Loading summary
Transcript196 lines
- [00:04]
A
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.
- [00:45]
B
Here I am, Lord.
- [00:47]
A
Use me. Buckle up, everybody. Here we go. Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of the Charlie Kirk Show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble gold investments@noblegold investments.com that is noblegoldinvestments.com all right, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show. It's Friday, June 12th. We're here at the Y Refi Studios. Blake is still on assignment. So we're holding it down here in Phoenix, Arizona and there is much to discuss, namely, do we have a peace deal or not? So a lot has been going back and forth in the news media overseas. A lot of leaks coming out of the Middle East. President Trump is none too pleased. But let's get the basic facts about where we were supposed to be at, where we thought we were at as of yesterday. Let's go ahead and play cut 24.
- [01:52]
C
But has Iran committed to not pursuing a nuclear weapon or will there be
- [01:58]
A
more negotiations on that down the line? We will not have a nuclear weapon. They've agreed to that.
- [02:02]
B
There will be no. Which is the whole reason, which is
- [02:05]
A
a big part of the reason.
- [02:06]
C
Is that going to be your agreement, sir?
- [02:08]
A
They will not only not have, they will not purchase, develop in any way, any shape, in any way, shape or form a nuclear weapon. They will not have a nuclear weapon. All right, so that's the big get, obviously. But then the second big get is the straight of Hormuz. So again, this deal has been going on and being negotiated for weeks now. I was able to participate in sort of a high level call with some members of the press a few weeks ago. I'm told there was another one this morning. I was not on it, but I'm Getting updates as we go. Calling my sources and they said it was gonna take weeks at that point. They basically said, you know, it's carrier pigeons that you gotta get into this Supreme Leader. Cuz they got him hidden in a bunker somewhere, you know, no digital connection. All right, so let's look at 25 here. This is another piece of it. The straight and the blockade. 25.
- [02:58]
C
And when the, and when this deal is signed, is the United States going to immediately lift the blockade?
- [03:04]
A
Yes, that's true as part of the deal.
- [03:07]
C
And just one.
- [03:08]
B
Oil prices dropping like a rock.
- [03:11]
A
So that's the piece there. Oil prices dropping like a rock. Okay, next piece, just so we get it all from the President, straight from the, the President's mouth himself. 26 just made a great settlement of the war with Iran. And we're going to be subject to
- [03:29]
B
finalization of documents which should get done
- [03:32]
A
over the next few days.
- [03:34]
B
Probably have a signing maybe in Europe
- [03:37]
A
and it's a great thing. All right, so that was yesterday. Then over the middle of the night there was leaks coming out of the Middle east talking about maybe cash being involved, talking about an immediate release of sanctions, easing of sanctions. Now the White house, President Trump, J.D. vance out in full force pushing back against that President Trump calling these people and these leakers dishonorable. Some of the negotiators dishonorable. Throw up this trip Truth social that just came out. He said the terms of that Iran leaked out to the fake news have nothing to do with the terms that were agreed to in writing. What they said, including their weak and pathetic statement on having a deal bears no relation to the truth. Very dishonorable people to deal with. With them there is no such thing as dealing in good faith. Amazing. Also their total, their totally rebuffed drone attack last night against Indian ships leaving the Hormuz Strait is totally unacceptable. They better get their act together and fast. J.D. vance continues on. He said, I'm seeing a lot of fake information about a potential deal to reopen the strait and end Iran's nuclear program. First, the Iranians are not receiving any cash and that was clear a couple weeks ago. That was never going to be on the table. And no funds are being released for simply signing a deal or attending a meeting. The deal is structured to ensure that the US and its allies continue to concerns are prioritized and that if the Islamic Republic of Iran meets its obligations, then economic benefits will flow to them and to the entire region. This deal has the potential to remake the region and lead to lasting peace. I've noticed a couple of bizarre things in the reporting over the last few hours. First, people who rightly said Donald Trump was a historic president a month ago are now criticizing a deal based on unconfirmed media reports. Second, people who say you can't trust a word said by the IRGC who apparently believe anonymously source social media posts. It's a very good point. The President is going to get us a good outcome one way or another. All right, so I was trying to get a readout of this call this morning kind of giving an update from a very high placed source within the admin. There was a few that were apparently accurate. So this is a tweet from Fox News who apparently somebody from Fox was on this call, this briefing call this morning says a White House official says Iran has agreed to a performance based deal that would require major concessions before receiving any sanctions relief. According to the official, Iran's nuclear material would be destroyed and removed, its nuclear program dismantled and none of its money released until it fulfills its commitments. And that is a repeat beat. I can tell you that when I've called in, asked for details, updates on how this is progressing, that seems to be a repeat beat that they will not release any of the money, meaning the sanctions, easing of the sanctions. They're not going to get oil shipments out and money in until they fulfill its commitments. Okay. The official also said the Strait of Hormuz would remain open and Iran would agree to stop funding terrorist groups. So you got nuclear the straight of her moose and stop funding terrorist groups. Okay, there's now there's another, there's another one. This one here from Kayleigh McEnany I'm assuming. She must have been on this briefing call. Do we have a deal yet? No, but we are very close. The official estimates the deal is 75%. They're not 100% yet. While this is tentative, we feel confident that we will be signing this in the next few days. We have agreed to the concept and the details but the deal is not done until we sign it. What is in the deal? The highly enriched uranium will be destroyed. The deal accomplishes that so very, very clear. That was the President's main objective. You can go back and roll the tapes from 10, 20 years ago. This is the main objective he was looking to get accomplished with these strikes. You can love it, you can hate it, but this was always the main objective. This deal gets this done. There is a long term. Number two, there's a long term commitment that Iran cannot procure a nuclear weapon. Three, this is a meaningful inspection process. I'm hearing that it's going to be international inspectors as well as US Inspectors. Four, Iran cannot fund terrorism as we work toward broader peace in the Middle East. That's a big, big piece here. What you're seeing in Lebanon, what you're seeing with the Houthis, all this, these proxies that are sowing chaos and violence across the region. If you're going to have a stable Middle east, you got to deal with that, too. All right? The Hormuz Strait will be open. Five assets are not immediately unfrozen. Iran must meet its commitments first. Okay? Now let me just say I know there is a certain contingent out there, the hardliners, the war hawks, that want to see a full regime change. Okay? If you want to do that, you got to put boots on the ground, okay? President Trump has said publicly he doesn't think the country has the appetite or the patience for that. He's right. Just go talk to some of our Turning Point students. They'll tell you even Trump voters are done with this, okay? They want the deal. They want peace, okay? So you get what you can get and you end this. Oil prices drop like a rock. You have peace, stability. They're not funding proxies. At least that's the deal. By the way, you can always put sanctions back on if they renege on any of these points. Main point is, though, you get that nuclear, you get an inspection regime that's actually got a backbone and actually has the threat of force behind it. That's a good thing. We want peace. You gotta understand. And we say it again and again and again. Maybe you guys are annoyed at hearing it at this point, but you can always choose when to start a war, but you can't choose when to end it. So sometimes you're making lemonade out of lemons here. I'm not saying that's what's happening. I'm just saying, yeah, you want regime change, you want full. You want a regime that's actually acting in good faith. That was never gonna happen as long as the IRGC and the Ayatollah and all these people remain in place. But that doesn't have to be our job to get rid of them, okay? What we want is an end of nuclear and we want stability in the region. This is a step by step process that nothing's getting released immediately. They got to make good. They got to show good faith, steps in the right direction. It's a home run if they can get it. Okay, let's pray for peace. That's the goal. Pray for peace. All right, we got to turn our attention to the Tulsi bombshell. Listen, I think Tulsi's great. I think she's a great patriot. Charlie was super close to her and she's been wonderful to me as well and got to really know her during the campaign. Her and her husband Abe, great people. And here's what I will tell you. She's going out with a bang. Unfortunately, her husband did have a really severe acute form of cancer that they caught. Does seem like they caught it in time, so. So we're praying for them. We're continuing to pray for them. But today she released a video on social media that was pretty shocking stuff and I love this, that she's not just fading off into the sunset. She's like, I've been working on stuff and I'm gonna get it out, I'm gonna get this out. So Here we go. Sock 21.
