explores whether this action constitutes sedition, the ensuing controversy in military and political circles, and the implications for civil-military relations.
2. AI Amnesty: Guest expert Mike Davis weighs in on current congressional debates about federal vs. state regulation of artificial intelligence, the push for "AI amnesty" by tech giants, and the potential consequences of giving tech platforms unchecked power.

Throughout, the panel features a combative, unapologetically conservative examination of legal, political, and cultural angles around both topics.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The 'Seditious Six' Video and Its Fallout

• Background of the Video

  • Six Democratic lawmakers, including Sen. Mark Kelly, Rep. Alyssa Slotkin, and others, appear in a video encouraging military personnel to refuse unlawful orders.
  • The language is ambiguous and never identifies a specific "illegal order."
  • Blake: "The best defense you could make is they're worried Trump might make an illegal order and they're saying people should defy it. But even worse, very strong vibe that they are soliciting... some element of defiance..." [02:03]

• Military and Legal Ramifications

  • Mark Kelly, as a retired Navy Captain, is technically still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
  • Department of War (formerly Defense) signals intent to investigate Kelly for possible misconduct.
  • Andrew: "If you take the 20-year-plus retirement from the military, apparently you're still subject to the UCMJ." [05:32]
  • Debate over whether making an example out of Kelly could backfire by turning him into a political martyr.

• Intent and Public Reaction

  • The hosts and guests see the video as unprecedented and dangerous, possibly "seeding the ground" for a future military mutiny if Trump returns to office.
  • Andrew: "These people just did this video and... there is a lot of people that are suggesting that this is seeding the ground for something terrible in the future or for some other sort of Color Revolution-esque action." [09:00]

• Notable Quotes

  • Mike Davis (Guest; Article 3 Project):

    "Mark Kelly is trying to portray himself as some noble hero. He should absolutely get court martialed and held accountable for this. They need to make an example out of this guy." [18:11]

  • Blake:

    "Sedition is a dicey word to use... treason is defined in the Constitution... Our founders knew English history... and they were very worried about that." [13:39]

• Political Risks of Prosecution

  • Multiple hosts debate whether prosecuting Kelly and others would be legally justified, politically wise, or would merely create sympathy for them.

• Historical Parallels

  • Reference to the Alexander Vindman/Trump impeachment saga as a cautionary tale about politicizing military obedience.

    "It kind of reminds me of what Vindman did to Trump... Trump's in the throes of chaos. It undermines the entire term." [22:18]

---

2. Listeners’ Feedback & Cultural Tones

• Nancy credits her baptism to Charlie Kirk's influence [11:06].
• Mixed reactions from the show’s audience highlight deep frustrations among conservatives about perceived lack of consequences for Democrats.

---

3. Law Enforcement & The Deep State: Transition Segment

• Discussion of court developments in cases involving James Comey & Letitia James, focusing on winning and losing legal battles as broader political warfare.
• Mike Davis:

  "James Comey got charged with lying to Congress and obstruction... He politicized and weaponized intel agencies and law enforcement with the Russian collusion hoax... The Supreme Court will fix this." [26:57]

---

4. AI Amnesty Debate

• Legislative Context

  • Congress is debating a moratorium on state-level AI regulation, seeking a unified federal standard.
  • Some Republicans, including Stephen Miller, argue federal preemption is necessary to prevent liberal states from embedding DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) values into AI.
  • Trump on Truth Social: "Overregulation by the states is threatening to undermine this growth. Some states are even trying to embed DEI ideology into AI models producing woke AI... We must have one federal standard..." [34:24]

• Mike Davis’ Perspective

  • Davis opposes “AI amnesty” (a parallel to Section 230 for social media), which he claims would let tech giants evade accountability to children, conservatives, communities, and content creators—the "four Cs."
  • Mike Davis:

    "If you're not going to protect the four Cs, they don't have 60 votes to get this done. If you try to do this again, we'll kick your butts again." [33:14] "Why would we let Meta... and Google... run us over and make trillions of dollars on the backs of conservatives, children, content creators and communities?" [33:08]

• Call for Federal Oversight With Protections

  • Davis pushes for strong federal rules to balance economic growth, national security, and community protections.
  • Emphasizes the importance of grassroots pressure to shape policy.
  • Mike Davis:

    "If they want to play this game again, I'll kick their asses again." [35:44]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Charlie Kirk:

  "If the most important thing is doing good, you will end up purposeful. College is a scam, everybody. You gotta stop sending your kids to college." [00:03]

