Progressive Critic (13:09)

You know I will. People have asked me about there was some type of report about potential travel restrictions on Americans and on Floridians. And I just, I think it's an absurd report that they would be doing that. I think it would be unconstitutional, it would be unwise and it would be unjust. And if you think about it, restricting the right of Americans to travel free freely throughout our country while allowing illegal aliens to pour across the southern border unmolested would be a ridiculous but very damaging farce. So we will oppose it 100%. It would not be based in science. It would purely be a political attack against the people of Florida.

Charlie Kirk (13:55)

So we are now seeing the contrast, the difference between a leader and a lifelong politician. And it's not just Andrew Cuomo. It's also JB Pritzker whose approval numbers are tumbling and also Governor Gavin Newsom. Governor Gavin Newsom is facing a serious recall threat. As I made the prediction on this program yesterday, Governor Gavin Newsom is likely going to challenge all of the signatures that are submitted in favor of his recall. He's going to say, well, there could be fraudulent signatures. There could be problems with mail in. There could be. We have to make sure we verify the identity of all the recall signatures against Gavin Newsom. I hope he does that. I hope we can have a robust debate on how when you have millions of people that participate in something, there could be a little bit of fraud and shenanigans. I just can't wait for Governor Gavin Newsom to do that. But Governor Gavin Newsom is facing a very serious recall threat. Now, that doesn't mean that he'll necessarily be removed from office. The way it works in California, they submit the signatures, it looks like they're on pace to do it. They're going to probably hit 2 million signatures, which is a real accomplishment. That's a very big deal. And I know a lot of people that are working on the ground on the Gavin Newsom recall in California. They have told me that it is Democrats that are signing up at this moment just as much as Republicans, which is awesome. And so the way it works in California is then if a recall is triggered, then there's a waiting period where there's a campaign period, and then the ballots go out or you go to vote, and they'll say, do you want a yes or no recall? And then if yes, who do you want to replace that person with? So it'd have to be 50 plus 1% to be able to have Gavin Newsom recalled. And then you have to have the. If yes, whoever wins, that would then replace him. And names that are being floated out is former Director of National Intelligence Rick Grinnell, who I think would be a terrific choice for that, amongst many other names that I know in California. But I could tell you this, that the grassroots rebellion against Gavin Newsom is legitimate. This is across party lines. This is across philosophies. Gavin Newsom's in serious trouble. And this is the system the Founding Fathers built for us. Isn't it amazing to think James Madison, the architect of the US Constitution, the foundation built on the laws of nature and. And nature's God, as it's articulated in the Declaration, that that system and that framework, it still is relevant. Why is that? It's because as much as we want to convince ourselves that we're so much better than the people from 1790, human nature has not changed. And the way that human beings naturally act is predictable. The founding fathers knew this. They wanted local governance first and foremost. They wanted local representation. And so while you have Florida booming with Ron DeSantis and his approval ratings going up, Democrats that are scared to even confront him in an election, you have the opposite happening on the other side of the country. Gavin Newsom facing a rebellion of working people of the muscular class that says, you know what, Gavin Newsom, you can go eat at French Laundry, but that doesn't mean you can do it as governor, and we are going to vote you out. What we are seeing right now is our system working, and that should give you all hope. Look, a lot of you guys are wondering, how do I support Mike Lindell? A lot of you are asking me. He is so courageous. He's fighting. I want to be able to get behind Mike Lindell. Well, I've talked about MyPillow, and I could tell you that MyPillow will not go flat. You can wash and dry them as many times as you want, and they maintain their shape. They're made in America. But most importantly for a lot of you, Mike Lindell is standing up for what is right. Did you know that MyPillow is being canceled by basically every company imaginable? Dollar General, Shop HQ, Mattress Firm, Kohl's, Kroger, BJ's, Wayfair, Bed, Bath and Beyond, the Shopping Channel, HEB, Affirm, Fingerhut, Kinney, Drugs, Colony Brands, Blue Stream, Coburns, Chewy.com, jC Penney. What do all of them have in common? They all canceled Mike Lindell's pillow. All of them. So if you want to be able to support Mike Lindell against the cancellation culture, the tsunami, the hurricane of cancellations that Mike Lindell has to endure, all because he has decided to ask questions about voter integrity, then you guys can get a Queen size premium MyPillow for $29.98. So here's what you do. Go to MyPillow.com, use the promo code, Kirk. Go buy a bunch of stuff. A lot of you ask Charlie, how do I support the fighters. How do I support the guys? Metaphorical fighters. How do I support the guys that go up and stand for truth? Well, I just listed a bunch of corporations that have canceled MyPillow. And you can go to MyPillow.com, use the promo code Kirk. Buy a bunch of stuff, but make sure you use the promo code Kirk, so they know our show sent you. If you want to stand for truth with courage and conviction and support those that do. Go to mypillow.com, buy a bunch of stuff. Giza, dream seats, all that good stuff. Promo code. Kirk, do it now. I want to go to David Schoen. He's doing a great job here defending the president and really attacking the Democrats case. Let's cut to that.

David Schoen (19:40)

Our Constitution and any basic sense of fairness require that every legal process with significant consequences for a person's life, including impeachment, requires due process under the law, which includes fact finding and the establishment of a legitimate evidentiary record with an appropriate foundation. Even last year's impeachment followed committee hearings and months of examination and investigation by the House. Here. President Trump and his counsel were given no opportunity to review evidence or question its propriety. The rush to judgment for a snap impeachment in this case was just one example of the denial of due process. Another, perhaps even more vitally significant example was a denial of any opportunity ever to test the integrity of the evidence offered against Donald J. Trump in a proceeding seeking to bar him from ever holding public office again, and that seeks to disenfranchise some 75 million voters, American voters. On Wednesday this week, countless news outlets repeated the Democrat talking point about the power of never before seen footage. Let me ask you this, why was this footage never seen before? Shouldn't the subject of an impeachment trial, this impeachment trial, President Trump have the right to see the so called new evidence against him? More importantly, the riot and the attack on this very building was a major event that shocked and impacted all Americans. Shouldn't the American people have seen this footage as soon as it was available? For what possible reason did the House managers withhold it from the American people and President Trump's lawyers for political gain? How did they get it? How were they the ones releasing is evidence in hundreds of pending criminal cases against the rioters? Why was it not released through law enforcement or the Department of Justice? Is it the result of a rushed snap impeachment for political gain without due process? House Manager Raskin told us all yesterday that your job as jurors in this case is a fact intensive job. But of course, as several of the House managers have told you, we still don't have the facts. Speaker Pelosi herself on February 2nd called for a 9, 11 style commission to investigate the events of January 6th. Speaker Pelosi says that the commission is needed to determine the causes of the events. She says it herself. If an inquiry of that magnitude is needed to determine the causes of the riot, and it may very well be. Then how can these same Democrats have the certainty needed to bring articles of impeachment and blame the riots on President Trump? They don't. The House managers, facing a significant lack of evidence, turned often to press reports and rumors during these proceedings, claims that would never meet the evidentiary standards of any court. In fact, they even relied on the words of Andrew Feinberg, a reporter who recently worked for Sputnik, the Russian propaganda outlet. You saw it posted, by the way. The report they cited was completely refuted. The frequency with which House managers relied on unproven media reports shocked me as I sat in this chamber and listened to this. There's a lot that we don't know

Progressive Critic (23:36)

yet about what happened that day.