- [10:43]
D
I'm releasing new evidence of long standing US government funding of more than 120 bio labs in over 30 countries. Now these biolabs include labs in places like Ukraine which could be at risk of compromise due to the ongoing Russia Ukraine war. In fact, the intelligence community had previously warned that a U. S funded biolab in Ukraine likely housed dangerous pathogens and remained vulnerable to long standing threats of Russian attack, seizure or damage. The now until now, evidence regarding the full existence and funding of these laboratories had been knowingly withheld from you, the American people. Many of these US government funded biolabs are currently or have previously engaged in research using hazardous and highly contagious pathogens and in some cases included dangerous gain of function research with very little visibility or oversight.
- [11:40]
A
Oh, gain of fauci. That's what we call it, gain of function. So we were told that this never happened. We were told it didn't happen in Wuhan. We were told these bio labs were a bunch of big conspiracy theories. I remember covering this with Charlie when this story first broke in 2022 and watching, you know, the social media posts and the clips get taken down because they were disinformation. Tulsi says it's all true and that some of these labs funded by the US taxpayer internationally were doing gain of function. Why is gain of function bad? Let's just remember for a second this is how we got here. This is how we got the pandemic. All of the mines that got broke because of COVID that was gain of function. Fauci was funding it. Fauci was lying to us about it. It's why we say Fauci lied. People died. They told us this was not true. Big giant conspiracy theory, Tulsi continues.
- [12:41]
D
22 Now President Trump clearly understands the serious threat dangerous gain of function research poses to the American people. And this is why he took decisive action over a year ago. On May 25, 2025, he signed an executive order to end federal funding of gain of function research around the world. Here at odni, I issued new guidance to the intelligence community directing increased collection on these laboratories and facilities overseas. And we're already seeing the results of this increased collection. We're learning new details, for example, on clinical trials that are underway at these facilities and that are raising significant ethical, financial and security concerns regarding the supposed public health initiatives and US national security.
- [13:31]
A
Yep. And here's throw this up from the Guardian. You guys, this is too good. Our team's pulling clips from this era to show just how weaponized this story had been used against us. How Ukrainian bioweapons lab myth went from Qanon fringe to Fox News. Oh, okay, so is this why the fake news tried to paint Tulsi Gabbard as a Russian agent? Is this why? Is this why they tried to push her out? She continues. 23 this is important.
- [14:06]
D
Now despite the obvious potential for catastrophic global impact that research on dangerous pathogens in biolabs can have, politicians and so called health professionals like Dr. Fauci, as well as entities within the Biden administration's national security team lied repeatedly to the American people about the existence of US funded and supported biolabs. Not only did they lie, they threatened those who attempted to expose the truth. So this release today breaks new ground as the information surrounding the existence, history, locations and funding of these US funded biolabs has been intentionally covered up by very powerful people. ODNI will continue working closely with partners across the US government to identify exactly where these labs are and what pathogens they contain.
- [15:01]
A
She mentions Dr. Fauci US funding, it's been obscured from the American public. And this is interesting because show this New York Times clip from the headline from that era Theory about US funded bioweapons labs in Ukraine is unfounded, says the New York Times. Oh okay. And I remember this clip. This, I will never forget this clip. Cuz everybody was saying it was a conspiracy theory. It wasn't real. Wasn't real. And then Senator Marco Rubio asked Victoria Nuland, who's a real snake by the way, about it and everybody was like Whoa, it is real. 28 Does Ukraine have chemical or biological weapons.
- [15:44]
D
Ukraine has
- [15:47]
A
biological research facilities, which in fact, we are now quite concerned Russian troops, Russian forces may be seeking to gain control of. So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach Biden. Pardons Fauci millie in the January 6th panel, a full and unconditional pardon for Dr. Fauci. Makes you wonder why. Charlie used to talk a lot about Angel Studios and what they were building. And as you know, I've been a longtime fan of it for the same reason. So I wanted to share some of my favorite films and shows on angel, and I put them all into one easy to use watch list. This is content that's actually worth your time. Not just noise or recycled talking points, but stories that go a level deeper and ask better questions. That's what stands out about angel to me. They're willing to put out films and documentaries that don't just follow the usual script, especially when it comes to politics, culture, and the bigger conversations you and I should be having. So on my watch list, you'll find picks that lean into those topics. But there are also solid options for family or just something meaningful to watch. And at the end of a stressful day, if you want to check it out, go to angel.comcharlie and take a look at the watch list I put together. You know, real quick here, we're going to bring in Dr. Paul Moreno in just a second. We're going to be talking about history, Carmelo Anthony, all that crazy stuff. You know, I'm just looking. The SpaceX IPO happened today. As many of you know, 4,4400 current former employees are projected to become brand new millionaires today. The stock is like, I think it IPO'd at 135, which a lot of people were saying maybe that's too high and it's already at like 160. So the market will tell you where it's gonna go. Get this. 400 of those people are expected to reach $100 million net worth, and there's gonna be like four or five new billionaires. There he goes. So congratulations to the SpaceX cafeteria workers who became millionaires today. That's a big story. Really fun stuff. All right, without further ado, I want to bring in our next guest, and that is Dr. Paul Moreno from Hillsdale College, William and Bernice Grukak, chair in Constitutional history and professor of history. Dr. Moreno, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show. It's good to see You, I know you're traveling, so thanks for making the time.
- [18:27]
B
Thanks very much. Great to be on the show.
- [18:30]
A
So we have been having this ongoing conversation about this fallout from the Austin Metcalf Carmelo Anthony trial, which is a total tragedy. A young man lost his life who shouldn't have lost his life. But I want you to hear some of the reactions from some of the folks around the country saying that this is some big injustice. And it strikes at the very heart of our judicial system whether or not we can have a jury of our peers to define somebody's guilt or innocence. SOP 34. Well, they're saying that they struck the three black jurors. Yeah, I have two attorneys coming up that are gonna talk about that. But, yeah, it was an all white jury, so that's not true. But it is the lie that keeps getting parroted again and again and again. This is Carmelo Anthony's father saying the same thing. Sat 36. What stuck out to me, number one, was the all white jury. But I was trying to be, you know, like, all right, it's not that big of a deal.
- [19:38]
B
I mean, the truth is on our
- [19:39]
A
side, so that's not true. It was actually a pretty diverse jury. There was three African Americans who made it to, I guess, some sort of final stage. But they all said that they would struggle to convict a young black man. And now there's tons of video clips going around the Internet, Dr. Moreno, that say, don't do that in the future. If you're black, just tell them you can be fair. And it strikes a very deep question, can we continue doing this and what is the history of it? How important is it, and where do we go next?