• Blake (on sedition):

  "Sedition is a dicey word to use... [Founders] were worried about [overreach]." [13:39]

• Mike Davis (on Kelly and sedition):

  "You cannot get more dangerous than this. That is interfering with the chain of command." [18:11]

• Andrew (on public reaction):

  "There is a feeling of frustration that some of these people... have, I think, done illegal things, and... they keep getting away with it." [12:31]

---

Important Segment Timestamps

| Time | Segment / Topic | |---------|--------------------------------------------------------------------| | 00:03 | Charlie Kirk opens: personal philosophy, grassroots activism | | 01:12 | Introduction to the Seditious Six video controversy | | 02:26 | Analysis of implications, UCMJ applicability to Mark Kelly | | 05:01 | Predictions on consequences for Kelly & Slotkin | | 08:39 | Alyssa Slotkin denies knowledge of illegal Trump orders | | 13:39 | Debate over sedition, treason, and historical precedent | | 18:11 | Mike Davis pushes for court martial proceedings | | 22:18 | Vindman/Trump impeachment as parallel | | 26:12 | Mike Davis on Comey and Letitia James legal issues | | 31:31 | Start of AI Amnesty debate—federal preemption vs. “AI amnesty” | | 33:14 | Mike Davis: “Four Cs” needing protection from tech & AI | | 34:24 | Trump Truth Social post—AI regulation and woke AI | | 35:44 | Mike Davis closes with call to action, opposition to AI amnesty |

---

Tone & Language

• Combative, unapologetically conservative
• Heavy use of military and legal metaphors ("make an example," "court martial," "coup d'etat")
• Apocalyptic warnings about the future of American governance if current trends continue
• Audience engagement through shout-outs and shared listener emails

---

Summary for Those Who Haven’t Listened

This episode is a deep dive into two headline topics through a distinctly conservative and activist lens. The hosts dissect a provocative “Seditious Six” Democratic lawmaker video, debating whether it's a dangerous act of undermining military order or an overblown controversy. Legal, historical, and political risks are debated, with multiple panelists and guest Mike Davis weighing the consequences of prosecuting high-profile political opponents.

The second half pivots sharply to the fight over AI regulation, where the guests and hosts argue that tech giants are lobbying for blanket “amnesty” that would sidestep accountability, calling for national rules that protect children, conservatives, communities, and content creators.

Overall, the show is unfiltered, urgent, and focused on mobilizing its conservative base to demand accountability and resist both perceived elite overreach and unchecked corporate power.

---

Transcript

[Charlie Kirk]

My name is Charlie Kirk. I run the largest pro American student organization in the country, fighting for the future of our republic. My call is to fight evil and to proclaim truth. If the most important thing for you is just feeling good, you're gonna end up miserable. But if the most important thing is doing good, you will end up purposeful. College is a scam, everybody. You gotta stop sending your kids to college. You should get married as young as possible and have as many kids as possible. Go start a Turning Point USA College chapter. Go start a Turning Point USA High School chapter. Go find out how your church can get involved. Sign up and become an activist. I gave my life to the Lord in fifth grade. Most important decision I ever made in my life. And I encourage you to do the same. Here I am, Lord.

[Blake]

Use me.

[Charlie Kirk]

Buckle up, everybody. Here we go. The Charlie Kirk show is proudly sponsored by Preserve Gold, the leading gold and silver experts and the only precious metals company I recommend to my family, friends, and viewers.

[Andrew]

All right, so, Blake, take us up to speed. There's been a lot since yesterday's show about this back and forth between Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Senator Mark Kelly.

[Blake]

So. Well, let's just. Let's start from the baseline. Most of you have seen this, but in case you haven't, this is the video that kicked it all off that six Democrats put out they released on social media a few days ago. Let's just put it up 164.

[Alyssa Slotkin]

I'm Senator Alyssa Slotkin.

[Mike Davis]

Senator Mark Kelly.

[Charlie Kirk]

Representative Chris D'.

[Alyssa Slotkin]

Aluzio, Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander.

[Chrissy Houlihan]

Representative Chrissy Houlihan.

[Jason Crow]

Congressman Jason Crow. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.

[Alyssa Slotkin]

You can refuse illegal orders.

[Charlie Kirk]

You must refuse illegal orders.

[Blake]

And so. And it went on a bit like that. You must refuse illegal orders.

[Andrew]

Don't.

[Blake]

Don't give up the ship.

[Andrew]

Don't give up the ship.

