The Left's Agenda: "Social Murder" and "Micro-Looting"

00:00:03 Speaker 1: 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'll end up purposeful. College is a scam, everybody. You got to stop sending your kids to college. You should get married as young as possible and have as many kids as possible. Go start at turning point, you would say, college chapter. Go start attning point, you say 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. 00:00:45 Speaker 2: Here I am. 00:00:46 Speaker 3: Lord, Use me. 00:00:48 Speaker 1: Buckle up, everybody, Here we go. Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of the Charlie Kirkshaw, a company that specializes in gold iras and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at noblegold investments dot Com. That is Noblegoldinvestments dot com. 00:01:17 Speaker 4: All right, welcome to the Charlie Kirkshow we are live here in Phoenix, Arizona at the y Refi Studios. It's April twenty third, twenty twenty six. That's the y refly right there on the banner. Check them out investyrefight dot com. We love those guys, like how we doing. 00:01:32 Speaker 5: We're doing lovely. 00:01:33 Speaker 6: Other than you know, evil people are out here, which is what the lead is today. 00:01:36 Speaker 4: It's a common theme. Unfortunately. 00:01:40 Speaker 2: I feel good because we get to fight evil. We get to fight evil. 00:01:43 Speaker 4: We have a noble cause and a noble calling, and I will tell you there is a lot of evil around. And by the way, we're gonna have Peter, our chapter president from Baylor University, on its second half of the hour. We get so many emails from you when we have our students on, so we're to keep doing that. And by the way, Peter deserves a heck of a hat tip and I'm I'm gonna praise him to the sky when he comes on, because man, were we up against it at Baylor University. 00:02:09 Speaker 2: The university was. 00:02:11 Speaker 4: Given us all kinds of problems, and they absolutely persevered. They broke through. We had a I think over a thousand students. There might have been fifty adults in the room. The university cut off all what they call community tickets for this event, and so, you know, did they. 00:02:27 Speaker 5: Give a justification for that? 00:02:29 Speaker 2: Wow, it was very last minute. 00:02:30 Speaker 4: It was last minute because it was they were going to let all these community members in which we had forty five hundred tickets reserved by the community. You know, if you know Waco, the whole community revolves around Baylor University. There's about twenty thousand students at Baylor Private School. Waco's about one hundred and forty thousand people. Big, so relatively small community, but man, did they love the Baylor University and their football team and all this stuff. 00:02:56 Speaker 2: Anyway, so they cut it off. 00:02:57 Speaker 4: Because a bunch of lefties complained, and you know, we were kind of sitting here, going, are we gonna not be able to have anybody come to this event? And look at that, I mean that's all students, all students to hear Tom Homan, Benny Johnson, and Attorney General Ken Paxton. It was a massive, massive success. So I'm so proud of the team. And then we had Erica down in Grapevine, Texas, actually talking to our Pastor's Summit last night. So two different nights, two different nights, two different events. So we had Ohio State the night before, then we had Baylor, and then we had the pastor Summit running concurrently, So a lot of activity out there and I'm just again, I'm so proud of our students. But we got to get to the evil people that Blake referenced and the evil ideologies, which is something if you haven't heard of. It's a concept called social murder. It's a cousin to something that you hear in modern context called systemic oppression, which basically blames the system. It blames the elites, It blames anybody in a position of power or influence for what they consider less than ideal circumstances that lead to suffering. Okay, every system known to man will create some level of suffering because we live in a fallen world. As Christians, we understand that. We understand also the Matthew principle that those who have will have even more in those who have little, even the little they have will be taken from them. 00:04:17 Speaker 2: Sometimes that's unfortunately the case. 00:04:19 Speaker 4: Now as Christians, we are called to try and help our brothers and sisters, to try and give to them. Now, I believe that that should be done privately through the church and through charities and things like that. In our modern quasi socialist system, Blake, we tend to give taxes away to the government. The government then will have certain programs, whether it be welfare or medicaid. Some states have their own to take care of the least of these. Now we could argue the merits of that, but as Christians, we understand that we have an obligation to take care of the least of these. Communists don't believe in God and at least largely, and they tend to blame the system on those who are part of the system. 