- [20:11]
B
Well, the jury is an essential institution. It's one of the most important ones in the Constitution. Although people don't usually look at it as a constitutional institution, but it really is in some ways the most democratic institution in the Constitution. It was sort of considered as like, the lower house of the judicial branch, where the judges were sort of an elite, aristocratic part of the judicial system. But the jury was a place where ordinary citizens in person could help administer the justice system. And there's a long history of that in the west, going back to ancient Greece and Rome. And the English jury system goes back probably to the 13th century during the ratification debate over the Constitution. When it came to Article 3 of the Judicial branch, there was really more controversy about the jury and the way that the original Article 3 provided for juries. And that's the reason why the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the Constitution really are all about the jury as an institution. So the decline of the jury in American history has really been astounding. I think something like 2% of criminal trials ever reach a jury today, and like, less than 1% of civil trials. So it really is almost a defunct institution in America.
- [21:29]
A
Wow, that's a profound thing you just said. Why are we seeing the decline? Is it just because so many cases get plea deals and they find settlements outside of the actual trial?
- [21:43]
B
Yeah. The changes in the criminal justice system have led to just routine plea bargaining and also changes in the civil justice system, which have given lawyers a lot more opportunity to reach settlement before you actually go to a jury. It's interesting that that's not. There's a guarantee to a jury trial in criminal cases, in federal criminal cases, in the original Constitution, and every state still has a criminal jury system, although they hardly ever. Hardly ever use them anymore. But civil trials, you're not entitled to a jury trial. The seventh amendment, which says that in all cases where more than $20 is at stake, you're entitled to a jury, has never been enforced. The states can waive that if they. If they want to.
- [22:27]
A
Yeah. I mean, so I guess, like, my question is, is that a bad thing, that more cases are getting plea deals and settlements are reached before reaching the trial phase?
- [22:39]
B
Yeah. Most people in the criminal defense part of the justice system think that it is that more people are being punished for things that they didn't do at all. That especially if you're, you know, you can't afford a good lawyer, you're going to be taken advantage of by the system, where you have just sort of, you know, very quick and summary justice, because there's just so many cases.
- [22:59]
A
Yeah. You know, I look at this case, Dr. Moreno, and I think they should have pled out. The facts were such they were so stacked against this kid. I mean, he shouldn't have been carrying the knife in the first place. He shouldn't have been sitting under the tent. He was asked 15 times by some eyewitness accounts to leave. He wasn't ganged up on. He wasn't assaulted. He was ultimately, I think a little shove is what I heard. It was a small push, and then instantly he was stabbed and his hand was already in the back. This jury, though, was made up of. Apparently it had an Asian, Hispanic, Indian, or Middle Eastern individuals. Three racial minorities among the 12, with more diversity, including alternates. So it was eight women, four men. Like I said, there was no black jurors on the panel prosecutors struck all qualified black prospective jurors, citing reasons like them being educators or other non racial factors. That is, I can't put somebody that's black in jail. I would feel bad about that. And the question, I think at the heart of the question is what are the underlying elements necessary to have a jury system that will actually be fair, that will apply, apply the law and not tribalism? And that is the question I think a lot of us are asking is in our current demographic makeup, with all the, you know, the racial strife, the racial animus, with all the immigration that we've had over the last 40, 50 years, are we still able to do this in an impartial way?
- [24:37]
B
Well, that's one of the things the jury was meant to do, is to be a way of enforcing sort of the norms and the values of the local community. And when you have communities that are so divided as Americans are today along racial and other lines, as you say, it becomes a lot more difficult to do that. Then jury trials become a way of people reaching results based upon those racial or other sort of status factors. People are going to think now, I mean, the last high profile case like this, people would think of the O.J. simpson trial, the Rodney King trial. If you go Back to the 1950s, the shoe was on the other foot. It was the Emmett Till trial where an all white jury very quickly acquitted some whites who obviously, I think after the fact they confessed, had lynched this young black man. And so this has been going on for a long time in American history. During the Reconstruction period, the unwillingness of blacks to serve as jurors because it wasn't regarded as a right of a civil right to serve on a jury was considered a political right like voting or holding office, because serving on a jury is really holding an office. So it wasn't until the 15th amendment that that came about that Congress struggled with ways to make sure that blacks could be able to get justice from all white juries in the Southern states and a lot of northern states which didn't allow blacks the right to vote or serve on juries until the 15th amendment.
- [26:03]
A
It's a fascinating history. I mean, so what do you do then when you get to a point where people are saying now openly lie to get on a jury, lie and tell people that you can be fair when you can't, just to get on a jury so you can acquit a black defendant?
- [26:22]
B
Yeah, because the Supreme. It used to be that lawyers could strike jurors for any reason whatsoever. They were called peremptory challenges for exactly that reason. They were peremptory in the 1980s. I think the Supreme Court said, you can't use race as the reason for striking a juror. And that's why in the selection in this case, they're saying, well, it wasn't for race. It was for other reasons, some of which were. I mean, if these jurors, whose potential jurors said that I can't be unbiased about this, I got to give them credit for their. For their honesty.
- [26:52]
A
Yeah.
- [26:53]
B
And. And for, you know, if people can't. Really can't believe that a jury of a particular race can do justice when the defendant is of another race, I don't know how wide that sentiment extends and how often high profile cases like this would come up. But as I said before, it's not the first time in even recent history that we've had a high profile, racialized controversy like this.
- [27:19]
A
Well, I certainly hope that this does not become a massive trend because I hope this tension dies down. To me, this was egregious in many ways. The facts were completely stacked against him. And I think the jury made the right decision. And I don't actually understand the controversy other than there's a lot of bad actors that are working in bad faith out there that want to sow discord, that want to just malign the system. In this instance, the system did what it was supposed to do. This kid was clearly guilty. Eyewitness accounts, the evidence. Yeah. He should be held accountable. And people are upset about that. You know, I don't understand what they're upset about other than that he's a black young man. I don't know.
- [28:08]
B
The other factor is this is Texas, and Texas is a death penalty state. And if the charge here is murder, then there are a lot of people who have compunctions about convicting people for murder. Whereas. And this is kind of a plea bargaining thing, if you reduce the charge to manslaughter with a prison term, more people might be comfortable with that. English juries, until England changed its criminal laws in the 19th century, every felony was punishable by death. And so you had a lot of juries that said, we're not going to convict just because we don't think you deserve the death penalty for picking someone's pocket.
- [28:40]
A
I'm going to play a clip from Pete Boot. Edge. Edge. And get your reaction to it on the other side. 33.
- [28:46]
B
We have to deal with a Supreme
- [28:48]
A
Court that is now a rogue Supreme Court. To see them eviscerate The Voting Rights
- [28:57]
B
act is to see them reverse some
- [29:01]
A
of the most important progress this country
- [29:03]
B
ever made,
- [29:06]
A
wiping out black political representation,
- [29:08]
B
but also wiping out part of what actually is great within the complex American story.
- [29:14]
A
Okay, so now you see what's happening here. It's not just delegitimizing the juries. It's not just delegitimizing a verdict in a very clear case involving Carmelo Anthony and Austin Metcalf. Now we gotta talk about the Supreme Court. We're gonna pack it. We're gonna do everything we can to get our way politically and ideologically. What do you make of that clip from Pete Boot. Edge. Edge.