[Blake]

So as many people pointed out, that's definitely. It's not implying anything that's good. The best defense you could make is they're worried Trump might make an illegal order and they're saying people should defy it. But even worse, very strong vibe that they are soliciting, encouraging some element of defiance of the administration's.

[Andrew]

We'll get to it. But Slotkin has. Slotkin has even gone on the record saying, no, I'm not aware of any illegal orders. So it's basically.

[Blake]

Well, they have to say that basically, otherwise they are actively telling them to defy orders right now. But anyway, Mark Kelly, he is a retired fighter pilot, but he still has. I can't remember his exact role with the military, but he has the ability to be recalled. So essentially he is still subject to military discipline in certain ways, or so the War Department says. And so what we had is first the Department of War put out an official statement. Let's put up 155. The Department of War has received serious allegations of misconduct against Captain Mark Kelly, US Navy retired, in accordance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice. And there is a whole long thing that they are may consider action in. And then Secretary of War Pete Hegseth comes out and he has his own tweet. 156. The despicable video urging Department of War troops to refuse illegal orders may seem harmless to civilians, but it carries a different weight inside the military. This was a politically motivated influence operation that never named a specific legal order. It created ambiguity rather than clarity and it used carefully scripted legal sounding language. And it subtly reframed military obedience around partisan distrust instead of established legal doctrines. In the military, vague rhetoric and ambiguity undermine trust, create hesitation in the chain of command and erode cohesion. The military has clear procedures for handling unlawful orders. It does not need political actors injecting doubt. And so then he goes on in.158. He goes on to threaten an actual court martial against him. Is that a video or a photo? Looks like it's a video. Let's do 158.

[Alyssa Slotkin]

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is threatening to court martial Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona. The Pentagon says they've received allegations of misconduct against the retired Navy captain.

[Narrator/Reporter]

This appears to all stem from that video that Senator Kelly made with other Democratic lawmakers urging service members to remember that they have a duty to disobey illegal orders. And the Department of Defense, which now calls itself the Department of War, they posted a statement on X saying that they have received serious allegations of misconduct against Captain Mark Kelly. He was a captain when he retired from the U.S. navy. And they said importantly that a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions which could include recall to active duty for court martial proceedings or administrative measures.

[Blake]

So definitely email us what you think about this freedomarliekirk.com, especially because this is Arizona's senator, because I guess where do you think you're gonna go from here? Do you think they'll go for it? Andrew?

[Andrew]

Well, so I think they've given themselves an out here or administrative measures, right. And so I think what's gonna happen is they're going to basically try and you know, Shame him into in some way, shape or form. And we have to, we talked about this actually before the judge.

[Mike Davis]

People stop at that.

[Andrew]

I mean, I mean, I don't know, but I will tell you.

[Blake]

Do you shame Letitia James?

[Andrew]

And by the way, for those who are curious, the ucmj, the Uniform Code of Military justice, if you're wondering why it only applies to Mark Kelly, which is a question I had, it governs conduct for active duty members, reservists and certain retirees. It does not apply to fully separated veterans, those who left without retiring after 20 plus years. So presumably he put in his 20 plus years, retired in a full military retirement style and therefore he's still subject. If you take the 20 year plus retirement from the military, apparently you're still subject to the ucmj. But yeah, I mean, I think he's saying that they're still subject to certain administrative measures. I am, Listen, I find this to be egregious, what they did, you and I actually immediately, our immediate reaction was it was egregious. And I would also just say that there is a risk because I've been disgusted how all of them have gone on social media and been, I'm a victim, I'm a victim. I can't believe President Trump would say this about me and that he's, you know, he wants me to be executed. No, he was rightfully offended. He was rightfully, I would say, upset, angered. Pod, you might say, which is the word I was going for. I stopped myself. But he was rightfully. All of these things he, he put on social media. He truthed that a Washington examiner article and it said that, yeah, listen, this is seditious behavior. If you were found guilty of seditious behavior, then you guess what one of the potential punishments is, you know, not so good things as Charlie would say. And so listen, I don't think, I don't think anybody is thinking that this is going here, but I do think that there should be real consequences for this save going so far as to make him an actual victim. That's what we have to warn for. And that's what we talked about before here. If you actually make him a sympathetic.

[Blake]

Figure, then what they did was egregious. I don't think it was egregious enough that you could bring Mark Kelly into a court martial docket, have him in his uniform, sitting up rigid straight, giving speeches how I only ever cared about serving my country, looking the part, all cinematic. And you try to convict him of that. Maybe you do. I feel the only reason to do that is if you are dead certain you have good oppo on Mark Kelly and you want him to be J.D. vance's 2028 opponent.