00:04:56 Speaker 2: What am I getting at? 00:04:58 Speaker 4: Hassan Piker is a a left winger, a radical left winger who says a lot of popular crab He's very. 00:05:05 Speaker 6: Popular one, so Hassan Piker. If you've not heard of him, you may hear of him soon. Incredibly popular streamer. He's on sites like Twitch. I believe he's on these days big website. If you're not familiar with it. A lot of the people on it, they'll play the game. People will play a video game and people will watch them, but it's also political stuff. 00:05:24 Speaker 5: This guy will be. 00:05:24 Speaker 6: Online six seven, eight hours a day just talking about politics. He'll have thousands, tens of thousands of people watching him. Millions will watch clips through other venues, very popular with young people. In fact, only a week or two after Charlie was murdered, he was scheduled to debate Hassan Piker at Dartmouth College. That was a debate we were looking forward to, We were game planning, and I think it would have been quite the event. So he's a very big name, but he's very far on the left and right now, on the left, there are elites like the people well Ezra Cline, those individuals. They're debating. Should we accept this guy into our coalition? And that's an important question because of the stuff this guy is arguing because he is a radical. 00:06:09 Speaker 2: He is a radical who will justify violence. 00:06:13 Speaker 4: And he did it again, this time in front of the New York Times, saying that he understands or at least a lot of America. I think the way he phrased it to be fair to him and will play the clip that a lot of Americans understand the assassination of Luigi Maggione against Brian Thompson, CEO of United Healthcare, because a lot of social murder, And what does he mean. It means that the CEO of United Healthcare was guilty of causing a lot of pain and suffering by denying claims or whatever the accusations are, and therefore he had it coming. Let's just play the clip and you can hear it in his own words, Hassan Piker nineteen. 00:06:51 Speaker 7: Engels wrote about the concept of social murder and Brian Thompson as the United health Healthcare CEO was engaging in a tremendous amount of social murder, the systematized forms of violence, the structural violence of poverty, because of the pervasive pain that the private healthcare system had created for the average American. I saw so many people immediately understand why this death had taken place. 00:07:29 Speaker 4: Okay, first of all, it's not a death had taken place. It was an assassination, a cold blooded murder of an innocent man. 00:07:36 Speaker 6: And also just worth pointing he's quoting Engels. Engels is famously the co author of the Communist Manifesto collaborator. He's also he's the funder He's always the guy who when you read the life of the early Communists, you start to really understand leftus because you see certain patterns. Marx is famously a loser. He doesn't support his own family, he has to sponge off other people like his friends. He never visits a factory floor. He's totally a classic type that lives on today of being uninformed about the world. Champagne socialist being a bad person individually, and that manifests in politics that they're bad as individual people, and of course they end up embracing evil. 00:08:18 Speaker 5: And this is what this piker guy is doing. He's going to say. 00:08:21 Speaker 6: It's very much a part of leftism to say, actually I can kill someone that I resent and it's a good thing because I have the right motivation. They're actually a bad person because the system that they're a part of murders people, which it doesn't really Brian Thompson's company paid for health care for people. 00:08:39 Speaker 3: Yeah. 00:08:39 Speaker 4: Well, and here's the thing. You'll see how the history of ideas morph. And you know, Mark Twain, I think famously said history doesn't rhyme or doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes. And you see these ideas from the eighteenth century or the nineteenth century, in the eighteen hundreds, morph in, weave and come in and out of the public consciousness. And then you get a guy like Cassan Piker, who's a gamer, who justifies all sorts of evils like micro looting by the way, that's another way he justifies, and by the way he electrocutes his dog, his on his does a lot of things on his stream. And he's standing by all the far left senate candidates, the Michigan candidate, the Muslim guy in Michigan who's running for Senate, he's standing by him. And so you see these ideas pop up and percolate, and this is just the latest iteration and we have to address it because it is evil and it is vile, and it will justify, justify all sorts of atrocities in its name. 00:09:38 Speaker 6: So we're talking about Hassan Piker, who is on the rise. He got this interview in the New York Times opinion section as basically leading figure on the left. So we talked about they were saying, no, it's so I could understand why you'd murder a healthcare CEO because of they're engaged in social murder. Another discussion they had was over this concept of micro looting, as they call it. You could also just call it stealing. You could call it shoplifting. And what he said. I don't think we have the video, but I have the quote. He says, I am pro stealing from big corporations because they steal quite a bit more from their own workers. And so he just says, okay, rob hole. Actually I think it was his co host who said she would just steal from Whole Foods. She would steal from other places. In the same interview, he says some other things. He said he doesn't endorse all theft. He says he wouldn't steal from a place that is taxpayer funded. 