- [29:41]
B
Well, I just read today that the Trump administration is really taking on the disparate impact standard of discrimination. That's really what all this voting rights controversy is about. The idea that enforcing the 14th and the 15th Amendment is about racial proportionalism, that we assume there's discrimination unless blacks or whoever are represented in proportion to their percentage of the population in every field of human life. And the Reconstruction Amendments were never meant to do that. Congress overstepped its bounds, I think, in Title VII of the Civil Rights act and in the Voting Rights Act. And the Court went along with that in the 1960s and 70s. And now the Roberts Court is beginning to, I think, contain some of these excessive interpretations of the Reconstruction Amendments. So the Court is, I think, right now trying to undo some of the bad decisions that it made in the past. And I think they're completely right for them to do that.
- [30:42]
A
I love what you just said, Dr. Moreno, for a number of reasons, namely, Charlie felt the same way. I mean, Charlie said it very bluntly that he thought that some of the Civil Rights act was a mistake, and he took a bunch of incoming for it. It's not that he didn't support the intent, but what he was talking about was this excessive, maybe language within the Civil Rights act and the Voting Rights act that they're correcting now. But talk about a little bit more detail, because I really want the audience to absorb this disparate impact. What is it? And why has it been misinterpreted? And then you said Section 7 of the Civil Rights Act. Unpack that a little bit more.
- [31:24]
B
Yeah, because the Civil Rights act in 1964 is a long bill. Section two, almost nobody would have any argument with that was about segregation, you know, Jim Crow and places of public accommodation.
- [31:34]
A
But. Can I pause you right there? Can I. Can I pause you right there? This is what happens in this argument. If you criticize anything within The Civil Rights act, they go, what do you want, segregation again? You want Jim Crow? No, no, no, no, no. We're not talking about Section two. It's a big old bill. So let's be very specific. Continue. Sorry, I just had to make. I just had to.
- [31:53]
B
Right, exactly. And that was the most controversial part of the Civil Rights Act. And that's what most people thought the Civil rights movement was all about. Title VII is about employment and private discrimination. It wasn't part of President Kennedy's original proposal for the Civil Rights Bill. It was put in by congressional liberals. And there you can make a constitutional argument that that really goes beyond Congress's power to regulate commerce among the states. But even if you accept that justification for Title vii, the idea that discrimination is proved on the basis of statistical disparity, this is the disparate impact standard, that is just, you know, I think, a bridge too far. Because when the Civil Rights act was being debated, almost everybody said, discrimination is defined here, as was always understood, an intentional act treating somebody differently on the basis of their race. And now it has become not about individuals, not about treatment. It's become about equal group outcomes. Justice Scalia referred to the interpretation of the Voting Rights act as a racial entitlement to a certain proportion of elected officials.
- [32:59]
A
It's so important, what you're saying, what you just said is really important. I remember reading about this a lot in Christopher Caldwell's book Age of Entitlement. And he, you know, so let's just lay the timeline out here. JFK gets assassinated November 22, 1963, and he was working on a version of the Civil Rights Act. So he gets assassinated. The Civil Rights act of 1964 was passed by Congress and signed into law on July 2, 1964. So about, let's say seven months later, about seven months later, it signed into law. And Lyndon B. Johnson, I mean, this was a huge initial effort for him to win black support to sort of. They pitched to the country, a mourning country, a devastated country, as a way to sort of fulfill JFK's memory and legacy. But it ballooned. And you made that point that it was liberals within the Congress, the progressives in the Congress, that packed it full of all these other things that weren't originally part of his vision, namely section 7 with this proportionate representation, proportional entitlement. These are these little history nuggets that get lost, but they're extra constitutional. They're very against the what the foundations of American society. So it's good that the Roberts Court is actually addressing these things, but obviously progressives are losing their minds about it. But it's so important that our audience understands the history of how we got here and what it's gonna take to correct a historic wrong.
- [34:33]
B
Yes, in fact, that goes back to cause. John F. Kennedy was very reluctant about taking on the civil rights issue because Southern or southern segregationists were sort of at the core of the Democratic party. They chaired all the important committees in Congress. So Kennedy was like this. FDR was like this before him. But Johnson was able to turn JFK into a sort of a martyr for the civil rights bill. He really played, played it politically very deftly and was able to break the Senate filibuster. And back then, this Filibuster was a 2/3 majority required to end debate. So you're right. The assassination of John F. Kennedy really was the turning point. But that that event had to be told in a certain way to sell the connection.
- [35:14]
A
Dr. Moreno, this was excellent. Thank you so, so much for making the time. I hope our audience got a lot out of that. Hillsdale College is the best Charlie for Hillsdale. Check it out, gentlemen. Let's get real for a second. Are you frustrated with today's woke dating scene? The apps, the games, the endless swiping. It's a waste of time finding a woman who shares your values, faith, family, patriotism. If it feels nearly impossible, it doesn't have to. Selective Search, America's leading matchmaking firm is changing the game. They connect strong, successful men like you, men who love God, love America. Want a family with women who share your values. These are intelligent, faith driven women who put family first and still believe in traditional values. Imagine that if you're a single conservative man in his late 30s to early 50s in Southern California. Listen up. Selective Search has an exclusive network of women ready for the real thing. Here's the best part. Their candidate program is 100% free and confidential. Some of our closest friends the show have used Selective Search and let me tell you, they're meeting great, great women. High quality women. This is your chance. This isn't an app. It's your answer. The perfect conservative woman is out there waiting for you. Visit selectivesearch.com california today. Let the professionals introduce you to women already looking for someone like you in Southern California. Don't wait for the perfect match. Take action now. Go to selectivesearch.com California and start building the future you deserve. And it's Friday, which means for our members. Members.charliekirk.com, members.charliekirk.Com if you join up there, you become a subscribing member of our community, then you get to come on the show on Friday and ask us whatever is on your mind. Nothing is off limits. You can ask whatever you want. And it's a great, great time. We always love it. And by the way, most of the time we do these. One of the clips ends up going viral for good or bad reasons, but that's kind of part of the fun. We were into it. So we got Danny here, we got Daisy here, Deez. I just. I'm, you know, I got nothing. I'm an A. All right, here we go. First question out of the gate is from Don. Don, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show. Please unmute yourself and welcome.
- [37:38]
B
Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my call.
- [37:41]
A
Absolutely. Welcome. Yeah, proud. I'm proud to be a member of Team Erica and I. I love you guys. Thank you. God bless you.
- [37:54]
B
The question I have is, it's a couple of weeks ago, the House voted to tell Trump he couldn't go to war no more.
- [38:05]
E
And I just wondering.
- [38:06]
B
I. I think I know what that really means, but wonder what. What? Wanted to hear your thoughts on it.
- [38:13]
A
Yeah, I mean, I got a bunch of thoughts on it, basically. To bring our audience up to speed, though. Yeah, the vote happened June 3, I
- [38:20]
E
believe, like a week ago.
