The Truth with Lisa Boothe: Inside the Charlie Kirk Assassination Case

Guest: Gregg Jarrett (FOX News legal analyst, author, ex-prosecutor)

Date: December 11, 2025
Podcast: The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show (The Truth with Lisa Boothe)
Host: Lisa Boothe

Episode Overview

This episode digs deep into the assassination case of prominent conservative figure Charlie Kirk. Lisa Boothe interviews FOX News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, exploring the overwhelming evidence against accused assassin Tyler Robinson, the challenges of jury impartiality in high-profile cases, and the broader political and legal ramifications. The conversation also touches on the death penalty, the legacy of the O.J. Simpson trial, legal battles facing New York AG Letitia James, Trump’s strike on Venezuelan narco-terrorists, and major upcoming Supreme Court decisions.

Key Discussion Points

The Case Against Tyler Robinson

[03:57 – 08:20]

• Evidence Overview

  • Significant forensic and surveillance evidence links Robinson to Kirk’s assassination.
  • Notable incriminating text messages, alleged confessions to family, and admissions to his roommate.
  • Potential legal challenges focus on whether authorities properly obtained evidence (search warrants, Fourth Amendment implications).

  “It’s compelling. It’s overwhelming evidence of guilt, provided that the government… followed the rules. …He allegedly confessed to one or more members of his family… and then there’s the text messages to his roommate that are highly incriminating, all but admitting that he did it.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [04:32]

• Roommate’s Role

  • No charges against the roommate as of yet.
  • Jarrett explains that if the roommate aided in any way, as an accessory before or after the fact, charges could still be possible depending on evolving evidence.

  “If he aided and abetted… he can be charged as an accessory before the fact… If he did anything at all to assist or to cover up evidence, he could be charged as an accessory after the fact.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [06:20]

• Jury Impartiality in a Politicized Environment

  • Discusses difficulty of finding a fair jury in high-profile, politically charged cases.
  • Compares to O.J. Simpson case, arguing that pre-trial publicity doesn’t necessarily prevent a fair trial.

  “If ever there was a high-profile case with a tremendous amount of pretrial publicity, that was it. …Yet they were able to find what the court determined to be a fair and impartial jury.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [08:20]

• Public Trials & Courtroom Cameras

  • Jarrett supports transparency, arguing that public trials foster trust and deter perjury and misconduct.

  “The Sixth Amendment in the Bill of Rights guarantees public trials… If we're going to have faith and confidence in our justice system, we must be able to see it at work with our own eyes.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [09:25]

• Visual Presentation of Defendants

  • Allowing the accused to wear street clothes minimizes jury prejudice.

  “When you see somebody in an orange jumpsuit, it creates the presumption of guilt. …It's a small matter when you get right down to it. …So it’s the right decision in this case.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [13:52]

The Death Penalty Debate

[14:51 – 18:33]

• State’s Intent to Seek Death Penalty

  • Utah prosecutors intend to pursue death penalty in this trial.

• Jarrett’s Moral Opposition

  • Cites the Leopold and Loeb case, arguing government killing undermines the message that killing is wrong.
  • Suggests life in prison is a harsher punishment than execution.

  “How do we tell society that it's wrong to kill when we as a government kill? …It is a far greater punishment to spend the rest of your living days in… a cage.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [15:02]

• Arguments for and against

  • Lisa Boothe leans in favor of the death penalty in this case, reasoning that Robinson’s actions lacked suicidal intent.

  “Clearly he didn’t want to die in the process. …I don't know if it's a worse fate for someone his age to spend the rest of his life in jail or die.”
  —Lisa Boothe [16:35]

• Lack of Deterrent

  • Both agree that neither the death penalty nor existing laws reliably deter determined killers.

  “I've never seen any valid, credible study that says the death penalty is a deterrence to murder.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [17:25]

Trial Timeline and Legal Strategies

[19:27 – 21:32]

• Expected Duration

  • Jarrett expects the trial itself to take about a month; the real battle will be in the penalty phase, especially if a guilty verdict is reached.

• Defense Tactics

  • The defense may emphasize mitigating circumstances (mental illness, diminished capacity).

  “The real battle begins to save his life. …The defense will really try to focus, make prosecutors prove their case… try to poke holes… but I think they've probably reconciled themselves to the fact that their client will be convicted.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [24:22]

Letitia James Mortgage Fraud Case

[25:07 – 28:14]

• Grand Jury Proceedings

  • James not indicted due to recent grand jury decisions, despite multiple attempts.
  • Jarrett attributes the outcome to the politicization of the process.

  “I think she's being protected by the grand jurors. …This became an intense and very public political football. …I think those grand jurors reacted in a very partisan way.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [25:46]

• Possible Future Indictment

  • Legal challenges may revive earlier indictments, pending appeals to higher courts.