David Schoen (23:38)

According to those around him at the time reportedly responded Trump reportedly reports across all major media outlets, major news networks, including Fox News, reported reportedly summon reportedly reportedly not accidental. According to reports, President Trump was reportedly who reportedly spoke to the guard and was widely reported media reports according to reports reported reportedly. As any trial lawyer will tell you, reportedly is a euphemism for I have no real evidence. Reportedly is not the standard in any American setting in which any semblance of due process is afforded. And accused. Don't be you get more due process than this when you fight a parking ticket. One reason due process is so important with respect to evidence offered against an accused is that it requires an opportunity to test the integrity, the credibility, the reliability of the evidence. Here, of course, former President Trump was completely denied any such opportunity. And it turns out there is significant reason to doubt the evidence the House managers have put before us. Let me say this clearly. We have reason to believe the House managers manipulated evidence and selectively edited footage. If they did, and this were a court of law, they would face sanctions from the judge. I don't raise this issue lightly. Rather, it is a product of what we have found in just the limited time we have had since we first saw the evidence here with you this week. We have reason to believe that the House managers created false representations of tweets. And the lack of due process means there was no opportunity to review or verify the accuracy. Consider these facts. The House managers, proud of their work on the snap impeachment, staged numerous photo shoots of their preparations. In one of those, Manager Raskin is seen here at his desk reviewing two tweets side by side. The image on his screen claims to show that President Trump had retweeted one of those tweets. Now, members of the Senate, let's look closely at this screen because obviously Manager Raskin considered it important enough that he invited the New York Times to watch him watching it. Now, what's wrong with this image? Actually, there are three things very wrong with it. Look at the date on the very bottom of the screen on Manager Raskin's computer screen. When we zoom in to the picture, the date that appears is January 3, 2020, not 2021. Why is that date wrong? Because this is not a real screenshot that he's working with. This is a recreation of a tweet. And you got the date wrong when you manufactured this graphic. You did not disclose that this is a manufactured graphic and not a real screenshot of a tweet. Now, to be fair, the House managers caught this error before showing the image on the Senate floor. So you never saw it when it was presented to you. But that's not all. They didn't fix this one. Look at the blue check mark next to the Twitter username of the account retweeted by the President. It indicates that this is a verified account given the blue check by Twitter to indicate it is run by a public figure. The problem, the user's real account is not verified and has no blue check mark, as you can see. Were you trying to make her account seem more significant or were you just sloppy? If we had due process of law in this case, we would know the truth. But that's not all that's wrong with this one tweet. House Manager Swalwell showed you this tweet this week and he emphasized that this tweet reflected a call to arms. He told you repeatedly that this was a promise to call in the cavalry for January 6th. He expressly led you to believe that President Trump's supporter believed that the President wanted armed supporters at the January 6 speech. Paramilitary groups, the cavalry ready for physical combat. The problem is the actual text is exactly the opposite. The tweeter promised to bring the Calvary, a public display of Christ's crucifixion, a central symbol of her Christian faith, with her to the President's speech, a symbol of faith, love and peace. They just never want to seem to read the text and believe what the text means. You'll see this reported in the media last evening. Also, words matter, they told you, but they selectively edited the President's words over and over again. They manipulated video time shifting clips and made it appear the President's words were playing to a crowd when they weren't. Let's take a look after this.

Donald Trump (29:05)

We're going to walk down and I'll be there with you. We're going to walk down. We're going to walk down to the Capitol. But I think right here, we're going to walk down to the Capitol

Progressive Critic (29:20)

and

Donald Trump (29:20)

we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. And we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated. Lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.

David Schoen (30:06)

And we are going to walk down to the Capitol. They showed you that part. Why are we walking to the Capitol? Well, they cut that off to cheer on some members of Congress and not others, peacefully and patriotically. The Supreme Court ruled in Brandenburg that there's a very clear standard for incitement. In short, to paraphrase whether the speech was intended to provoke imminent lawless action and was it likely to do so. Go to the Capitol and cheer on some members of Congress but not others. They know it doesn't meet the standard for incitement, so they edited it down. We heard a lot this week about fight like hell, but they cut off the video before they showed you the President's optimistic, patriotic words that followed immediately after we fight like hell.

Donald Trump (30:59)

And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun, my fellow Americans, for our movement, for our children and for our beloved country. And I say, despite all that's happened, the best is yet to come.

David Schoen (31:26)

There's that famous quote, like one of the House managers said, a lie will travel halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to put its shoes on. Well, this lie traveled around the world a few times, made its way into the Biden campaign talking points and ended up on the Senate floor. The Charlottesville lie. Very fine people on both sides. Except that isn't all, he said. And they knew it then and they know it now. Watch this.

Donald Trump (31:56)

But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of to them a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name. George Washington was A slave owner? Was George Washington a slave owner? So will George Washington now lose his status? Are we going to take down. Excuse me. Are we going to take down. Are we going to take down statues to George Washington? How about Thomas Jefferson? What do you think of Thomas Jefferson? You like him?

Progressive Critic (32:38)

I do.

Donald Trump (32:39)

Okay, good. Are we going to take down the statue? Because he was a major slave owner. Now we're going to take down his statue. So you know what? It's fine. You're changing history. You're changing culture. And you had people, and I'm not talking about the neo Nazis and the white nationalists because they should be condemned totally, but you had many people in that group other than neo Nazis and white nationalists, okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers. And you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats. You had a lot of bad. You had a lot of bad people in the other group, too.

Conservative Supporter (33:22)

You were treated unfairly.

Progressive Critic (33:23)

Sir, I'm sorry, I just didn't understand

Conservative Supporter (33:24)

what you were saying. You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly. I just didn't understand what you were saying.

Donald Trump (33:28)

There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before, if you look, they were people protesting very quietly, the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones. The following day, it looked like they had some rough bad people, neo Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call them. But you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest and very legally protest because, you know, I don't know if, you know, they had a permit. The other group didn't have a permit. So I only tell you this. There are two sides to a story. I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country, a horrible moment. But there are two sides to the country. Does anybody have a final. Does anybody have. You have an infrastructure.

David Schoen (34:20)

What makes you think infrastructure? This might be today, the first time the news networks played those full remarks in their context. And how many times have you heard that President Trump has never denounced white supremacists? Now you in America know the truth. Here's another example. One of the House managers made much of the president's supposedly ominous words of, you have to get your people to fight. But you knew what the President really meant. He meant that the crowd should demand action from members of Congress and support primary challenges to those who don't do what he considered to be right. Support primary challenges, not violent action. I know what he meant because I watched the full video and so did the House managers, but they manipulated his words. You will see where they stopped it and to give it a very different meaning from the meaning it has in full context. Let's watch. You have to get your people to

Progressive Critic (35:22)

fight, he told them.

Donald Trump (35:26)

You have to get your people to fight. And if they don't fight, we have to primary the hell out of the ones that don't fight. You primary them, we're going to let you know who they are. I could already tell you, frankly,

David Schoen (35:40)

the people who need to fight are members of Congress. Why did we have to skip the necessary due diligence and due process of law that any legal proceeding should have. It couldn't have been the urgency to get President Trump out of office. House Democrats held the articles until he was no longer president, mooting their case. Hatred, animosity, division, political gain. And let's face it, for House Democrats, President Trump is the best enemy to attack. I want to say this for Donald Trump, who I may well be voting to impeach.