- [38:21]
A
Yeah, yeah, exactly. So it's got very limited ability to impact Trump's ability to prosecute the war or not. It's mostly viewed as a symbolic gesture, a symbolic rebuke. It passed. I'm looking here, 2:15 to 208. Four Republicans, Thomas Massie, Brian Fitzpatrick, Tom Barrett and Warren Davidson joined the Democrats. And in its language, it sort of says, hey, you gotta withdraw your American troops, U.S. troops, from hostilities with Iran unless we declare a war. Okay. A lot of people think it's unconstitutional. The Senate has advanced a similar measure. Really, really narrow margins. It doesn't have the weight of law behind it. Essentially, it doesn't go to the President's desk to sign or to veto. So it's limited real effect on Trump's powers. But I would also add another point is that the individual most, it seems consumed, obsessed with getting peace and finding a resolution to the conflict, is the President himself. So I'm not sure what they were trying to sort of communicate here. I mean, the President has spent the last two days trying to get the peace deal with a very difficult negotiation over the finish line so that we can open the strait, we can remove the blockade, that we can get the nuclear dust, that we can ensure that Iran never has a nuclear weapon. Again and again. I was not in favor of going in. I was not in favor. I could say it till I'm blue in the face. And it's like some people will never hear me say that. I really wasn't. I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon. But President Trump made the decision to do it. And so at that point, you want him to win and you want him to get what he, what he went in for, and you don't want it to be in vain. Okay. So I would say I don't know what they're trying to communicate. The President wants peace. The President's been working towards peace. He wants to get this peace deal done. JD Vance is very behind him and is working tirelessly to get it done. So I don't know what the House and the Senate were trying to get accomplished here other than trying to hamstring the President in the middle of a high stakes negotiation. So, yeah, it seemed like a dumb
- [40:25]
B
thing to do to me as well.
- [40:28]
A
Yeah. I genuinely.
- [40:29]
E
Don't these symbolic votes just seem like a waste of time?
- [40:32]
A
Yeah, it's like, listen, can you pass the Save America act here?
- [40:36]
B
Yeah. Really?
- [40:38]
A
Yeah. That's what we want. I hope that answers your question, Don.
- [40:42]
B
Thank you.
- [40:43]
A
God bless you, man. Thank you for being Team Erica, of course, and Team Turning Point. David, welcome to the show. You're up next. Welcome. And please unmute yourself. Hey, how we doing today? Doing great, David. What's your question?
- [40:58]
B
Excellent.
- [40:59]
A
My question is, and I'll make it quick, we're in California. We voted early because everybody said that we should vote early. So basically what happened is that it seems that the Democrats saw what they needed and started flying in ballots. What. What are we supposed to do? Or in your opinion, what. What is, what should we do net for in December or in November? November, yeah. So, you know, you got to think about voting. I mean, states that have early voting, which is the vast majority of them, you got to think of it like a basketball game or a sports competition. There's four quarters, you gotta win all four quarters. Okay. You gotta win early when it starts. You gotta win early in person. Late, early. Then you gotta win in person. So you gotta kinda play it on all fronts. So you didn't do anything wrong by voting early by any means. Have you checked the status of your ballot, by the way? Did you get any letters for requesting to redo your signature or anything like that? Did you check it? I checked it. I kept checking it because I, I wanted to make sure there was cheating going on. And it kept saying that mine was accepted and counted. Okay, all right, well, good. So here's what I would say. But we did have. But we did have people in our, in our group that their s. They said the signatures, what, didn't match, so they threw their, their votes out for, for certain people. Did they, did they get a chance to redo their signatures and get their votes counted afterwards? Yeah. Okay. Well, that's the process. Curing the ballots is. Is a, is a legal process. So what I would say is a couple of things. First of all, we are for in person voting day of paper ballots. That, I mean, that's what we want. Right. And we want the Save America Pass. So you have to prove your citizenship, you have to prove your identity, you have to show an id. All of those things are very important until we get there, especially in places like California, especially for mayoral races and governor gubernatorial races, which they could still mandate, whatever rules they want because that's the dividing of the powers here in the United States. What the Save America act will affect federal elections. Right. So when you're voting for president and Congress and all that stuff. So there's going to still be problems at the state level, regardless of what we do. California does have a signature verification or voter id, a resolution that's going to be on the ballot in November that does seem to be popular with even the people of California. So we're going to work to help get that passed. And I think that's going to add some wind in the sails. But Charlie used to say this all the time, and Danny and Daisy will remember this, that the movement is too big to fit into one day. So when we tell you vote early, what we're saying is don't get on election day and realize you're sick or get a flat tire or something. Some emergency comes up and you don't get a chance to vote. Get the ballot in. Go. What I had to do last election, I was still in California. I took my ballot into the voting center the day before and I dropped it in person because I knew I was going to be busy all day with the election.
- [44:19]
F
Yeah, that's what we were just talking about, what day we typically like to vote. I agree that I like to go in person. Day of civic duty, get the sticker. There's a great energy. But last year, I mean, we were here.
- [44:31]
A
Yeah.
- [44:32]
F
Literally for 48 hours in a row. So you're 2024. Yes.
- [44:36]
A
Yes, 2024.
- [44:37]
F
I can't believe that was almost two years ago.
- [44:38]
A
Wow.
- [44:39]
F
That a lot of us, like actually filled out our ballots and then went to drop it off that day or went to vote early. But locally, local elections, I like to vote day of.
- [44:50]
E
Yeah, Yeah. I always vote day of. I don't trust.
- [44:53]
A
It's very simple for Danny.
- [44:55]
E
Well, I love Chicago too. So our elections are run very similar to la.
- [44:59]
A
Yeah.
- [44:59]
E
So I'm always worried about it. So I always vote in person.
- [45:02]
A
Listen, and you're not wrong for being suspicious. I mean, we had Bill Asali on the show, you know, the first assistant U.S. attorney to Central district of California, and he said that the fraud is just baked in. The fraud, it's structural fraud. It needs to be dealt with. It needs to be litigated. It needs to be prosecuted. There's only so much he can do when the system is so screwed up, when you have mass mail in voting and lax ID or no id. That's all they need. That's all they need to cheat. Next question. Who do we got up next? Caleb. Caleb and Michelle.
- [45:35]
E
Yep.
- [45:37]
A
Welcome to the show.
- [45:38]
F
Welcome back.
- [45:39]
A
Hey, Caleb. It's been too long. Where have you been? We've just been busy in. In North Carolina. You know, it's, it's, it's. Having come from Minnesota, it is just a little bit surreal that we have a sports team here that's actually in the finals. So, you know, that's been consuming a lot of our time. Fair enough. My. My question is Amy Klobuchar is announced that she's running for governor of Minnesota, and she's announced her running mate as the former mayor of our hometown, Fergus Falls, Ben Shire. And I don't know if you guys have been paying attention. Maybe Blake is, but he's not here today. But we're wondering if you think that they picked Ben Shire because either he's buddy buddy with Tim Walls or because Fergus Falls just made it on the map because they're the home of the American Idol runner up, Chris Tungseth.
- [46:40]
F
I don't know about this specific story, but I would be more inclined to lean towards option one because I think that American Idol is heavily on the decline. I don't know if you saw there was a winner from a couple years ago that was the winner, not even the runner up and went back to busking in the subway in New York City to pay rent. So I don't know I would lean more towards option one. I don't know what you guys think. The Tim Wall story sounds more believable.
- [47:05]
A
What do you think, Dan?
- [47:05]
E
I mean, yeah, I don't think American Idol has any relevance.
- [47:09]
A
I mean, maybe small town Minnesota does.
- [47:12]
E
Yeah, maybe.