Legality of Strikes on Venezuelan Narco-Terrorists

[28:14 – 33:41]

• Democratic Criticism

  • Skepticism about the legality and justification for Trump’s military strikes on Venezuelan drug cartels.

• Jarrett’s Legal Justification

  • Argues that cartels designated as “armed terrorist organizations” are lawful targets under U.S. and international law (AUMF, Hague and Geneva Conventions).
  • Cites precedent by Obama and Biden, equating their actions to Trump’s.

  “It is absolutely lawful under both U.S. and international law… Democrats and their media handmaidens… didn't seem to care when Barack Obama went after terrorism targets… When Trump does it, it's somehow war crimes. No, it's not. That's legally absurd.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [29:00]

• Discussion on Targeting Venezuela

  • Jarrett notes Trump’s statements that Colombia or Mexico may be “next” if necessary.

  "If the Mexican government doesn't do anything about their cartels, we may have to take action ourselves. …This is part of his fulfillment of the promises he made to the electorate."
  —Gregg Jarrett [34:15]

Supreme Court & Political Landscape

[37:43 – 44:15]

• Jerrymandering and Redistricting

  • Supreme Court will not intervene in partisan (non-racial) gerrymandering, reaffirmed in recent decisions.

  “As long as the redistricting is not done for racial reasons, states can do as they please and the Supreme Court will not interfere.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [38:07]

• Presidential Removal Power

  • Expected SCOTUS ruling restoring the President’s ability to fire federal agency heads, reversing a longstanding precedent.
  • The ruling is described as overdue correction, removing the so-called “fourth branch” of unaccountable bureaucracy.

  “I think the Supreme Court is clearly going to reverse the Humphrey case of 1935 and finally—and belatedly—restore presidential power over… these rogue federal agencies.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [41:18]

• Major Upcoming Cases

  • Birthright citizenship
  • Transgender health care for minors
  • Religious charter schools
  • Voting rights (Louisiana case)
  • Campaign finance

• Political Pushback

  • Jarrett predicts backlash from the left as these high-profile cases are decided.

• Trump-era Lawsuits

  • Trump has won the majority of legal challenges filed against him, often overcoming partisan lower court decisions.

  “He’s had more than 400 lawsuits filed against him. …A lot of these cases… are silly and frivolous… too many district court judges have totally disavowed the rule of law… suffering from a terminal psychopathology known as Trump Derangement Syndrome.”
  —Gregg Jarrett [42:46]

Notable Quotes (with Timestamps)

• On Evidence Against Robinson

  "It's compelling. It's overwhelming evidence of guilt… He allegedly confessed… and there's the text messages… highly incriminating, all but admitting that he did it."
  —Gregg Jarrett [04:32]

• On Media and Public Trials

  "The Sixth Amendment… guarantees public trials. …If we're going to have faith… we must be able to see it at work with our own eyes."
  —Gregg Jarrett [09:25]

• On the O.J. Simpson Trial

  "They were more than willing to buy into the absurd argument by the defense that the blood evidence had been planted… they were looking for a hook because they hated cops."
  —Gregg Jarrett [11:42]

• On Death Penalty Morality

  "How do we tell society that it's wrong to kill when we as a government kill?"
  —Gregg Jarrett [15:02]

• On Politicization of Legal Fate

  "This became an intense and very public political football. …grand jurors reacted in a very partisan way."
  —Gregg Jarrett [25:46]

• On Consistency in Military Action

  "When Obama and Biden did it, it was perfectly lawful. When Trump does it, it's somehow war crimes. No, it's not. That's legally absurd."
  —Gregg Jarrett [29:00]

Timestamps for Major Segments

• [03:57] Start of main discussion: Kirk assassination case evidence.
• [08:20] Jury bias and challenges, parallels to O.J. Simpson case.
• [13:52] Visuals and presumption of innocence in the courtroom.
• [15:02] The death penalty: arguments and moral dilemmas.
• [19:27] Expected trial timeline, strategy for defense and prosecution.
• [25:07] Letitia James’ legal troubles and political context.
• [28:14] Legality of strikes on Venezuelan narco-terrorists.
• [37:43] Supreme Court: gerrymandering, presidential power, and consequential rulings.

Memorable Moments

• Personal reflections on the O.J. case and courtroom fairness.
• Moral debate on capital punishment, with Jarrett referencing Clarence Darrow's legendary defense.
• Heated assertions on double standards in media and legal scrutiny toward Trump.

Conclusion

This episode delivers a dense, fast-moving legal and political analysis of the Charlie Kirk assassination case and its broader implications. Gregg Jarrett brings courtroom rigor and high-voltage opinion, while Lisa Boothe drives the national conversation about fairness, jurisprudence, and media narratives. The discussion is enriched with analogies, legal history, and timely Supreme Court context, offering listeners a comprehensive view of law and politics colliding in America today.