Progressive Critic (36:17)

Donald Trump has already done a number

David Schoen (36:18)

of things which legitimately raise the question of impeachment.

Charlie Kirk (36:22)

I don't respect this president and I will fight every day until he is impeached.

Progressive Critic (36:29)

That is grounds to start impeachment proceedings.

David Schoen (36:32)

Those are grounds to start impeachment?

Progressive Critic (36:33)

Those are grounds to start impeachment proceedings?

David Schoen (36:35)

Yes.

Progressive Critic (36:36)

I think that's grounds to start impeachment proceedings.

Charlie Kirk (36:38)

I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to call for the impeachment of the President of

Progressive Critic (36:46)

the United States of America.

Conservative Supporter (36:48)

I continue to say impeach him. Impeach 45. Impeach 45.

Progressive Critic (36:56)

So we're calling upon the House to

David Schoen (36:57)

begin impeachment hearings immediately.

Progressive Critic (37:00)

On the impeachment, Donald Trump, would you vote yes or no?

Charlie Kirk (37:02)

I would vote yes.

Democratic Politician (37:03)

I would vote.

Charlie Kirk (37:04)

I would vote to impeach.

Conservative Supporter (37:05)

Because we're gonna go in there, we're

Charlie Kirk (37:07)

impeach the mother that.

Conservative Supporter (37:08)

I thought he should have punched him in the face.

Charlie Kirk (37:09)

I feel like punching him.

Donald Trump (37:11)

I'd like to take him behind the gym.

Progressive Critic (37:13)

If I were in high school, we were in high school. I'd take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him. No, I wish you were in high school. I could take him behind the gym.

Conservative Supporter (37:19)

I will go and take Trump out tonight. Take him out now.

Donald Trump (37:24)

When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?

Progressive Critic (37:27)

They're still going to have to go

Charlie Kirk (37:29)

out and put a bullet in Donald Trump. Show me where it says that protests

Progressive Critic (37:31)

are supposed to be polite and peaceful,

Conservative Supporter (37:34)

and you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore anywhere. I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.

Progressive Critic (37:46)

Please get up in the face of some Congress people.

Conservative Supporter (37:50)

People will do what they do.

Progressive Critic (37:52)

I want to tell you, Gorsuch.

Donald Trump (37:54)

I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you, you

David Schoen (38:00)

will pay the price.

Conservative Supporter (38:02)

We're gonna go in there. We're gonna. This is just a warning to you Trumpers.

Democratic Politician (38:08)

Be careful. Walk lightly. And for those of you who are soldiers, make them pay.

Charlie Kirk (38:17)

If you had to be stuck in

Democratic Politician (38:18)

an elevator with either President Trump, Mike Pence, or Jeff Sessions, who would it be? Does one of us have to come out alive?

David Schoen (38:30)

And there's more. I promise to fight every single day.

Progressive Critic (38:36)

1. I'm a fighter and I'm relentless.

David Schoen (38:38)

But I'm a fighter and I'm relentless. A fighter, and I'm relentless.

Progressive Critic (38:42)

I will fight like hell.

Conservative Supporter (38:43)

The way I see it now is that we pick ourselves up and we fight back. That's what I think it's all about. We stand up and we fight back. We do not back down. We do not compromise. Not today, not tomorrow, not ever. You can either lie down, you can. You can whimper, you can pull up at a ball, you can decide to move to Canada, or you can stand your ground and fight back. And that's what it's about. We do fight back, but we are going to fight back. We are not turning this country over to what Donald Trump has sold. We are just not. Look, people are upset, and they're right to be upset. Now, we can whimper, we can whine, or we can fight back. Me, I'm here to fight back. I'm here to fight back. Because we will not forget. We do not want to forget. We will use that victory vision to make sure that we fight harder, we fight tougher, and we fight more passionately than ever. We still have a fight on our hands. Fight hard for the changes Americans are demanding. Get in the fight to winning the fight. Fight, fighting, fighting. We'll use every tool possible to fight for this change. We'll fight. We'll fight to fight. Fighting hard. Serious about fighting and fight. We gotta get on our front foot and fight back. Problems, we call them out, and we fight back. I'm in this fight. Not afraid of a fight. I am in this fight all the way. You don't get what you don't fight for. Our fight, our fight. We are in this fight. Fight for our lives. This is the fight of our lives.

Charlie Kirk (40:41)

But we are going to make sure

Progressive Critic (40:43)

that this fight does not end tonight. This is a fight for our lives, the lives of our friends and family members and neighbors. It is a fight fight. And it is a fight that we're going to work to make sure continues. It's a fight. It is a fight. It is a fight. And that's what this fight is for.

Donald Trump (41:11)

Well, I'm wired to fight anyone who isn't doing their job for us.

Progressive Critic (41:14)

I'm Jon Tester and you damn right

Donald Trump (41:16)

I approve this message

Democratic Politician (41:21)

and I'll have lots of fights ahead of us.

Conservative Supporter (41:23)

And I'm ready to stand up and keep fighting.

Democratic Politician (41:25)

We have to fight. We're going to fight. We're going to fight. We need to fight, fight, fight. And we need to fight. We're going to fight. We got a few more fights. I'm going to take the privilege of a few more fights and we have the biggest fight of all. I will never stop fighting.

Conservative Supporter (41:40)

I will fight like hell to fight back against anyone. We need to say loud and clear

Democratic Politician (41:46)

that we are ready to fight.

David Schoen (41:48)

It's a bare knuckles fight now.

Charlie Kirk (41:50)

They're going to have to actually fight back against people.

Donald Trump (41:54)

The fight has to be conducted.

Conservative Supporter (41:55)

It's so important that we need to fight.

Democratic Politician (41:57)

Fight.

Progressive Critic (41:58)

That fight we have been fighting, I

David Schoen (42:00)

was fighting very hard. Time is of the essence, both in terms of the fight.

Progressive Critic (42:03)

I think we should be fighting.

David Schoen (42:04)

Well, I. I really believe we need to fight.

Charlie Kirk (42:07)

We're simply not going to take this line down.

David Schoen (42:09)

We're going to keep fighting.

Charlie Kirk (42:11)

So I'm telling all my colleagues, this

David Schoen (42:13)

is the fight of our life.

Charlie Kirk (42:14)

Whose side are you on?

Conservative Supporter (42:15)

Who are you fighting for?

Progressive Critic (42:17)

They're fighting or I'm fighting?

Charlie Kirk (42:18)

We're both fighting for we will fight back.

Conservative Supporter (42:20)

We're not going to just take this line down.

Charlie Kirk (42:22)

I'm just going to keep the fight up.

Democratic Politician (42:23)

What we have to do right now is fight as hard as we can.

Conservative Supporter (42:26)

We have to rise up and fight back.

Progressive Critic (42:29)

And so we're going to fight and we're going to continue to fight. I am going to be fighting. Fighting like hell. Keep fighting. Fighting. Fighting. Or we kept fighting and we did. So we're going to keep fighting. We have to be fighting every single day. We have to fight back, and we have no choice but to do that. I think we're doing the right thing to do that. Fighting.