- [47:13]
A
I don't know. Listen, I think that's fine. I think that's a. Probably like, you know, maybe that factored in minimally. I don't know, Caleb. But, you know, the reason they pick, she picked Ben Shire is because he's a white dude with five kids from rural Minnesota. So if you're going to win Minnesota, Minnesota, as you know, the margins are actually pretty tight and there's a lot of bad PR if you're a Democrat out of Minnesota this year. So it's a very transparent play to appeal to rural white voters in Minnesota. So because he's from western Minnesota, you know, he's small town mayor, as you said, so that's what it's about. She's trying to get outside of the Minneapolis St. Paul bubble and, and bring in the rest of the state.
- [47:56]
F
You can be progressive, but not too progressive. You still need.
- [47:59]
A
Look at, we're normal people in the Midwest.
- [48:02]
F
White guy.
- [48:03]
A
We're normal people. We have five kids. How do you not hate that? Yeah, yeah, well. And definitely, I mean, yes, you're right. Small town Minnesota. American island was a big deal. I mean, they had parades, they had, they had all sorts of events because, you know, hey, we got a, we have an, we have a hometown guy, you know, on the national stage. So. Yeah, but yeah, you're probably right on
- [48:24]
F
all three with the third one that we offered as well.
- [48:27]
A
Yeah, I mean, listen, it probably didn't hurt, let's be honest. But, you know, I'm reading his bio right now.
- [48:33]
E
I'm kind of surprised. She didn't choose like a Somali, though.
- [48:37]
A
No, they already got that vote on lockdown. You think the Somalis are at risk now with the Republicans going after him, trying to get the fraud and trying to deport them? They know who butters their bread. Okay. The Somalis are on lock and they vote in the bloc, by the way, so they don't need to play to that. They need to play to the skeptical white rural voters who think they've been taken for a ride, which they have, you know, in this guy. He's got. I mean, listen, admittedly they've, they've been married a long time. They have five children. They own and operate two small businesses in downtown Fergus Falls. Union Pizza and Brewing Company and Toast, which I think is another sort of restaurant. So he's been the mayor. I mean, it's a good, it's a good bio. It kind of rounds out her. Her. Her ticket to whatever.
- [49:19]
F
Okay. But let's ask you guys, the debate we were just having with this upcoming race. Are you thinking of voting early, dropping off your ballot day of.
- [49:27]
A
Well, they're in North Carolina.
- [49:28]
C
What's. Residents of North Carolina.
- [49:31]
A
Yeah.
- [49:32]
F
Never mind then.
- [49:34]
A
Yeah. Yeah.
- [49:34]
E
Well, they haven't. They have a Senate race.
- [49:36]
A
Yeah. Watley versus what's his name, Cooper or what?
- [49:40]
E
We're going to need all the votes.
- [49:41]
A
We're so. Yeah. Vote early, vote often. I'm kidding. But, yeah, Whatley's got a heck of an uphill battle. I haven't heard a ton of good news out of that race, unfortunately, and that's North Carolina. North Carolina is a funny red state in the sense that it has a lot of. I think it's like a Democrat governor, Democrat attorney general. Trump won it all three times. But it does. It's just a funny, funny state. New Hampshire's kind of like that where you get.
- [50:14]
E
Kentucky.
- [50:15]
A
Yeah. Where you get kind of a mix. New Hampshire is the inverse, though, where it's like locally you get a bunch of red representation. Federally, you get blue. So, anyways, thank you, Caleb and Michelle. God bless you. Great to hear from you again. Who's up next?
- [50:29]
F
Ellie.
- [50:30]
A
Ellie, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show.
- [50:33]
F
Hey, guys, thanks for taking my question.
- [50:36]
A
Absolutely.
- [50:36]
F
What can we do here? My question would be, what would you
- [50:39]
A
say to someone who really wants to
- [50:41]
F
travel to amfest this year, but has
- [50:43]
C
never been to a Turning Point event before?
- [50:45]
A
Are you planning on. Are you thinking about it?
- [50:48]
F
I want to, but it would be expensive to travel from where I live,
- [50:53]
C
and so I'm just kind of like
- [50:55]
F
trying to feel everything out.
- [50:56]
A
What part of the country are you in? You can be vague.
- [50:59]
C
I'm from Illinois.
- [51:00]
A
Illinois. Oh, come on. There's, you know, I guess if you're in Southern Illinois, it's tougher. You'd have to, like St. Louis or drive up to Chicago, but there's direct flights.
- [51:09]
F
Wait, how old are you, Ellie?
- [51:12]
C
I'm 22.
- [51:13]
F
Okay. I think that you should totally come because there is. There are so many young people that come and meet each other. There are lots of events. You can get to know people that
- [51:22]
A
are like minded, social hours, breakouts. There's.
- [51:27]
F
Yeah, it's really. It's a great event for all, all ages. But I would say the young people that show up and support make friendships that last forever. There are so many cool experiences, booths you can visit and, you know, we do podcasts there. And yeah, I think you would have a really Great time. I am biased, but I have fun.
- [51:46]
A
It. It will blow your mind. There's no event really like it in the country. You walk in and it's kind of like visual overload, and you. There's all the media row and people doing interviews, and it's so much fun. And I'm not a guy that really actually likes events, but it's a lot of fun. And we think you should come. I mean, there's not really a good excuse besides the money, but we like. I don't know if I can be
- [52:14]
F
there having contractions at 39 weeks pregnant. You can come.
- [52:17]
A
That's a compelling point. Geez, guilt tripper.
- [52:21]
F
We'll see you there, Ellie.
- [52:25]
A
Good conversation is about respect. It's how we create a space where people are able to share their ideas and be heard. Charlie knew that. Turning Point still knows that. And TikTok has always strived to build the kind of place that thrives on respectful connection, where curiosity fuels connection, and we can share what's on our minds and learn from each other. When ideas meet respect, good things happen. On TikTok, you can find a mechanic explaining the why behind a problem most of us wouldn't even know how to name or. Or a father sharing a lifetime of knowledge with his viewers. Viewers who listen, discuss, and then they respond. TikTok turns connection into community through small acts of understanding. You can feel it in the comments, in the thank you from a stranger halfway across the world. Tik Tok is a place where respect opens the door for discussion, and discussion helps us build something real. All right, who's next?
- [53:15]
E
We got Kyrie.
- [53:17]
A
Kyrie, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show.
- [53:19]
C
Hey, guys. Happy Friday. It's good to see you all and get to talk to you again. Yeah, real, real quick, while I have the opportunity. Daisy, I absolutely love your eyes. They're gorgeous. And I'm glad that.
- [53:33]
D
I'm glad you're on the show today,
- [53:34]
F
so I can tell you that that is so nice of you.
- [53:36]
C
Thank you. Well, I've always been fascinated with eyes. And the first time I. I think you were on with no dumb questions or something, maybe I was like, oh, Jay's eyes are gorgeous. Any. Anyway, thank you. My main question with the Carmel Anthony Austin Metcalf thing this week, I. I mean, to me it seems pretty. Pretty cut and dried. I work at a small shop in a small town. We have like six employees. One of them is black. I consider her a friend. We've always been on good terms. She's a Christian lady. She had not Even heard about this story until Wednesday. One of my other co workers was talking about it, and she was like, oh, my, what's this? And, oh, well, this one boy stabbed this other boy and, oh, that's horrible. Well, then when she found out that one of the boys was black, she immediately took his side, began making excuses for probably why he did it. The other boy was probably saying something racist to him. Some people don't even know they're racist. It's just the way they're raised. And she got, she got kind of antagonistic and she said if she got to looking on her phone, she said, oh, there weren't even any black people on the jury that tried him. And I, I didn't know enough about the details to come back with facts, but I was, I was so caught off guard. I got, I mean, I would love to keep this lady as a friend. We work together, you know, I, I, I have been careful. I know she voted for Kamala Harris, but we've always, you know, there's always been a good, a good relationship there at the shop. And I, I was just so, so hurt. You know, I, I want to, I'm not great at remembering, remembering facts and talking points and coming back to people and thinking fast on my feet, but I really would like to know if you all have, have some tips. Well, yeah, something I can say to this lady because I, I really, I, it, it breaks my heart when I see people online that you don't, you know, don't know any better. But she's, she's so smart and like I said, she's a Christian lady and so nice. It just seems so obvious. I mean, this boy,
- [56:06]
D
you.