[Andrew]

Right? Well, there is good oppo that would.

[Blake]

Very quickly make him a front.

[Andrew]

I don't want to get into it too much, but I've just heard we are in Arizona after all. I heard there's quite a bit of oppo on Mark Kelly. But listen, that's. I'll stop there. This is what really upsets me and this is that Elise Slotkin, who was CIA, by the way. What's the CIA really good at, Blake? Oh, I don't know. Destabilizing foreign governments.

[Mike Davis]

You say that.

[Andrew]

I feel like they're pretty bad at it. Well, they might be bad at it, but listen, they think they're pretty good at it. So here's here. This is what frustrates me. And you said that they have to say this, but look at 159, let's go ahead and play this. Cut this from the weekend. Alyssa Slotkin admitting that Democrats lied about President Trump issuing illegal orders to the military. 159, let's talk right now. Do you believe President Trump has issued any illegal orders?

[Alyssa Slotkin]

To my knowledge, I am not aware of things that are illegal. But certainly there are some legal gymnastics that are going on with these Caribbean strikes and everything related to Venezuela.

[Andrew]

Oh, so there it is. He hasn't done anything illegal. We just out of the blue decided to throw up a flare.

[Blake]

We're worried he might. We're worried he might.

[Andrew]

We're worried that there might be another pandemic. We're worried that there might be an economic collapse. Worried about a lot of things. That doesn't mean you go out and make a video. I mean, this is what I think has a lot of people's hair on the back of their necks up. And that is the fact that out of the blue these people just did this video and they are hinting at something. There's something very fishy, very underhanded going on here. You know, there's, there is a lot of people that are suggesting that this is seeding the ground for something terrible in the future or for some other sort of Color Revolution esque action. And I think that's why we're all like kind of. It got our attention because like something isn't right here. Something is very, not very much not right. And I understand the reaction that they're getting.

[Lane Schoenberger]

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.

[Charlie Kirk]

I want to tell you guys about why refi.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 why refi.com that is why refi.com do you have a co borrower? 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 privacy loan debt. So many people feel stuck. Go to yrefi.com that is yrefy.com Private student loan debt relief. Why refi.com.

[Andrew]

All right, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk Show. We've got a couple emails here.

[Blake]

Blake, we got a bunch of good emails in that break.

[Andrew]

Freedomarliekirk.com freedomarliekirk.com First, I want to shout.

[Blake]

Out Nancy who just messaged us to say that she was just baptized at the age of 63 and she gives Charlie credit for that decision. Thank you very much. God bless you. Nancy wanted to shout that out. We got an email from one of our biggest Fans, Steve, at AmericanTactics. AZ he sends us a Bible verse every day along with a lot of responses. And he says Senator Mark Kelly accused President Trump of calling for Kelly's execution. I claim balderdash on that accusation. As a lifelong resident of Arizona, this pathetic excuse of an elected official who is a transplant has placed an enormous stain on the great state of Arizona. We need to bring Arizona back to full on red. Amen, Steve. We're working on that. Obviously we're gonna keep working.

[Andrew]

Yeah. I mean, he's, you know, what's funny about him is I look at Mark Kelly, you know, here he is invoking the name of Charlie, you know, because President Trump said, you know, he's doing seditious things. So obviously we're. One of the potential penalties is the death penalty. Okay, I get it. That's Inflammatory. That's probably the max. It's probably not gonna happen. Now, Grace sent us a. But hold on. For him to bring up Charlie's name. I find it really despicable, actually. So, anyways, go ahead, Grace.

[Blake]

Well, Grace says. Come on, guys. Charlie would demand we arrest and charge constitutional justice. Yes to death penalty. I. I am calling for the military.

[Andrew]

Here's Phyllis. Of course, they should all be convicted of sedition. They are all guilty of trying to undermine the president of the United States. Nothing will happen, though. They are all getting away with everything. Well, I think this is. I think this is why Secretary Hegseth is sounding. The tone that he's sounding is because I think there is a genuine, fundamental just frustration within the base that these people keep getting away with it. Right. We're gonna have Mike Davis on in the second half of this hour. We're gonna be talking about Letitia James Comey. Looks like the DOJ is going to be appealing that court case that has been thrown out because of a technicality, basically on the legality of Lindsey Halligan's appointment as a first step. So they're gonna be appealing that. But in general, there is a feeling of frustration that some of these people, these wrongdoers, these people that have, I think, done illegal things, and it's been proven, and they keep getting away with it. This is a video, a social media video that. It was designed to be provocative and cute. But the problem is the underlying message here, Blake, was that they were undermining and sowing doubt. And by the way, you have to be.