00:10:31 Speaker 5: That's different. He also said. 00:10:33 Speaker 6: Private schools should be illegal. He's really a wrecking ball of takes. 00:10:37 Speaker 4: But this guy is so full of bad takes, and I genuinely think that these are demonic ideologies that he is becoming the mouthpiece for. And you know, unfortunately for us, Charlie predicted a lot of this, and we could go all the way back to twenty twenty. So again, Hassan Piker is justifying, morally, justifying the murder, the cold blooded assassination of Brian Thompson by Luigi Mangioni allegedly, but Charlie predicted this all the way back in I guess twenty twenty its one. 00:11:10 Speaker 2: This is gonna get really nasty. 00:11:12 Speaker 1: Everyone listened to this. I just hope you understand. Think of the nastiest moment in twenty sixteen. They are not gonna let this guy get reelected without the most brutal, drawn out fight. We're gonna have the tech companies getting involved. The media is gonna get worse than ever. They're gonna be taking now Twitter accounts left and right. They're gonna be taking videos on YouTube. They are gonna be coming after us. They are gonna be following us in the middle of the night. They're going to be breaking into our houses. You think I'm joking. They are going gonna have violent that you will not be able to walk the streets of the Maga hat without your your physical health be put in jeopardy. 00:11:42 Speaker 5: And I hope it. 00:11:43 Speaker 2: Doesn't get that way. 00:11:44 Speaker 1: I hope that this clip gets unearthed and everything's like wonderful. I hope that the country comes together and we have a beautiful unitarian healing moment in September. 00:11:53 Speaker 4: He kept going in May. This is four months before he was assassinated. It's not twenty one. 00:11:59 Speaker 1: The Luigia effect is not going the way. It's disturbing, it's scary. People love Luigi on the left, the far radical left, and this is going to continue to be a problem. The Luigi effect is a serious issue where they believe that they can become a social media martyr for that cause, not just the action itself, but that you then can become the face of the resistance against your said struggle. 00:12:34 Speaker 6: It's almost besides the point to pick at the specific things. At this time, they're justifying murdering CEOs. This time they're justifying shoplifting. The bigger picture thing that you're going to see pop up again and again and left. Everyone knows murder is actually wrong. Everyone knows actually it's not okay to steal things. Similarly, everyone knows it's not okay to vandalize destroy things. But you see the same thing pop up on the left. It is very in tock cicading. To tell people something that is obviously wrong and evil and predatory, we can justify it through some flimsy ideological pretext. This is how you get mob violence. This is how you get people embracing frenzies of all sorts. And you see this especially pop up on the left. It's basically a resentment driven ideology that you can be this freak show who's you're not as accomplished as you think you deserve to be, you're not as high status as you think you deserve to be, and you can project this out onto others, and so that will justify murder, justifies theft, justifies all sorts of stuff. And that's why you see why do left wing marches get violent so often. It's not even just it's not even violence toward an end. They'll just burn a store down, they'll smash a window, they'll graffiti some beautiful statue that was put up. 00:13:49 Speaker 5: Fifty years ago. 00:13:51 Speaker 6: It is very much this this id this will to destroy basically just because something is good or beautiful. And I think that's also why see them they almost have this like perfect radar or this perfect scent for embracing evil ideas around the world. Like as an example, the you know, they love the pro Palestine cause, but it's not even that they love the pro Palestine cause. It's that, for example, there was a BLM group in Chicago that was celebrating the people who flew in on hang gliders to that concert where they massacred a bunch of civilians and raped people. 00:14:25 Speaker 4: They tried to turn it into like a flyer and iconic symbols yes, yeah. 00:14:28 Speaker 6: Like, And the left has done that. For example, you know Franz fan On who got quoted after that atrocity was committed. They were talking about they were directly quoting his ideology, and he was a guy who said raping. 00:14:40 Speaker 5: People is a form of resistance. 00:14:43 Speaker 6: The most evil things imaginable get justified on the left through a political lens, and if we don't confront it. Honestly, this is the tumor that is growing on the left, and it says Charlie warned, they're going to embrace more and more radical means of getting their agenda done. We already see this with the war on Ice agents. Ice agents are enforcing America's laws for our borders. They're saying you can't break into this country. And they don't just say we want to change our immigration laws. They say we want to hunt ice agents, we want to throw them in jail, and a lot of them basically say it's justified to murder ice agents. 