Charlie Kirk (42:48)

And I'm fighting. Well, our job right now is to fight.

Conservative Supporter (42:51)

It's really important. I'm going to keep fighting.

Charlie Kirk (42:52)

I'm asking for the support of people across the country to fight back. And you got to be fierce in fighting. Keep fighting.

Conservative Supporter (42:58)

Brown have been fighting.

Progressive Critic (42:59)

I've told President Biden I will fight like mad.

Democratic Politician (43:02)

I'll tell you what, now more than

Conservative Supporter (43:04)

ever, we have to fight like hell.

Charlie Kirk (43:06)

We have these battles on the floor of the Senate. I'm going to go down and battle and I'm going to be down there on the floor fighting.

Progressive Critic (43:12)

But we Democrats are fighting as hard as we can. Democrats are fighting as hard as we can credit it in any way, but we're fighting back.

Charlie Kirk (43:19)

What we've got to do is fight

David Schoen (43:21)

in Congress, fight in the courts, fight

Charlie Kirk (43:23)

in the streets, fight online, fight at the ballot box, fighting and pushing around the clock fighting. Continue to be brave and be strong and keep fighting. We're getting people engaged in the fight.

Progressive Critic (43:34)

We're fighting. We've got to keep fighting and keep focused. Continue to fight, fight.

Democratic Politician (43:39)

This is going to be a fight.

Progressive Critic (43:40)

We'll also fight him and challenge him

David Schoen (43:42)

in every way that we can in the Congress, in the courts and in

Democratic Politician (43:45)

the streets to continue fighting. We each have an important role to play in fighting in this fight. Like so many before it, it has been a fight the American people are going to have to fight. And about the importance of fighting. I will always fight fighting, but we always must fight. Joe Biden has a deep, deep seated commitment to fight and to fight and about the importance of fighting. We always must fight. To fight, to fight and to fight. As our willingness to fight continued the fight. As Joe Biden says, to fight, it's about fighting what we're fighting for. We will tell them about what we did to fight, really about a fight. But truly I do believe that we're in a fight. I believe that we are in a fight. I believe we are in a fight. I believe we are in a fight. So there's a fight in front of us, a fight for all of these things. And so we're prepared to fight for that. We know how to fight our ongoing fight. A fight. We know how to fight. We like a good fight. We were born out of a fight. This is what is our fight right now.

David Schoen (44:57)

There's the fight. There's the fight, there's the fight. And then there's the fight to defend back in the fight.

Conservative Supporter (45:03)

Our mission is to fight. That is the guiding purpose of House Democrats fighting. He has never forgotten who he is fighting for. March and fought and we just have to fight. But this is a fight for our country.

Progressive Critic (45:17)

Fighting the health crisis Of COVID I led the fight and continue to fight.

Charlie Kirk (45:22)

Never, never, never give up this fight.

Progressive Critic (45:26)

I am a citizen.

Conservative Supporter (45:27)

We're gonna fight. We are gonna fight. We're gonna fight. We're gonna fight. And I will fight.

Charlie Kirk (45:33)

We're in the fight of our lives right now. We fight like hell to fight, to

David Schoen (45:37)

fight, fight against the Trump administration.

Charlie Kirk (45:39)

Democrats are standing up to fight.

David Schoen (45:42)

We're in this fight in a serious way.

Conservative Supporter (45:45)

We're eager to take on this fight, get in this fight, and we'll fight it out. I have taken on the fight as

Charlie Kirk (45:50)

representatives for the people, as legislators here

Donald Trump (45:52)

in the halls of Congress.

Charlie Kirk (45:54)

Our job is to fight.

Conservative Supporter (45:55)

Who has led us in this fight

Charlie Kirk (45:57)

is to fight for this.

Progressive Critic (45:58)

This fight. Every day I'm in the United States

David Schoen (46:01)

Senate, I will fight. And one of the things we do

Conservative Supporter (46:05)

is fight, should fight, because my constituents

Charlie Kirk (46:08)

send me here each and every day to fight.

Democratic Politician (46:11)

We have been fighting this fight, and

Conservative Supporter (46:12)

we need to be side by side so we can succeed. And so I hope that you will all join us in. In our fight. And if we fight, and as the next governor of Georgia, I will never stop fighting, we can show the old guard something new. And we can fight my fight. Those fights. To fight, to fight an administration requiring

Democratic Politician (46:30)

us to fight and fight we will. Their fight and their fight and their fight. The fight is a fight. And so when we fight the fight that we are in, when we are fighting this fight, we fight this fight. The strength of who we are is we will fight. And we will fight. We will fight the fight. We will fight. We are in a fight. The fight, fight, fight, fight. It is a fight, is a fight, and it is a fight born out of patriotism. This is a fight fighting. I say fight on. Fight on. Fight on. Fight on.

Conservative Supporter (47:05)

I'm here to say one more time in publicly, this is not a fight I wanted to take on, but this is the fight in front of us now.

David Schoen (47:15)

Every single one of you and every one of you, that's okay. You didn't do anything wrong. It's a word people use. But please stop the hypocrisy. And did you tone down the rhetoric last summer when all of this was happening? Did you condemn the rioters? Or did you stand with Nancy Pelosi, who said people are going to do what they're going to do?

Democratic Politician (47:40)

This is a movement. I'm telling you, they're not going to stop. And everyone beware, because they're not going to stop. They're not going to stop before election day in November, and they're not going to stop after.

Charlie Kirk (47:56)

And please show me where it says

Progressive Critic (47:57)

that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful.

Conservative Supporter (48:02)

I just don't even know why there aren't uprisings all over the country.

Donald Trump (48:05)

Maybe there will be.

Charlie Kirk (48:11)

It was a violent night in St. Louis. They shot and killed David in cold blood.

Democratic Politician (48:15)

Destroying property which can be replaced is not violent.

Progressive Critic (48:19)

This is an apartment complex on fire and it just collapsed.

David Schoen (48:22)

Their building just collapsed.

Donald Trump (48:23)

I have nowhere to go now.

Charlie Kirk (48:25)

These people sent this for no reason. This is just a snapshot of some of the damage that people will be waking up to.

Progressive Critic (48:34)

I'm proud of New York and I'm proud of the protests.

Charlie Kirk (48:41)

There is damage everywhere you look.

David Schoen (48:43)

Honestly, it looks like a war zone.

Conservative Supporter (48:45)

Heartwarming to see so many people turn out peacefully.

Progressive Critic (48:53)

They keep doing it day after day after day. That darn country is a nation of protest. The patriots were protesters.

Charlie Kirk (49:05)

St. John's Church is on fire.

David Schoen (49:08)

That. That's a myth.

Conservative Supporter (49:13)

I hope someone burns down your whole precinct with all y' all inside.

Charlie Kirk (49:17)

It is not generally speaking.

Conservative Supporter (49:20)

And you push back on them and you tell them they're not welcome anymore anywhere.

Democratic Politician (49:28)

They're not going to let up and they should not.

David Schoen (49:33)

You claim that it's wrong to object to the certification of election results. You, along with your allies in the media, attempted to cancel and censor members of this chamber who voice concerns and objected to certification. Manager Raskin, you'd been in Congress only three days when you objected in 2017. It's one of the first things you did when you got here. I have an objection because 10 of the 29 electoral votes cast by Florida were cast by electors not lawfully certified.