[Blake]

Sedition is a dicey word to use. As I like to point out to Charlie, treason is defined in the Constitution. It's defined narrowly as it has to be levying war against the United States or giving aid and comfort. And you need at least two witnesses. That's all because our founders knew English history and an English history, treason and sedition, you know, related laws, were used a lot for domestic political reasons against, you know, just domestic foes. And they were very worried about that. And we saw that ourselves. We saw that with January 6th, where they were hunting around to bring a sedition case against President Trump against his supporters. In the end, they settled for mostly just indicting hundreds and hundreds of his followers and convicting and sending them to prison. And we were very angry at that. We were very angry at that overreach. And quite plausibly, that overreach is why Trump is president again.

[Andrew]

Yeah, it's important not to overreach.

[Blake]

There's both damage you can do to the country by really aggressively pursuing this. And also damage you can do to yourself politically. And you always have to take account for that.

[Andrew]

Well, and here's what I will say. You know, when you talk about overreach, there is a clip here from Mark Kelly. Listen, I find Mark Kelly to be pretty, pretty despicable, actually. I feel like I see right through Mark Kelly. I don't see the strength that other people see or this like, standup serviceman that served his country. And like I said, there is an oppo file on Mark Kelly in the state. But here's what's interesting. I do agree with you that I'm not sure how far we want to take this fight from a political standpoint. Listen, you and the base, you and the audience, you get what he was trying to do. He's undermining the President of the United States, sowing doubt, sowing confusion. But he has this ace in the hole, and you got to acknowledge it. When you're going to fight a battle, you got to understand what you have in your favor, what is working against you. Play 161.

[Jason Crow]

Donald Trump called for my execution. I know a little bit about political violence. My wife Gabby was nearly assassinated. She was shot in the head because of political violence. She nearly died. These are the kind of threats that this president makes, not just to me, some of my colleagues as well. Just this week, he did this. Threatened our lives, said we should be hanged because of something we said.

[Andrew]

So he's got this trump card, if you will. And it is. What happened to his wife is egregious, terrible. I mean, especially in the wake of what happened to Charlie. I get it. So you just have to be careful about the battle you're gonna fight. Now, that's why I say, listen, he's gonna get investigated. The White House is saying that they fully support it. You cannot have a functioning military when you have elected leaders, especially of the profile Mark Kelly and Slotkin saying, don't trust the commander in chief. Right. That is sowing discord within the ranks. The White House is supporting of this investigation. I think we're gonna find ourselves in an administration administrative solution. That's my prediction. You know, I've been thinking about how much culture is shaped by what we choose to watch. Because whether we realize it or not, the stories we invite into our homes shape the way we see the world. That's why what Angel Studios is doing matters. And right now, they're having their biggest sale of the year. For a limited time, you can get An Angel Guild membership for as low as $6.99 a month for 12 months, plus two free tickets to see David in theaters. Angel Studios is leading a quiet revolution in entertainment. They're telling stories that elevate truth, celebrate family, and remind us what courage really looks like.

[Charlie Kirk]

These aren't just good films, they're cultural reset buttons. When you join the Angel Guild, you don't just stream entertainment, you help create.

[Andrew]

It and you help decide what the next generation of stories will look like. Take advantage of the lowest price of the year, become a member of the Angel Guild and get your two free tickets to see David in theaters this Christmas. Go to angel.comcharlie that's angel.comcharlie to learn more. Mike Davis from the Article 3 Project is joining us now. Mike, welcome to the show. I gotta just say we're talking about the Seditious six, so let's start there. Give us your take on it. Are you a maximalist? Do you want to go full, full court martial proceedings after Mark Kelly? Are you, are you advising a more reserved person?

[Blake]

Are you a squish like me?

[Andrew]

Blake is, Blake is saying let's not make him a victim. Let's not make him a future presidential candidate here, if that's possible.