00:15:20 Speaker 4: The more I think about it, the more I realize that, you know, it is this dichotomy between chaos and order. God spoke creation into being, He spoke order into being, we read in the scriptures, and the agents of chaos want to destroy that order. And that's why I think, you know, we can't say it enough. We are in a spiritual battle because the the agents of chaos want to destroy all that is good, true, and beautiful. They want to undermine it, they want to villainize it, they want to kill it. And that's how I can kind of look across the landscape and I can say good guy, bad guy, good guy, bad guy, because guess what. It doesn't mean that we we dehumanize the bad guys like they do us. But it does mean that you need to have your radar highly attuned to understand who is doing what and for what ends right. And so if you see somebody that's building up and is creating, good guy, typically a good guy doesn't have to be one hundred percent good. You see the guy's trying to burn it down and destroy it. 00:16:16 Speaker 2: Bad guy. Pretty simple. 00:16:17 Speaker 4: On one level, America is entering its two hundred and fiftieth year, and the direction of this country is being decided right now in our culture and our economy, and who we choose to support matters more than ever. Most wireless companies don't care who you are or what you believe. They just want your money. Patriot Mobile is different. For more than twelve years, they've stood with Americans who believe freedom is worth fighting for, funding the Christian Conservative movement when others stayed silent. 00:16:46 Speaker 2: And here's the deal. 00:16:47 Speaker 4: You don't have to give up quality or service when you switch to Patriot Mobile. They deliver premium priority access on all three major US networks, so you'll get the same or better coverage than you have today. Think switching is a half it isn't keep your number, keep your phone, or upgrade. Their one hundred US based support team can activate you in just minutes, still paying off a device. Patriot Mobile even offers a contract buyout. This is a defining year. We gotta work together to save our country. So go to Patriotmobile dot com, slash Charlie or call nine seven to two Patriot and use the promo code Charlie for a free month of service. That's Patriotmobile dot com, slash Charlie or call them at nine seven to two Patriot using the promo code Charlie and switch today. So I am very excited to have this young man on our show, Peter Fernandez. He's our TPSA Baylor Chapter president. Welcome to the show, Peter morning. 00:17:43 Speaker 3: How are you all? 00:17:44 Speaker 4: We are great, and thanks for being flexible. I know our time kept shifting around as our schedule shifted around, but I just want to say, I just want to say congratulations on a heck of a job last night. You I can tell by your speech and we'll play a clip of that and just say, but you know, you're kind of like an old soul and I could see that with the poise that you had. I mean, this was not an easy event for those of the people in the audience that aren't aware of it. We had this as open to the broader community. I think some progressive students complained, and so then they tried to limit it, and then they were like, no, you can have twenty outs outside non students, and we're like, come on, that's not even enough for the parents of you know, Peter's family probably couldn't all fit in that. So they're like, oh, here's one hundred and twenty. It didn't matter. You guys packed that place up with over a thousand people. I think all but fifty of them were students. 00:18:37 Speaker 2: The energy was. 00:18:37 Speaker 4: Incredible, the Q and A was incredible, and you just comported yourself brilliantly, Peter, the floor is yours. 00:18:44 Speaker 8: Yeah, So we had a fantastic event. Like you said, the turnout was amazing. The university threw everything they could at us, and they didn't outright say you can't have an event, but they said that we couldn't have pep from the outside. And believe me when I tell you, the Waco community wanted to be there. 00:19:04 Speaker 3: There's a community college. 00:19:05 Speaker 8: Down the street and members of their chapter and members of their community reach out to us saying that they wanted to come. We had countless alumni reach out to us just asking about attendance for the event, and they were unfortunately turned. 00:19:20 Speaker 3: Away by the university. 00:19:21 Speaker 8: And it's hard to tell members of the bail Or family, which we'd like to call anybody who's pastor present member of the university Baylor family, and it's hard to tell people in the Baylor family that they can't come. But the university had no problem doing that, and that's something that I really really think that they're gonna feel the pain from that because the donors and the alumni are not happy about it. 00:19:45 Speaker 4: Yeah, I can tell you I got a ton of I'm I have zero connection to the Baylor community other than you know, friends, and I was talking with Ken Paxton's team because he obviously spoke last night. It was just shocking that they wouldn't allow that to happen. And by the way, just so we're very clear, you know, they made some statement saying this was originally it was just this is how it was always originally designed, this event. 