- [56:06]
A
Are you chomping at the bit here?
- [56:08]
E
No, it's more so just like I remember Charlie always said, like, intentions don't matter when committing a crime. Like, just because you're poor doesn't mean you can go rob a bank. Just because someone may, like, anger you at a track meet doesn't mean that, that you then get to stab somebody. So I just ask her that and basically say, like, take race out of it, because that has nothing to do with it. Why does somebody, why are you siding with somebody that literally just murdered?
- [56:32]
A
Yeah, and why are we making this young man the victim? Austin Metcalfe is the victim. He is dead. He got a life sentence here. Okay. You know, Carmelo Anthony's probably going to be out in parole, let's say in 10 years. Okay. You got 35 year sentence. He's not gonna serve all that. So you do have to hold people accountable when they do bad things. Okay. This was a terrible, egregious thing that has wrecked that family, wrecked his twin brother. The other thing I would tell you is that you gotta check out Sarah Fields. We had her on the show yesterday. Check out her. Her Twitter X feed. She was in the courthouse during the trial. She heard all the witness testimony. Carmela was asked to leave upwards of 15 times, according to witness accounts. Asked politely and then aggressively, probably. But that doesn't mean that he deserved to die, that Austin Metcalfe deserved to die. He eventually was told to leave. He wasn't under his own tent. I don't know why he was so intent on being under there. But then it was a slight shove, instantly killed him. Instantly stabbed him right through the heart.
- [57:37]
E
Well, and you can also ask your friend just a simple question of why do you think it was right that Carmelo Anthony was carrying this knife around at this track meet and so easily willing to just pull it out and stab somebody right away?
- [57:49]
A
Yeah, he didn't, by the way. If he was just trying to, like, get free from this really aggressive group, which doesn't sound like it was aggressive at all. Why, why, why wouldn't he just pull it out and say, don't mess with me? No, he pulled it out and he kept saying, you. You touch me and find out. You touch me and find out. And then he just literally, you know, shivved him right in the heart, cut him so deep that it cut through the bone and cut his heart. He bled to death instantly in his brother's arms. Like, this should have. I mean, at the very worst, this should have been a little like fist fight at a high school fistfight, which happens. Boys are going to fight sometimes, but you don't. You don't pull out a knife instantly and, you know, murder somebody.
- [58:31]
E
And there's a broader problem here. The fact that, like, the media and the Democrats are brainwashing black people in this country so badly to think that when, yeah, a murder happens, you don't know the details. You side with, obviously, common sense. The person that murdered somebody's obviously in the wrong, but then you find out they're black. And because you're brainwashed so badly, you then think the black person has to be the victim, even though they literally were the murderer and killed the victim.
- [58:57]
A
Yeah.
- [58:57]
E
And so there's a broader problem here, and we see this with the blm, but it's still. Even though BLM is calmed down, we still see this among black people. The damage really is already done and it's already baked in the cake that they really. The victim mentality is a real problem right now.
- [59:12]
F
Yes, you will be, you will be miserable if you are constantly a victim. And like you said, it's so obvious to read this story and hear about it and know what happened. But like you said, you do want to keep your friend. Like you believe this person is well intentioned. And it is, it can be kind of abrasive to go back to someone, be like, well, actually, here's what happened. Or 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, we have all these facts, but as a friend, I would go back to her and be like, hey, have you heard this? What does this make you think? Is this right versus wrong? And just try to encourage your friend to step out of that victim mentality because you don't want your friend to be miserable like that. You don't want your friend to always assume that just because someone's black, they are right in this situation. So I think, I think it's worth having another.
- [59:56]
A
Or that just because somebody's black, they're the victim. You know, there were, there was a jury pool, so they got this. Just so you know how this works. The jury pool of 589people was narrowed down to 12 jurors and six alternates. No black jurors ended up on the final panel. That part's true. But apparently there was like three qualified that made it through all the other steps and they were rejected for reasons like they were educators. And that is apparently fair to do. And there was other black folks that were trying to get on the jury that said, I don't think I can condemn a young black man. I don't think I can find him guilty. And they were rightly dismissed because you can't have a jury if they're just gonna vote along tribal lines. That's not what it's about. It's about you have to assess the facts and then make a determination of guilt or innocence based on the facts. That's what a jury does. And if you're not able to do that, then that's a problem. And there's just so much misinformation, by the way, going on around social media about he was self defense, that Austin Metcalf basically impaled himself when he, you know, came out. No, all of those facts are complete misinformation, disinformation being spread around on the Internet. I can tell you, as somebody who's dealt with a lot of this lately, it's Wild. It just runs rampant, and people just, you know, say fake things and lies. Yeah. And then all of a sudden, people believe it. So I think to Daisy's point, sounds like this gal's a really sweet person, so let's assume the best. By the way, there's a lot of black people on social media that are saying really good things, actually, and most of them tend to be Christians, and they're pushing back against this narrative. So maybe find some of those clips and share them with your friend if it feels appropriate. But you are living proof that her victim mentality or this instant instinct to assume guilt or b. Wrongdoing on the h. On behalf of the jurors or the. The prosecution or the judge, you're living proof.
- [61:52]
D
You.
- [61:52]
A
You. Is this your store, by the way, that you own, or you just another person that works there?
- [61:57]
C
No, I'm an employee. There's the boss and the boss's daughter. And then, like four others of us.
- [62:02]
A
Are they white?
- [62:04]
C
Yes.
- [62:04]
A
Everybody, listen. They hired her and they love her and they treat her well. There's no issue there. You guys are the living embodiment that this racial strife and animosity doesn't exist, that she doesn't need to feel instantly victimized. So I just say you be the living proof that we don't have to live this way. We don't have to be at each other all the time, attacking each other just because of the color of their skin. So thank you for your question.
- [62:37]
C
Okay. Thank you, guys.
- [62:38]
A
Is that. Is. Is that helpful? Hopefully. Hopefully that was good.
- [62:42]
C
I mean, it reaffirmed some of what I was already thinking. I don't know that it's going to be really easy to get her in a place where the others aren't around, because I don't want her to feel like she's being ganged up on. The others of us feel the same way, but she doesn't.
- [62:58]
A
Yeah, but maybe. Maybe you don't need to do the conversation, like, tomorrow. Maybe it's a month from now, you know, when the tensions are less.