[Mike Davis]

What Senator Mark Kelly is doing here by wink, wink, Nod, nod to 18 year old military enlistees to decide what orders of the President of the United States, the commander in Chief are lawful versus unlawful and then to ignore what these 18 year old enlistees think are an unlawful orders of the President of the United States. You cannot get more dangerous than this. That is interfering with the chain of commands. Mark Kelly is trying to portray himself as some noble hero. He's trying to portray himself as some victim when he got called out on it. He should absolutely get court martialed and held accountable for this. And he can raise his congressional speech, speech or debate clause, arguments for his defense, whatever he needs to do. But they need to make an example out of this guy. There's no chance this guy is going to be the President of the United States. He's a clown and he's really, he's really hurt his credibility by doing this far outside of the political circles. He's, he's hitting real Americans and real America, the non political people who think it's appalling that you have members of Congress calling on the military, calling on intel agencies to ignore the President of the United States.

[Andrew]

You know, I tend to fall on your end of this, Mike. I think that, you know, I think this was a self owned by them. I think they got way out over their skis. This was unsolicited, by the way. This, like came from out of nowhere, I guess. Like you could make the argument that the boat attacks.

[Blake]

I mean, there's always one thing or another they could fixate on. It just stands out to me what a dangerous escalation is. Even even though I'm the squish on how hard you prosecute it, we should not lowball how bad it was that they did this, how dangerous it is and how they are egging on a destructive thing. And one reason I am wary of prosecuting him is I'm thinking if they actually induce members of the military to try doing this, to try defying the president, you need to make sure you are in the strongest political position possible to defend against what would basically be a coup d'. Etat.

[Mike Davis]

I wrote a Fox News, I wrote a Fox News piece on this, Andrew, and I point this out. If, if the Supreme Court of the United States, the Trump administration, is going to the Supreme Court of the United States on the emergency docket and they are getting the smartest lawyers and judges at the lower court level reversed by the Supreme Court with like a 91 or 92% reversal rate, if these very smart Harvard lawyers and judges at the district or the appellate court level are getting the law wrong and the Supreme Court has to fix this 92% of the time, how the hell do we expect 18 year old military enlistees to figure out what the law is?

[Andrew]

Such a good point.

[Mike Davis]

Like, I mean, we have to. You have, if you are in the military, you have to follow the President of the United States on every order. And I can think of a time, for example, during Vietnam where there was a military officer who ordered the mass murder of the Vietnamese, burned down the villages. That's that, that would be at the military commander level where you would say, I can't do this because this is clearly a war crime. This is your, your kill. You're raping and killing children, women, children. You can't do this. That's, that's very clear. When you're dealing with the President of the United States, you better follow every order of the President of the United States unless you are goddamn sure it is wrong. For example, when President Trump ordered the strike on the Iranian nuclear facility, are you going to have some military officer or military enlistee saying, sorry, I can't do this strike. I'm going to expose this ongoing military operation because I don't think President Trump has the lawful authority to take out this Iranian nuclear facility. This is a very dangerous game these politicians are playing. And Mark Kelly not only should be ashamed. If he's capable of shame, he should be held accountable for this.

[Andrew]

Well, you know what? This reminds me of Mike as well, and Blake, it kind of reminds me of what Vindman did to Trump. Right? It was basically this inside out. Oh, we got this phone call, and guess what? He was abusing his power and withholding military aid for political gain. Right? And then all of a sudden, Trump's in the throes of all this chaos. It undermines the entire term in so many ways. It's such a slippery slope, because if you can start alleging that the president has done something illegal when he is given broad authority to command the armed forces, you could basically nitpick anything and start pulling away all authority from the executive branch to command the military. And then you do have the third worlding of the American military, where they would lead a military junta, where it would be a coup d'. Etat.

[Mike Davis]

Let me ask you this. These Democrats who pretend like they care about President Trump using the military, which, what they think is unlawfully. President Obama ordered an extrajudicial drone strike on two American. On several American citizens, including being a minor. I fully supported that drone strike of Obama, but there is. There is doubt whether that was legal or not. You have David Barron, who's now a judge on the First Circuit Court of Appeals, who was running the Office of Legal Counsel in the Justice Department at the time. OLC is the one that decides whether executive branch actions are lawful or unlawful within the executive branch. Of course, judges ultimately decide, but it was Judge David Barron who told President Obama that he had the lawful authority to. To order a drone strike on American citizens, including a minor extrajudicial killings. Was that legal? Was that illegal? That's up for debate. But you certainly don't want these drone officers, these drone operators in the military, to say, you know, I, I just can't do this. I just, I don't think that President Obama was. Was being lawful here, so I can't do this. Those people would be court martialed. They would be thrown in the brig. And that's exactly what should happen to Senator Mark Kelly for pushing this very dangerous game that they're playing because they don't like Trump into the brig.

[Andrew]

Well, I mean, that would be hard to run for president if he's. Yeah, I mean, we were talking about.