00:20:06 Speaker 2: That's not true. 00:20:07 Speaker 4: We got the paperwork, We got the approvals for the original requests when we booked the venue. So anyways, whatever, I don't even want to dwell on that, Peter, because you guys pulled off an amazing event. But just to be clear, we had forty five hundred people from the Waco community, most of them probably alumnis of the university, and like you said, other neighboring schools that wanted to be a part of this event. And I mean, it really is tragic because you know, then they greenlight this this counter protest movement, this inclusive event, trying to kind of sabotage the event, you know, And they were claiming some of their decisions were based on security protocols, this and that. Well, if you were worried about security, why would you greenlight an event at the same time with a bunch of people that probably wish us ill and maybe worse. 00:20:57 Speaker 8: Absolutely, and I have two points on that first event that they had. 00:21:01 Speaker 3: I'm sure Charlie would agree. 00:21:03 Speaker 8: I have no issue with alternative organizations hosting something. 00:21:06 Speaker 3: In fact, I encourage it because both sides need to be heard. 00:21:10 Speaker 8: But I feel like there's a lot of dishonesty behind hosting out on the same day, because if you really wanted to make sure that both voices were heard, you'd have their event on one day, which I would love to have attended it, by the way, but I couldn't because we had to set up for hours, and then we would invite them to ours, and then both sides could be heard by the entire wake Up community or the Baylor community. But I just think it was just honest on their part and on the university's part by putting them at the same time, because it's like you have to choose one side or the other when it's really not supposed to be about that. It's supposed to be about hearing both sides and then making a decision for yourself. 00:21:46 Speaker 4: Yeah, well said, I'm going to play a clip from part of your speech here. 00:21:50 Speaker 2: I thought you did a great job. I watched it all. 00:21:53 Speaker 4: I really do, I Peter, I can't say enough good things. 00:21:59 Speaker 2: Man. 00:21:59 Speaker 4: You severed in one of the most the toughest event you know, situations that I've seen, and I've been around this game for a long time at this point, and you you crushed it. You came through with flying colors. And that speaks so highly about the quality of person that you are and the quality of students that we have at Baylor. And I'm just so if I sound effusive, it's because it's authentic. I really mean that. So here we go. Let's just play cut twenty six from your speech. 00:22:28 Speaker 3: And we table. 00:22:29 Speaker 8: Well, it's a controversial question. We'll also make sure that it's known that it's okay to disagree with us. 00:22:35 Speaker 3: My favorite days of tabling. 00:22:36 Speaker 8: Are those days when the agrees and the disagrees are pretty even, because those are the days that the most civil discourse is happening, and those are the days that Charlie would be the most. 00:22:48 Speaker 2: Proud of you continue, not twenty seven. 00:22:51 Speaker 8: There's been a great decline in civil discourse. People don't talk about the issues anymore. I'm too scared to be judged or canceled, so instead can find ourselves in a political monolith. We surround ourselves with people who think exactly like us. 00:23:08 Speaker 3: And I don't mean we only, I mean everybody. 00:23:11 Speaker 4: I love these clips, Peter, because I can tell that you really believe in the mission, and that is free and open dialogue, to open debate, civil debate. We open the show today talking about hasan Piker who's promoting an idea called social murder, which is basically, you can justify all sorts of terrible evil things, including assassination and murder. 00:23:34 Speaker 2: Culture. 00:23:35 Speaker 4: You here are representing our vision, the turning point vision of open dialog, Charlie's vision of civil debate, civil discourse, the things that make this country great and have made this country great for now two hundred and fifty years. 00:23:49 Speaker 2: Why is that so important to you? 00:23:50 Speaker 4: And do you see the I guess the building, the gathering of momentum for those beliefs, or do you see that they're declining. 00:24:00 Speaker 8: I really do feel that the point where my as I said last night, my goal and my role at this university and in this chapter became clear to me was after what happened to Charlie, because the only reason that what happened to him occurred was because people have stopped having those conversations. Ten years ago, civil discourse was just another thing that happened every day. People would talk about the tough issues, but it wouldn't be something that would make you say, I don't want my family at Thanksgiving because they're supporting this candidate. 00:24:32 Speaker 3: And now we're at this point where. 