- [63:06]
F
I think just ask good questions. And your role as a friend is just to help her think through these
- [63:11]
A
things critically and just let her know that you're her friend. Yeah, I think that's cool. For 250 years, America has been a bastion of freedom. And as we look ahead to the next 250, we're reminded that freedom is ours to defend. Today, Alliance Defending Freedom stands in court courtrooms across the country to protect those freedoms we cherish, like life, free speech, religious Freedom, parental rights. These freedoms are at the core of who we are as a nation. And they're under siege, but they must be preserved. Adf, great people at ADF is approaching a critical fiscal year end fundraising deadline. Your support today helps ADF defend those freedoms so they may endure for many years to come. Every dollar you give right now will be doubled thanks to a special matching grant while funds last visit joinadf.com charlie that's joinadf.com charlie or text charlie to 83848 to give today. That's joinadf.com Charlie or text Charlie to 83848 help ADF. They are some of the greatest people out there and they're amazing legal minds. And ADF are on the front lines fighting for what matters most to us in this audience. So check them out. JoinADF.com Charlie I want to know this, I want this question from Gina. Gina, welcome to the show. What is your question?
- [64:38]
F
Well, I sort of thought your enthusiasm
- [64:41]
C
was telling and you said, I hope
- [64:44]
A
somebody asks about this. Tell us about what happened. Yes, so here's what happened. So cafeteria workers there, I mean, it's the janitors too. Janitors, all this stuff. So what Elon Musk has done. So when you're starting a company, cash flow is really tough, right? You gotta, you gotta keep the money coming in. And so what he did for a long time now, he's been offering sort of below market. So you get paid a little bit less to do jobs, right? And they have fully integrated their cafeteria. So it's not like an outside company. These are actual SpaceX employees, like cafeteria cooks, janitors, all this stuff. And in exchange for taking a little bit less, they get stock options. They get this really kind of broad equity sharing model within SpaceX. And so all the cafeteria workers are basically anybody that took advantage of those stock options, which I'm sure is going to be the vast majority of them because it was an obvious call. They're all millionaires now, which is amazing. So, I mean, a lot of them probably were able to exercise these options probably around like 20 to 30 bucks. And now the stock is trading at what, like right now? It's like 170, 170, 175 or something. So even if they had a pretty small amount of stock, they just made a lot of money. And yeah, estimates have it at about 4400 current and former SpaceX employees will become millionaires from the IPO. And this group explicitly includes cafeteria workers and other hourly and support staff. So that Is unusual. Just to be clear, in the space, normally these people don't get stock options. You give stock options to, like, your managers, your contracts. When you do a contract with an actual salaried employee, you get stock options as part of that package. Nope, not in Elon's world. So I just think it's great because, you know, everybody goes at, you know, aoc, tax the rich, you know, too many billionaires. Elon's evil, all this stuff. Well, guess what? The way he runs his companies is brilliant because they're all bought in works.
- [66:51]
E
Capitalism creates more wealth and socialism just takes people's wealth. Yeah, they have a problem with.
- [66:57]
A
Elon's a builder and he makes things and I love it. So I'm a big fan. So here's to you SpaceX cafeteria working millionaires. Good on you. That is the American dream. Changing lives, changing lots of lives.
- [67:10]
F
That is amazing.
- [67:11]
A
Yeah. And the stock's just rip roaring. I mean, I don't know, it might crash a bit or come back down to earth, which is a good SpaceX expression. But yes, I love that story. What's our next question?
- [67:21]
F
Kathy Rose.
- [67:22]
A
Kathy Rose, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show. Unmute yourself.
- [67:25]
C
Thank you. Andrew, thank you for having me and God bless you all.
- [67:29]
A
Oh, God bless you too. Thank you.
- [67:32]
C
Yes, thank you. My question is, how can I talk with friends who are very, very politically disengaged, even though they're super conservative? I've grown up and been very blessed to be surrounded by a very close knit Christian community. We've all been at the same church since we were babies, worked at the same companies, everything. But I think kind of in part because of that we are so insulated from everything that goes on outside that if I. That like, no, none of my friends would even know that transgender maybe even is a thing. Except for we see these weird, like blue haired, funny looking people in Olympia, Washington. My, none of my friends would ever consider anything like an abortion. But then over the last year, like ever since President Trump launched his 2024 campaign, I don't even really remember why, but I started really getting into it. And then watching Charlie's videos, I was like, whoa, this is really important what is going on with our country. But when I talk with my friends about it, they're like, yeah, I don't really care about that at all. And so I just want to. I'm like, how do I talk with them without just coming across like, oh, this is Kathy Rose's spiel. And actually really genuinely catch their attention.
- [69:07]
A
Well, you are you're basically, it sounds like you're dealing with low propensity voter problem, which is what we do over at Turning Point Action. Right? So our whole, our whole program is designed to get you and your friends out to vote because we know that you're ideologically aligned, that you believe all the same stuff, but for some reason you are disengaged. And by the way, there's, I think about 25% of evangelical voters in the country don't even vote. So it sounds like this is your friend group, which it's not good, because especially they used to say this all the time in the pulpits, like, don't politicize my Christianity. Well, don't politicize my religious experience. Well, guess what? Your politics is getting more religious. They're talking about the very foundation of God's design for male and female. So you have to bring these things home. So what we do is we basically, in a nice way, I have to watch when these things get clipped in a nice way, harass your friends. Because that's kind of what we do when we do chase the vote. It's like, here's a text. Hey, have you got your ballot in? Hey, have you it filled? Can I come help you fill it out? Can I come help you drop it off? Can we do. And then we bring cookies and we do, you know, barbecues in the park. And you build up something called social guilt. It's actually a thing that they've studied where when it comes time to vote, they feel kind of obligated because you've been so devoted to getting them nicely, nicely again. You want to be like kind of the mayor when it comes to this. You've been nicely encouraging them, nicely, reminding them nicely, telling them about how important it is to get engaged in your civic process. And so when it comes time to vote, they feel an obligation to sort of make you happy and kind of make good on their end of the deal. So that's what I would say. Chase the vote.
- [70:54]
F
We really have to get to the next question. But I did just want to say that goes back to the conversation we're having with Kyrie about so much of being a good friend is asking them questions and forcing them to think about these things. Because when we all have common sense and think of right versus wrong, it's easy to think, oh, this is obviously right, everyone must think this way. So you might need to get them more theologically engaged and understand what's happening by just asking them questions. Okay, we want to read Mix. Mick said I had a very liberal family member in town ask me why I was still on the Trump train. I explained to her that I have my frustrations with the admin but I would still vote for him. But I warned her. The off ramp for young guys like me is to the very far right with Iran. How do we communicate to the admin that we need to wrap this up while also keeping the young guns from veering into more anti Semitic accelerationist wing?
- [71:40]
A
That's a big question, Danny.
- [71:42]
E
Thankfully it is wrapping up. But another thing is just look at this morning with Tulsi Gabbard. The wins and stuff that would have never happened under a liberal administration. And just you have to show them that stuff's actually getting done. Look at the closed border. I mean, the border is actually so good that they now just like even talks about it. Don't even talk about it. It doesn't matter. It's fine. So you really just need to keep showing people the wins that we have got.
- [72:07]
A
And it could always be worse with Kamala Harris. If she was our president, can you imagine? We would have lost the country. So, yeah, we lost 13 service members. A tragedy. This is not a forever war. And if you get out of it and they don't have nukes, it's not the worst thing ever. You gotta keep them from diving into nihilism though. That's the key in this Jew hate scapegoating stuff's a dead end.
- [72:30]
F
No black pilling.
- [72:31]
A
No black pilling. We don't fight because we know we're going to win. We fight because it's the right thing to do.
- [72:39]
B
For more on many of these stories
- [72:41]
A
and news you can trust, go to charliekirk. Com.