[Blake]

If Trump would have to.

[Andrew]

I know. I remember that. Listen, Mike, I tend to agree. I think there needs to be pretty stern consequences here. So I'm very sympathetic to your argument. I do think that, you know the punishment has to fit the crime here and I think it's a pretty egregious crime. I'm open minded to an administrative solution here. I don't want to create a victim out of this guy. But at the same time I just like I am in this moment having flashbacks to Vindman. I'm literally having flashbacks because this is a slippery slope. This is the third worlding of the US Military. I want to change our attention here to the news that broke yesterday that James Comey and Letitia James that a judge had thrown out the case basically based on procedural issues with Lindsey Halligan so saying that she was not lawfully appointed to her position. Now I'll play this clip. This is Ag Pambondi saying we're going to appeal this right away. 190.

[Chrissy Houlihan]

Sure. We'll be taking all available legal action including an immediate appeal to hold Letitia James and James Comey accountable for their unlawful conduct. I'm going to keep going on this. I'm not you know I'm not I'm not worried about someone who has has been charged with a very serious crime. His alleged actions were a betrayal of public trust.

[Andrew]

And James Comey's already taken a victory lap. Maybe should pump the brakes as Caroline Levitt says. But 195 this is James Comey.

[James Comey]

The message has to be sent that the president of the United States cannot use the Department of Justice to target his political enemies. I don't care what your politics are. You have to see that as fundamentally un American and a threat to the rule of law that keeps all of us free. I know that Donald Trump will probably come after me again and my attitude is going to be the same. I'm innocent. I am not afraid and I believe in an independent federal judiciary. The gift from our founders that protects us from a would be tyrant would be tired.

[Andrew]

Mike. I already see you shaking your head.

[Blake]

They can't stop acting like they're in a movie.

[Andrew]

It's this is virtue signaling holier than thou. Mike Davis.

[Mike Davis]

It's worse. James Comey got charged with lying to Congress and obstruction of a congressional investigation for the very thing he's complaining about. He politicized and weaponized intel agencies and law enforcement with the Russian collusion hoax with Crossfire Hurricane to take out President Trump, his political enemy. He got caught lying about it. The prior interim U.S. attorney was a giant wimp and didn't bring charges. Same with Letitia James with her mortgage fraud. And so Lindsey Halligan went in there, found the evidence, took it to a grand jury, a Democrat controlled grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia outside of Washington D.C. and even this Democrat grand jury found probable cause on both James Comey for lying to Congress and an obstruction of a Congressional investigation and against Big Tish James, the New York Attorney General who lied about having a second home in Virginia to get a better mortgage rate when it was an investment property. The grand jury returned these indictments. Then you had this Democrats Obama Chief judge of the 4th Circuit pick a Clinton judge in South Carolina to come in and and to dismiss these indictments. And they dismiss these indictments on the incorrect legal grounds. They essentially argue that the courts, after 120 days the courts instead of the President of the United States or his Attorney General get to decide who the chief law enforcement officer is, the U.S. attorney in these districts. That is an incorrect reading of the statute. It's a dangerous reading of the statute because you don't have accountability. You don't have prosecutors who are accountable to the American people through their duly elected President of the United States. You have prosecutors who are picked by Democrat judges and Democrat hell holes like the D.C. suburbs or New Jersey to protect their political allies and go after their political friends. The Supreme Court will fix this. And in the meantime, the Attorney General has many different tools to bring accountability for both Big Tish and James Comey, including indictments in the Southern District of Florida.

[Andrew]

Right now in war torn Ukraine, elderly Jews like Maria face a brutal winter and a constant search for food. Maria is 85 years old and lives alone. She's nearly blind and suffers from a broken hip. Maria is a Holocaust survivor. Her father and brother were murdered by the Nazis. Maria still lives in her childhood home. There's no indoor plumbing, no heat and it's bitterly cold. Today. Like yesterday, Maria barely has enough food to survive. Her hunger is unbearable. She prays for warmth, food and someone to help her this winter. As the snow falls and the nights grow longer, her hope fades with each passing day. She feels forgotten and needs our help. That's why I'm so grateful for the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. We for over 40 years, the fellowship and their supporters have delivered boxes stuffed with nutritious food, cooking supplies and other essentials to suffering and impoverished people like Maria. To learn more about the great work of IFCJ, visit urgentifcj.org that's urgentifcj.org Mike Davis Article 3 Project. Tell us your coordinates. How do people follow you and track you and support the work you're doing.