Progressive Critic (50:03)

Is the objection in writing and signed not only by the member of the House of Representatives, but also by a senator?

David Schoen (50:10)

It is in writing, Mr. President.

Progressive Critic (50:11)

Is it signed by a senator?

David Schoen (50:12)

Not as of yet, Mr. President.

Progressive Critic (50:14)

In that case, the objection cannot be entertained.

Conservative Supporter (50:16)

Mr. President, I object to the certificate from the state of Georgia on the grounds that the electoral votes were not debate.

Progressive Critic (50:22)

There's no debate.

Donald Trump (50:23)

I object to a certificate from the state of North Carolina based on violations.

Progressive Critic (50:29)

There is no debate. And there's no debate in the joint session.

Democratic Politician (50:32)

I object because people are horrified by the overwhelming.

Progressive Critic (50:36)

Section 18, Title 3 of the United States Code prohibits debate.

Charlie Kirk (50:41)

I object. Objected to the counting of the electoral votes of the state of Ohio.

David Schoen (50:46)

I object to the certificate from the state of Alabama.

Progressive Critic (50:48)

The electors were not lawfully certified.

Charlie Kirk (50:51)

I object to the 15 votes from the state of North Carolina because of the massive voter suppression in the closing of Voting, polling booths.

Progressive Critic (50:57)

There's no debate. There's no debate.

David Schoen (51:00)

There's no debate.

Charlie Kirk (51:01)

And the massive, gentle suppression that occurs.

Progressive Critic (51:03)

The general was suspended. I have an objection to the electoral votes.

Conservative Supporter (51:07)

The objection is in writing, and I don't care that it is not. It is not signed by a member of the Senate. I do not wish to debate. I wish to ask, is there one United States Senator who will join me in this letter?

Progressive Critic (51:20)

There is no debate.

Conservative Supporter (51:22)

The objection is signed by a member of the House, but not yet by

Democratic Politician (51:26)

a member of the Senate.

Progressive Critic (51:27)

It is over.

David Schoen (51:33)

And when the House managers realized that the president's actual words could not have incited the riot, as you alleged in your article of impeachment, you attempted to pivot. You said that raising the issue of election security and casting doubt on the propriety of our elections was dangerous. One of the house managers, Mr. Cicilline, told you that this is not about the words Mr. Trump used in isolation. Rather, it is about the big lie, the claim that the election was stolen. The House managers told you that it's the big lie that incited the riot and that the big lie was President Trump's claim that the election was not a fair election or that the election was stolen. Claiming an election was stolen, you were told, are words that are insightful to a candidate's followers and cause people to respond violently. Claiming the election was stolen or not legitimate is something that a candidate should never do because he or she knows or should know that such a claim and such words can actually incite violent insurrection, you were told. Well, it seems that the House manager's position must be actually a bit narrower than that. The House manager's position really is that when Republican candidates for office claim an election is stolen or that the winner is illegitimate, it constitutes inciting an insurrection, and the candidate should know it. But Democratic Party candidates for public elective office are perfectly entitled to claim the election was stolen or that the winner is illegitimate, or to make any other outrageous claim they can. It is their absolute right to do so, and it is their absolute right to do so, irrespective of whether there's any evidence to support the claim. Democratic candidates can claim that an election was stolen because of Russian collusion or without any explanation at all. And that is perfectly okay and is in no way incitement to an insurrection. And somehow, when Democratic candidates publicly decry an election as stolen or illegitimate, it's never a big lie. You have been doing it for years. But can you imagine telling your supporters that the only way you could possibly lose is if an American election was rigged and stolen from you. And ask yourself whether you've ever seen anyone at any level of government make

Progressive Critic (54:06)

the same claim about their own election.

David Schoen (54:09)

If Stacey Abrams doesn't win in Georgia, they stole it.

Donald Trump (54:11)

It's clear. It's clear. And I would say, I say that publicly.

Conservative Supporter (54:15)

It's clear you can run the best campaign.

Democratic Politician (54:18)

You can even become the nominee.

Conservative Supporter (54:20)

And you can have the election stolen from you.

Democratic Politician (54:23)

He knows he's an illegitimate president.

Conservative Supporter (54:25)

He knows.

Democratic Politician (54:26)

He knows that there were a bunch

Conservative Supporter (54:30)

of different reasons why the election turned out the way it did. Votes remain to be counted. There are voices that were waiting to be heard.

Democratic Politician (54:39)

And I will not concede.

Progressive Critic (54:41)

And I respect where you're coming from,

Charlie Kirk (54:42)

and I respect the issues that you're raising. You're not answering the question. Do you think I am? No. You're not using the word legitimate.

Conservative Supporter (54:50)

There are still legitimate concerns over the integrity of our elections and of ensuring the principle of one person, one vote.

David Schoen (54:59)

House Manager Castro no longer has to try to imagine it. Thanks to the distinguished senator and others, it didn't have to be this way. The Democrats promised unity. They promised to deliver the very Covid relief in the form of $2,000 stimulus checks that President Trump called for. They should have listened to their own words of the past. I leave you with the wise words of Congressman Jerry Nadler.

Progressive Critic (55:27)

The effect of impeachment is to overturn the popular will of the voters. We must not overturn an election and remove a president from office, except to defend our system of government or our constitutional liberties against a dire threat. And we must not do so without an overwhelming consensus of the American people. There must never be a narrowly voted impeachment or an impeachment supported by one of our major political parties and opposed by the other. Such an impeachment will produce the divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come and will call into question the very legitimacy of our political institutions. The American people have heard the allegations against the president and they overwhelmingly oppose impeaching him. They elected President Clinton. They still support him. We have no right to overturn the considered judgment of the American people. Mr. Speaker, the case against the President has not been made. There is far from sufficient evidence to support the allegations. And the allegations, even if proven true, do not rise to the level of impeachable offenses. Mr. Speaker, this is clearly a partisan railroad job. The same people who today tell us we must impeach the president for lying under oath almost to a person voted last year to re elect the speaker who had just admitted lying to Congress in an official proceeding. The American people are watching, and they will not forget. You may have the votes, you may have the muscle, but you do not have the legitimacy of a national consensus or of a constitutional imperative. This partisan coup d' etat will go down in infamy in the history of this Nation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield back the balance of my time.