00:24:35 Speaker 8: People don't talk to their family members because they figured out who they voted for. And I think that that's probably one of the craziest examples that exists. But it really goes down to the fact that people don't talk about the issues anymore, because if we talk about the issues, I find more often than not when we table that even the craziest of liberals with notable exceptions, will we'll find common ground with them, and we'll shake hands after the conversation and they'll walk away, and I feel good about it, and I'm sure they do too. And that's the kind of thing that I know Charlie was promoting and doing every time that he went on a college campus. And that's what I think we need to keep doing. And that's what I mean when I continuing his legacy. 00:25:17 Speaker 4: Yeah, God bless you man. There's this graph that I've thrown up on the show a lot, but it's something that I keep with me. Actually, it was taken by you gov in The Economist September twelfth through the fifteenth, twenty twenty five, and so this is just a few days after Charlie's murder. And I would suspect that even some people that were pulled in this probably you know, didn't say exactly what they thought because of the rawness of Charlie's murder. 00:25:49 Speaker 2: So I actually think these numbers would be higher. 00:25:52 Speaker 4: But if you look at that left side of that graph, in that blue bubble up at the top, that what that reveals is about twenty nine percent of eighteen to thirty nine year old self described liberals progressives believe it is justified for citizens to resort to violence in order to achieve political Goalsmost like one third, essentially of eighteen to thirty nine year olds believe that violence is justified to achieve political goals. What do you think when you see that graph, Peter. 00:26:25 Speaker 8: I think that is the result of spending eight years calling one political ideology Nazis and fascists. Because when you label somebody something that's been historically demonized, right, I mean, Nazis were bad people. But when you label an entire ideology as that violence doesn't seem like it's unacceptable. And I'm sure that that's what's gotten into the minds of plenty of people on the left, and that's why we see so much violence toward alternative opinions. Turning point is another one of those trigger words. It's kind of funny because I've been told that I lead a white supremacist club on campus, but I'm not white, and neither is our vice president or our treasurer or our secretary. And I know that sounds like DEI, but it is not. They're just very, very strong believers as in the conservative movement. 00:27:20 Speaker 4: Is great, Peter, well done again, great event last night, huge triumph. And I want to ask you. You had Attorney General Ken Paxton there last night. I don't know if you've got to interact with him at all. What is the vibe on campus when it comes to this Senate race that's, you know, looming in Texas, Paxton vs. 00:27:40 Speaker 2: Cornyn. Do you guys talk about it? What's the vibe? 00:27:42 Speaker 8: I gotta say that's one of the things that doesn't seem to come up too often. I know that when we when we table, we like to mention voting and all that. 00:27:51 Speaker 3: But I do know a few people really really excited about. 00:27:55 Speaker 8: Getting Cornyn out of there since he's been there since two thousand and two, which I think is one of the biggest problems we have in our entire government, is that people get to sit in Congress for twenty four years. But I'd say there's not a huge buzz, but people know that it's an important race, especially within our club, and we were excited to have him come. 00:28:20 Speaker 2: Awesome. 00:28:20 Speaker 6: He's been there since two thousand and two, and he seems to think it's still two thousand. 00:28:24 Speaker 4: He seems and he thinks it's his I mean, there's a huge backlash just I don't know, Peter, if you're aware, but everything that happened in Virginia, which we're going to get into at the top of the next hour with Ken Kochinelli about what the courts are going to do with the redistrict in Virginia. But you know, there was one hundred million dollars spent in the primary, not even the runoff, right, so, and it's probably going to tally up to one fifty one hundred and fifty million dollars in to attack a Republican in that state. So it's a big, big, big issue there. What other issues are kids talking about when you're tabling or when you're talking with your campus the chapter members. 00:29:01 Speaker 2: What are people passionate about? What are young people thinking about right now? 00:29:05 Speaker 3: Totally honest. 00:29:06 Speaker 8: The thing that seems to come up more than anything else in conversation is the Epstein files, and everybody anytime that we try to go on to another topic, and we will, we'll get productive conversations there. But everybody saying, you know, I would just feel so much better about this administration and about our country if I knew why the pedophiles were being protected and why we haven't gone after them yet. 00:29:30 Speaker 3: And I have to agree with that sentiment. 