[Mike Davis]

Article3project.org Article number three project.org Follow us on Social media. Donate what you can afford, but take action. That's the most powerful thing your audience can do is action, action, action. And thank you guys.

[Andrew]

Yeah, absolutely. We're going to be talking one of your initiatives on AI. I have a lot of questions, Mike. Article 3 project. Mike Davis. There is a back and forth going on. I mean it first flared up during the one big beautiful bill about this moratorium on states putting forth any regulation. So at that time we brought in Stephen Miller. Stephen and Charlie had a big conversation about it ended up going viral. And it was about this idea of can states like California or New York issue regulations when it comes to AI and basically was saying we don't want them to do that. We don't want the woke states, the Democrat led states to be leading the charge on this. You disagree with this position. Now lawmakers are once again trying to, to stuff it into the ndaa. I believe so. Mike, give us your perspective on it. I'm all ears.

[Mike Davis]

No, I don't necessarily disagree with Stephen Miller on the need for a federal standard for AI. I guess it's the tech companies are the only companies in America who think they need federal preemption. But I'm not necessarily opposed to federal preemption. They're not asking for federal preemption with federal rules of the road. They're asking for AI amnesty like they did with Section 230 back in 1996 where these small tech platforms had Section 230amnesty and then antitrust amnesty. And then we got Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple that crush competition, shutter small businesses and cancel conservatives and others with whom we disagree. We can't repeat the mistakes of section 230 with AI. And so I understand that we, we need to be competitive across the world and compete with China and compete with other adversaries. But we also need federal rules of the road if we're going to have federal preemption. So state and local governments cannot touch AI. For example, I call this the four Cs. Are we going to have protections for children from, from online abuse? Are we going to have protections for conservatives so we don't get canceled by these AI platforms? Are we going to have protections for communities so we make sure that we don't, for example, jack up the water and electricity prices and these small communities so the working class have to foot the bill for these AI data centers that consume all this water and electricity are we going to have zoning protections in communities so we don't put AI data centers in the middle of neighborhoods. These big tech oligarchs, the AI bros say no, that they should have full amnesty from, from state and local and then no federal rules of the road so they can just do whatever the hell they want like they did on section230. And my response to that is hell no. Why would we let Meta for example, and Google for example, who hate us as conservatives, run us over and make trillions of dollars on the backs of conservatives, children, content creators and communities? If you're not going to protect the four Cs, they don't have 60 votes to get this done. They thought they had 60 votes for four months ago, at the end of June, at the beginning of July, they thought this thing was going to pass and must passed legislation. And then the Article 3 project kicked into gear and it went down 99 to 1, including the lead sponsor, Ted Cruz voting against his own bill. I would, I'll tell the AI bros the same thing. If you try to do this again, we'll kick your butts again. And if you need, if you're going to get 60 votes, you're going to protect the four seats.

[Andrew]

Yeah. This is a Trump Truth Social 169. He says, you know, investment in AI is helping to make the US economy the hottest in the world. This is Image 169. Thanks guys. But overregulation by the states is threatening to undermine this growth. Some states are even trying to embed DEI ideology into AI models producing woke AI. Remember black George Washington? We must have one federal standard instead of a patchwork of 50 state regulatory regimes. So I, and actually by the way, in the final line there, Mike, he says we can do this in a way that protects children and prevents censorship. So is the middle ground here spearheading a federal effort to make sure that we have AI a regulatory regime at the federal level so we don't have this patchwork? It sounds like you're open minded to that.

[Mike Davis]

Yeah, and I'm working with the President and the Vice President and their teams on that right now. But they're going to protect children, conservatives, communities and creators or they're not going to get this done. It's very easy to go on conservative media and get people to light up their two home state senators and their US House rep and then all of a sudden this AI embassy that they think they're going to jam through at 4 o' clock in the morning goes down 99 to 1. So if they want to play this game again, I'll kick their asses again.

[Andrew]

So I'm convinced. I'm convinced. Mike, I think you're right. I think there's, I think there's some money involved in some of these, this push to keep getting this bill that went down in flames back into the ndaa. I think you're right. I think we need to scrap it. I think we need to get it in the federal, federal level. I think that's the key here, I think, because we can't.

[Blake]

I mean, as he says, you know, if it's content creators, get your pound of flesh out of it.

[Andrew]

Yeah, Exactly. Mike Davis, Article 3 project. Thank you, man. We appreciate you.

[Mike Davis]

Thank you, guys.

[Andrew]

We'll see you soon.

[Blake]

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