Charlie Kirk (57:11)

As the China virus spread across the globe in the spring of 2020, Noble Gold investors flocked to precious metals. And as a financial safeguard, gold is up more than 30% since March of 2020. Silver surged more than 50% over the same period, reflecting the correlation among precious metals during the time of financial volatility. But providing financial protection is not the only role that precious metals play in this fight. Precious metals also have broad applications in the medical field that go well beyond the dental uses most people associate with their value. But providing financial protection is not the only role that precious metals play in this fight. Gold and silver nanoparticles are an essential part of virus research and prevention. As the China virus mutates, science will have to adapt its prevention methods accordingly. And precious metals will continue to stay in demand. As for me, I will continue to trust the team at Noble Gold, a leading authority in the precious metals industry. If you have the kinds of questions I do about your financial mix and how to best leverage precious metals as a hedge against market uncertainty, I encourage you to visit noblegoldinvestments.com and call their team for a free gold guide. Call Noble Gold today and tell them Charlie Kirk sent you for a special gift with all qualifying transfers. What a phenomenal speech that was by David Schoen. We're keep an eye on that. That was unexpected. We had a whole show planned. It's so funny, actually in our show flow today, kind of things that we were going to think about going through. One of the things I wanted to go through is how the Democrats tampered with evidence. And I was going through it with our team. I said, you do know that Eric Swalwell, who's a lover of Fang Fang, the Chinese Communist Party spy, he tampered with evidence. And David Schoen, to his great credit, came out and proved that point that Eric Swalwell, and this is why this is not a trial. This is a Hollywood Broadway production. That's all this is. In a real trial, you'd say, your honor, this evidence is tampered with. So you had Swalwell, the lover of Fang Fang, who came out and said that Donald Trump called for the Calvary to come. Cavalry. Now, anyone in the Christian world knows that there's a difference between Calvary and Calvary. I sometimes without unintentionally mispronounce one or the other, but I know the difference. Calvary, C, A L. Calvary. One is where Christ was crucified. The other is horse mounted. Infant. Horse mounted. Horse mounted. Military. So Eric Swalwell reads Jennifer Lawrence's Tweet, who says, Mr. President, that Calvary is coming. So Eric Swalwell then comes out and says, well, on the House impeachment floor, you see here President Trump, he was calling in for reinforcements, and the Calvary is coming. Now, to an untrained eye, you're like, well, there might be something. You know, maybe there might be. It's nothing. It's the opposite. She was calling in a prayer, vigilant. They also added a blue check verification to Jennifer Lawrence. Not that Jennifer Lawrence, a different Jennifer Lawrence, by the way, I think that the girl from Hunger Games is named Jennifer Lawrence too, right? So not that Jennifer. It's a different Jennifer Lawrence. Jennifer Lynn Lawrence, who's not verified on Twitter, said the House impeachment managers saw her tweet and they say, huh, if we added a blue check verification, it would add a lot of credibility to this. Boom. They did. Tampering with evidence. Now, there's no recourse for the Democrats lying under oath. There's no recourse for the Democrats tampered with evidence. But if this was a real court of law, you could get in serious, potentially criminal trouble for tampering with evidence in a court proceeding, in a prosecution. Then David Schoen went on to play one of the greatest supercuts, I think, ever compiled of every single Democrat senator. That's right, every single Democrat senator saying, we must fight, we must fight, we must fight. The very same thing that they're trying to impeach the president for. David Schoen made the brilliant move of not necessarily even having to defend the president, instead attacking the prosecution's case. David Schoen is a brilliant lawyer because he knows that, that before you even have to get to defend your client, if there's no case for the prosecution and you can add doubt to the jury, then the whole case will be dismissed. And that's exactly what he did, is he said there was evidence tampered with. This was a made for TV production. They selectively edited tapes, they misrepresented words. Calvary and Calvary. Now, one of two things. Either Eric Swalwell is a total fool or he's a pathological liar. Now, he could be both, but it's one or the other. Producer Connors nodding his head. He says, yes, he's both. I believe that Eric Swalwell doesn't know the difference between Calvary and Calvary Cav. Calvary. That was a big part of his speech. Swalwell comes out and he says, see, he's bringing in the troops. He's calling them in. Now, all of this stuff had to go through some form of a Democrat impeachment manager filter team, you would imagine. And what does that tell you about the Democrat Party and all their lawyers and their millions of dollars they've spent on this that not one of them caught? Hold on. This is Calvary. Not Calvary. It goes to show, in a real criminal proceeding, the prosecution, you know what they would do? They'd go through all of her other tweets, they'd look at it through a thousand different perspectives. They'd say, does this really mean what I think it means? Then they have to submit the evidence. David Schoen, he almost made this point. It was so close. But he didn't make it. And I was a little. The only critique I have of him is the fact that President Trump and his team were not given the opportunity to look at this evidence and is a direct violation of the Sixth Amendment. A part of the Sixth Amendment is called the Confrontation Clause. You have the right to be confronted with everything that you are being charged with, all the witnesses, all the evidence, and then your team has the opportunity to challenge it, to cross examine it. The right to cross examine witnesses and evidence in a criminal proceeding. Why is that important? Well, it's important because in countries like Russia or in China, they won't introduce evidence against you till the last moment, and you won't have any opportunity to be able to vet it, be able to get your defense right. They'll say, oh, Alexei Navalny, turns out we have a sworn affidavit from your childhood friend that you killed dogs for fun. That's it. What do you think, Jury? Well, that sounds terrible. You go to jail for three and a half years. The point, that's obviously an exaggerated example, but it's not really. The point is that if you're not being able to be confronted with the evidence and cross examine it and challenge it, then the prosecution can introduce any evidence at any time, for any reason whatsoever to destroy your life. The Founding Fathers knew this. Do you understand how brilliant the Founding Fathers were? That if you do not have they had the brilliance to know that if you are not confronted with what you're charged for, that's a violation of natural rights? Where do natural rights come from? They come from God. You have the right to live free and to take that freedom away, you must have the opportunity to know what you're being charged with. The House Democrats violated the Sixth Amendment. Not only is this impeachment unconstitutional because there's not a Chief justice sitting behind them, it's unconstitutional because it's violated the Fourth, probably Fourth Amendment, definitely the Sixth Amendment. I want to get back into this idea of different states, different country, different direction. Now, we all do have to live under federal law in this country, but there's a huge distinction between states. And you're seeing that the three hottest real estate markets in the country are Phoenix, Austin, and Tampa. The fourth being Nashville. Now, Phoenix would be the exception of this, but it's generally been governed by Republicans for quite some time. Texas has not had a Republican Democrat governor in quite some time. Florida has not had a Democrat governor since the 90s. And Tennessee has not had a Democrat governor. You know what else those states have in common? And Arizona better get their income tax figured out. I'm telling you right now, for anyone watching this from Arizona or listening to this, if your legislatures do not fix out fix this Prop 208 nonsense, a lot of people are going to leave Arizona and they're going to leave quickly. It's going to be harder and harder for people to want to go to Arizona. It's one of the most foolish things. It's a byproduct of weak Republicans. And I'm telling you, everyone listening to this in Arizona, you better go contact your legislators right now to tell them to go fix Prop 208. It's a disaster. Texas, no income tax. Tennessee, no income tax. Florida, no income tax. Elon Musk cut 95 on the Joe Rogan podcast on the massive move to Austin and how people shouldn't bring their politics that made them move in the first place. Let's go to cut 95.

Progressive Critic (66:21)

It's gonna be the biggest boomtown that America's seen in 50 years. Yes, I agree. Yeah. Yeah, I think so. Megaboom. I think we do need to make sure that Austin does not, you know, people moving from California don't inadvertently recreate

Charlie Kirk (66:37)

the issues that they have moved that

Progressive Critic (66:40)

caused them to move in the first place. Yes. Yeah.