00:29:33 Speaker 2: Yeah. 00:29:33 Speaker 4: Interesting, So when you do you have a note for President Trump? I mean, I you know, turning point is a C three in your personal capacity, however, how would you like to see the administration handle this to make it easier for a student like you on campus to table and talk about it. 00:29:48 Speaker 8: I really just think that the I don't want to say, maybe flip flopping is the right way to put it on what the message about Epstein was, where it's oh, we're going to release it when we get into office. 00:30:00 Speaker 3: Wait, it's on my desk. Oh wait, there is no file. 00:30:04 Speaker 8: And then they release it and all of the names of the people we want to go after are hidden, And I feel like it makes me have a little distrust. 00:30:14 Speaker 3: I can't lie. 00:30:15 Speaker 8: And I had right up there a Trump flag and I didn't take it down because I don't like him anymore, but I realized this flag is the most important one. And but I do really think that a lot of people who voted. 00:30:29 Speaker 3: For him would have a lot more trust if. 00:30:31 Speaker 8: Those names and things like that were to be released, because those are bad people and there's no doubt about that. And I think we all voted for Trump to see him make our country better, and I think a lot of the biggest way he can do that is to get rid of the bad people and bad people like that. 00:30:50 Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, yeah, No, I think that was really insightful. And I'm not even saying you're right. I'm or that the vibes are right because I actually have thoughts about basically. 00:30:59 Speaker 2: A lot that. 00:31:01 Speaker 4: But it's very important that the people in power understand what kids like you feel about it. Do you see what I'm saying? Like so, whether or not you could argue the details on that, and I know Blake has a lot of thoughts, but it's so important that they understand that this is the perception Blake, I don't know if you have thoughts. 00:31:20 Speaker 5: No, I think that's very strong. 00:31:21 Speaker 6: I think you can complain about what the public thinks, but you can't override what the public thinks. You can't ignore what it thinks. And I think in all of our discussions with youth leaders and we want honesty about this because that's the only way you can get truth, we have seen there has been a vibe shift in a way. 00:31:39 Speaker 5: We wouldn't like over the past year. 00:31:41 Speaker 6: Yeah, and we're basically six months away from an election. Besides those names, is there anything maybe an issue that's less appreciated that people aren't talking about as much? Like what could be something the administration might come out catch people by surprise that might excite con servative leaning students or those who were independents who gave Trump a shot in twenty twenty four. 00:32:05 Speaker 8: I'd say that two biggest things that I feel like our chapter focuses on a lot. I think there's a lot of people who think that the deportation efforts haven't gone far enough. 00:32:12 Speaker 3: Now. 00:32:13 Speaker 8: I'm happy because when compared with the previous administration, the numbers are great, But I would also agree I'm a son of a Cuban immigrant. My grandparents bought my dad here, started a new life in America, did it the right way. And that's also something I love to bring up when people say, oh, you don't know what it's like, and I said, I am Hispanic. 00:32:34 Speaker 3: I actually do know what it's like. 00:32:37 Speaker 8: But I think the immigration issue is certainly something that people are really focused on. They want more deportations. And also the position on pro life and how I don't know how true that is, but I saw something that said that Planned Parenthood is getting funding again from the government, and I believe that to be one of the great fast evils that is in our country. 00:33:02 Speaker 3: And I wish that our government would stop funding it. 00:33:05 Speaker 2: I'm not sure I know the answer to that. Actually, I'm not sure. I'm going to look into that one. That's it. 00:33:10 Speaker 4: If that is the case, then I'm going to raise holy hell about it as well. So what about We got about a minute and a half here, Peter, what about Israel? 00:33:18 Speaker 3: Yeah, that's another one. 00:33:20 Speaker 8: I think that it's It's something that one of our chapter members kind of got a little famous off of a clip at Amfest talking to Ben Shapiro about it, and a lot of people agree with him. And I can't say that I'm fully one way or another on it, but I do know, as I said before, this has the flag that I care about, and when I cast my vote in twenty twenty four, my intention behind that was that I want our president to serve us. And I'm not saying Trump's not, but I want our government, the people who we elect, to serve us. And I can't lie when I say it feels like that hasn't really changed a ton since the last administration, because you have Biden, right, and money's going to Ukraine, money's going here, money's going there, and I still see those checks being written out to other countries and I'm wondering, Hey, I mean, other than the border, which of course is a great thing. What you know, what other issues are we handling with the money, Because that money could go to almost people in New York City. 00:34:30 Speaker 3: I'm from New York. There's so many things. 