Charlie Kirk (66:43)

Joe Rogan and Elon Musk are not necessarily political by any means, but Elon is saying very little. I disagree with and what Elon is saying logically is now don't go vote for a bunch of high taxes, homeless nonsense, open drug usage, high property tax, public sector unions. And so, yes, Austin is going to become one of the largest boom towns we have ever seen. I'm not a huge fan of Austin, Texas. It's way too liberal for me and it's really weird. Would you agree, producer Connor? It's a weird town. I will tell you. Harris County, Houston, it's also turning into a mini Austin. I was walking the streets of Houston a couple months ago and they got all sorts of different liberal feeling things. They got like downtown Houston had like juice shops and Pilates, vegan stuff, like all. And I'm okay with all that. It's just kind of a. Just goes to show that Houston was changing. I'm telling you, if you look at the voting trends, I'm exactly right. I'm making my point is that Harris county is one of the most. It's the quickest growing liberal counties. It's the quickest movement, meaning it's made one of the largest movements in recent years. And so now we have these difference of states. So let me just tell you something. If you're moving out of Illinois, California, or New York to a red state, don't try to change that red state. Just do what they've already been doing. We're seeing this here in Arizona. In Arizona, we have a bunch of Californians moving in and they say, oh, this place is nice. Let's destroy it. We fled high taxes, we fled public sector corruption, we fled cost of living. Let's just wreck this place, too. Republicans built these functioning states and people are moving in dramatic and drastic numbers like we've never seen before. And it's going to be up to states like Florida, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas to be keeping the Biden administration accountable, to file lawsuits, to hold them legally accountable. And now we have a real grassroots movement to hold Gavin Newsom accountable. If you have not signed the Gavin Newsom recall pledge and you're in California, I encourage you to do that immediately. It's very important. Go get your friends to do the same. National Republicans are pouring money into the Newsom recall. This is a way to put Democrats on defense because remember, the entire Democrat cartel comes from the San Francisco Bay Area. Swalwell, Pelosi, Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom. Gavin Newsom is the former mayor of San Francisco. They are all friends with each other. They all wine and dine at the same places. People originally moved to the Wild west for Freedom. Now people are fleeing, but west, because it's become totalitarian. California was one of the most free and prosperous states in the country. It has flipped itself upside down. Immigration played a large role in this. Hollywood, weak Republicans, all of it played a factor. But now Gavin Newsom is on defense. The Democrats are on defense in California. It's a great opportunity for us to play offense and to support the good governors in our country like Ron DeSantis and Kristi Noem. I'm go through just some of the cuts of the week that we have not had a chance to go through. Representative Clyburn, cut 101 says, I don't think Trump is going to escape this. This is just the beginning. Cut 101.

Progressive Critic (70:20)

But Donald Trump knows very well the next mulligan he gets is gonna have to be on the golf course because they're waiting for him down in Fulton as well as up in New York. I don't think he's going to escape this. This is just the beginning.

Charlie Kirk (70:38)

Didn't quite understand what he said at the beginning of this, but I think that just the crackly audio. But I think he said that this is just the beginning of our hunt for Donald Trump. So there's a really interesting article here. I think they changed the name of the title. They changed it. Of course they did.

Donald Trump (70:56)

Yeah.

Charlie Kirk (70:57)

Because it was too honest. It was by this guy, Alexander Nazarian. I don't know who that is. He's a very gifted writer. I don't say that lightly. His diction, his flow, his syntax. It's probably not a word you thought you'd hear today. Syntax. He's very gifted. He missed his calling being a novelist. Not joking, but it's a really good article. They changed the title because it was probably too honest. The title was originally I Miss the Thrill of Trump or I'm Gonna Miss the Thrill of Trump. And it goes on. It's quite long piece. And he equates himself to being a World War II fighter on the Allied side at Normandy. And so the Atlantic was getting very trolled very, very hard about this for good reason, because it was just so outrageous, but it was actually really true. And basically the argument, as he was a Democrat activist, media member, is that Trump made our lives exciting. We were in the opposition, but they knew they really weren't. So they were in this very unique position, a gift that will never be given to them again, where they could act all rebellious, but they were actually part of the predominant culture in the country. So they could act. Yeah, we're part of good trouble. Yeah. Okay. You control all the media, you control all the colleges, you control all the universities, you control the corporations. And yet they can still kind of feel as if they're mounting this revolutionary rebellious style campaign. He then goes on to, he does say this, that it is now time to put pressure on the Biden administration. That's probably the real reason he got attacked. He said, quote, some want journalists to give the new administration a break to let Biden undo Trumpism before subjecting him to harsh scrutiny. To which I say, no dice. If all those pans about speaking the truth to power and democracy dying in darkness were reserved for Trump alone, they were never really serious to begin with. The thrill may be gone, but the work begins. Democrats made, Democrats were made relevant because of Donald Trump. He made American politics exciting again. And so now a lot of these Democrats are looking for relevancy. This is their last gasp through this impeachment trial saying, can I still get on TV for attacking Trump? Yes. And they will not stop. And they're going to continue to lose credibility. They, they're going to lose relevancy the more they do that. I want to get to a cut here from Newt Gingrich about how the Biden administration is committed to radically changing America, which is completely contrary to what the Biden administrator Biden ran on in the campaign. I want to go to cut 62. This is one of the major reasons why Biden is okay with impeachment. One of the major reasons why Biden is okay with impeachment is because it is smokescreen. It is vapor. It's a mirage, it's a distraction, it's camouflage to what's really happening. What is Joe Biden doing today? We're not talking about it. That's a good thing for Biden. There's probably something bad for America. Play tape.

Progressive Critic (74:26)

Here's reality. The the Biden Harris Democratic team are committed to radically changing America in every way they can. And they are. What they don't realize is that they are rapidly building themselves for a disaster in 2022 and 2024 because they're drawing a very wide gap between themselves and the Republicans. This is what Obama did. He got, he lost 63 seats. Two years later, it is what Bill Clinton did. He lost 54 seats. And so I think that they had, they want the noise of Trump so we don't notice how many really disastrous things they're doing.

Charlie Kirk (75:09)

That's exactly right. So they are creating cover fire for their theft so people are not paying attention to all of the destruction that Joe Biden is doing to this country, now we'll be able to turn it around. We're going to be able to reverse it. This impeachment is already failing. David Shone just took them task for altering evidence, violating the Sixth Amendment, tampering with evidence, not allowing due process. And so now the Biden administration at some point is going to have to be held accountable and the activist media is going to be up against a financial cliff soon. What do I mean by that? These media companies are going to run out of stuff to write. The New York Times, the Washington Post, cnn. They've grown accustomed to having millions and millions of eyeballs of people that are dedicated daily to try to destroy Trump. Well, now that he's a private citizen, he'll be acquitted by the Senate. He'll still be criminally investigated. By the Georgia phone call that they've already signaled that he's going to be investigated probably by the Southern District of New York and the State of New York or the Manhattan DA but those stories are not traveling as much as they used to. Now that Biden has been president for almost a month, the American people are saying that's fine, but what are you doing to hold him accountable? Because my wages aren't going up, prices are going up, jobs are not as abundant as they used to be. I kind of miss the guy that used to tweet crazy things, but the economy was robust. Why aren't you holding him accountable? So I'm gonna make a prediction for you and this Alexander guy. I missed the thrill of Trump. Alexander Nazarian, I think, actually gives a little bit of a preview. You're going to see some reporters and some members of the activist media. I'm talking about the real reporters, not the people on the propaganda networks. I'm talking about the people that do research. You're going to start to see them defect a little bit. You're going to start to see a couple people defect and investigate the Biden administration, submit FOIA requests because they'll get clicks and they want to be famous. Now, that's not a good way to be loved in liberal circles. But there's so much corruption out there that is not being investigated. If the New Yorker or the New York Times or the Washington Post or any one of these outlets just focused 10% of the attention, just 1% of the attention they focused on Trump, they would uncover Pulitzer Prize worthy stories. And we're already starting to see that because Tara Palmeri, who is a reporter for Politico, I Think she's actually the chief White House reporter, began investigating a romantic relationship between a journalist and TJ Ducklow. The journalist is a journalist for. Is it Axios? Who's she a journalist for? Is it Axios? It's a journalist for Axios. And Tana Palmeri starts asking questions about that, saying, isn't that a little bit of a conflict of interest? Right. Or like what's going on here? And so TJ Ducklow in one call, allegedly tried to turn the tables, accusing Palmieri of breaking an off the record agreement by relaying Ducklow's misconduct to her editors. Palmeri, who's a former New York Post reporter, I'm reading from the New York Post and co author of Politico's popular playbook, was working on the story of Ducklow's then secret romance with Axios reporter Alexi McCammond, a male journalist at Politico, and asked Ducklow for comment while Palmero reached out to McCammond. So basically, TJ Ducklow is dating Axios political reporter Alexei McCammond. That's, that's not a big deal. It's something, but it's not groundbreaking. The reason the story is newsworthy is less about TJ Ducklow and more about Alexi McClaman, where this is an example of literally the Biden administration being in bed with the media. Literally. That's what it is. Saying this is somewhat of a conflict of interest. We're not exactly going to expect hard hitting journalism from Alexei McCammond going towards TJ Ducklow. That's not exactly going to happen. And so according to the original reporting, Alexi McCammond was working with Axios on the Biden admin on the Biden campaign. She then disclosed her relationship back during the campaign with TJ Ducklow and then got reassigned to Kamala Harris. Not exactly a big move. Now if she got reassigned to covering a Senate race, that's fine. And so the bigger point here though is that TJ Ducklow threatened Tara Palmieri. And the other part of this is that the reporter who's being talked about, Alexei McCammond, there's an inherent conflict of interest here. And so Tara Palmeri, who's doing her job, just asks the very simple and obvious question, are you going to disclose this conflict of interest to your readers? And it's turned into this entire, just very complicated saga where TJ Ducklow basically goes to threaten her. TJ Ducklow says, quote, I will destroy you to Tara Palmieri. Lashed out to one of the head reporters at Politico he then claimed that Palmieri was jealous that a different man had wanted to f you and not you. So TJ Ducklow has now been put on a one week unpaid leave. But I hope that Tara Palmeri remembers this. I hope that the Politico staff says, okay, you're going to bully around our reporters. You're going to put a one week leave on. We're not your communication arms here at Politico. We don't work for you. Yeah, okay. We hated Trump and we are dedicated to him. But you know what? We are going to investigate you. We're going to investigate your financial filings. We're going to investigate you like we investigated Trump. I hope that's the takeaway there because I'm telling you, the way they've been covering right now, these media companies will go bankrupt. But then clip 109 shows that Joe Biden, I will fire you if I see anyone disrespecting anyone. Clip 109.

Progressive Critic (82:25)

But I'm not joking when I say this. If you're ever working with me and I hear you treat another colleague with disrespect, talk down to someone, I promise you I will fire you on the spot. On the spot. No if, ands or buts. Everybody, everybody is entitled to be treated with decency.

Charlie Kirk (82:48)

And so I don't think that TJ Ducklow is going to be fired anytime soon. He was put on one week leave. Apologize to the reporter and we'll move on. I want to get to some of your questions here. Freedomarliekirk.com While I do that, I want to just compliment the Trump impeachment team defense team. They're doing a great job focusing on the illegitimacy of the claim, the problem with the prosecution, the, the unconstitutional nature of it. And then they're also playing offense against the Democrats who say fight, fight, fight, fight, talking about political speech. This is the correct defense. They're not getting into any of the specifics. I would like to see if they'd get a little bit more into the narrative of what actually happened at the Capitol. But that remains to be seen. Let's get to some questions here. Freedomarliekirk.com Someone's asking about what's going on in Arizona. Well, we just had an amazing episode with Congressman Paul Gosar where I asked some very pointed questions. So I encourage you to go to the Charlie Kirk show podcast right now. Type in Charlie Kirk show, maybe on Apple podcast or on Spotify and hit subscribe. Let's go to a Question here. Someone is asking about TikTok. Okay. Hey Charlie, my name is Sarah. I'm writing you from a small town in Kingston, Oklahoma. I listen to your podcast every day. I know you always say that America was found on Christian values and beliefs. I believe this as well. But it's been circling around on TikTok, a video that's saying that's a myth. Sheen says that none of the founding fathers were Christians, saying that they were deists which believe in a God, not the God of the Bible. It said that John Adams was quoted saying, quote, America was in no way founded on Christian beliefs. This is pathologically untrue. America was founded on activist pastors first and foremost. Look at the black robe regiment. I'm going to give you four or five facts that will dispute this, that America was founded on Christian beliefs. Number one, just look up the black robe regimen activist pastors that laid the foundation for America's founding. Number two, I'll get the final number, but I believe it was 85% of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were regular church attending Christians. Number three, Thomas Jefferson was called a deist by many historians, but he considered the Bible to be the most exceptional, incredible document ever written. After traveling the world and reading all the greats and all the classics, the they were inspired by the Bible. Number four. God is mentioned four times in the Declaration of Independence. 1, 2, 3, 4. Why? God the creator, God the law giver, God the law interpreter, and then finally God the law administer basically getting the pretext to the United States Constitution. It says clearly in the Declaration the laws of nature and nature is God. Another thing that people that make this argument with is totally untrue is they do not look at William Blackstone. William Blackstone was a devout Christian and he more than almost anyone else inspired the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh Amendment and the first Amendment of the United States Constitution. Talking about how God Lord inspired the United States, inspired common law and the protection for natural law and natural rights. You cannot get to the American founding without going through William Blackstone. It's impossible. It is a riddle that that the people that push this myth cannot break. Then finally, George Washington. George Washington was a Bible believing Anglican Christian. George Washington traveled everywhere with the Bible. George Washington prayed at morning and evening with his Bible alongside of him. And here's the final numbers of the 56 men who signed the Declaration. The great majority, perhaps all identified as Christians and all but one were Protestants. But four were either President or former ministers. And a number of signers were sons of clergy, and at least half of them had studied divinity at various universities. And then there's denomination breakdowns. It is a lie that is being pushed by the university to say that America was not founded on Christian values. John Locke himself, who is one of the major philosophical one of the major philosophical influences, that's the word I was looking for, influences on the American founding, said himself that you cannot get around the God question. The Scottish Enlightenment, Scottish Presbyterianism influenced the founding of our country more than almost anything else. You'd have to get through John Edwards. You'd have to get through the activist pastors to make that argument. And they can't do that. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Please consider supporting us at charliekirk. Com Support Email us your questions freedom at charliekirk. Com and get involved with turningpointusa@tpusa.com. god bless. Speak to you soon.