00:34:32 Speaker 8: I just wish that the money we are sending to other countries who have issues could be put it forward issues. 00:34:37 Speaker 3: In our country. 00:34:38 Speaker 4: Well, Peter, again, I think there's important details to all of these topics that could be in the administration's favor. But I think it's I didn't want to argue, and I think your perspective is so valid. 00:34:50 Speaker 2: It's so important to hear. 00:34:52 Speaker 4: And I'm going to clip this up and put it on social so they can Peter Fernande's great job last night at Baylor University. 00:34:58 Speaker 2: One of one of the truly great leaders we have. 00:35:02 Speaker 4: I wasn't expecting this, I have to say, but death of recess it stopped me in my tracks. This isn't about dodgeballs and jungle gyms. It's about control. The modern American classroom didn't just happen. It was intentionally designed. It was standardized and centralized. And once you see who built it and who protects it everything clicks. Billions of dollars are flowing through education bureaucracies Every year, test scores collapse, and somehow the answer is always more money and less parental authority. The documentary breaks down how organizations like the NEA amassed enormous influence, how radical gender ideology entered classrooms, and why something as basic as recess movement, freedom, childhood, you know, had to go. That's not random, that's systemic. Institutions protect themselves. They do not protect your kids. And that's why this documentary exists on Angel Studio streaming platform Angel Guild. Angel Guild is willing to distribute films that challenge powerful systems when legacy media won't touch them. So right now, go to angel dot com slash Charlie and watch Death of Recess right now. If you're a parent or planned to be, you need to see this. That's Angel dot com slash Charlie and watch Death of Recess. 00:36:20 Speaker 9: Breaking tonight, a circuit court in Virginia ruled a short time ago, within the past two hours, that the redistricting referendum passed by voters yesterday is unconstitutional. The judge is now blocking certification of the election and denying a motion to stay pending appeal. 00:36:38 Speaker 4: So big news out of Virginia. We have been following this story closely. I have all credit to Blake. He's been forcing us and actually I was very into it. 00:36:47 Speaker 2: I didn't fight him on it. 00:36:48 Speaker 4: But he's been a banging the drama on Virginia for quite some time now, as we've had a number of guests trying to raise the alarm, trying to raise awareness about Virginia. We lost barely in a very winnable race, but there still remains legal troubles for this new map here to help us unpack that. As Ken Kuchinelli, the former Attorney General of the State of Virginia should have been governor as a matter of fact, and a really brilliant legal mind. 00:37:14 Speaker 2: Ken, welcome back to the show. 00:37:15 Speaker 10: Good to be with you all. 00:37:16 Speaker 4: Yeah, so it's the first time having you back on after Charlie, and so it's good to see you. Honestly, it's good to see old faces that we've had on and have you back on and we're trying to hold it down and we're just honored to have you here in your brilliant legal mind that Charlie really respected and you've been out in the public saying, hey, not so fast, everybody. There could be still problems for this map. Tell us your thoughts on it and what you see that's going to happen here. 00:37:42 Speaker 10: So the way the Democrats jammed this through, they broke the rules. I know that will shock everyone. But like many states, Virginia's constitutions, so this is state constitutional issues we're talking about, not federal so no federal courts will be involved in most of these decisions. But our state constitution requires that if you want to amend the constitution in this case to get rid of our bipartisan Redistricting Commission, which is what they were doing, you have to pass an amendment through the General Assembly, have an election of the General Assembly, and then have what's called second passage, and then at least ninety days have to go by before it is submitted to the voters. But let's review what happened. Virginia has forty five day elections thanks to the Democrats the last time they had three way control governor in both houses, they gave us forty five day elections, and they didn't do first passage of this amendment until Halloween last year. Now, a reminder to folks that Virginia is one of those states that has odd year elections. Abigail Spanberger was elected governor last year and particularly appreciate that, but it was in the odd year. Well they did this on Halloween, but voting started on September nineteenth, six weeks before over a million people had already voted, and they wanted to count that election as the constitutionally required intervening election, and that's going to be very challenging for them to pull off. That was problem number one with that effort on Halloween. The other problem was they claimed to be in a special session. A lot of state legislatures, unlike Congress, they do very discreet sessions. We only have a forty five day or sixty day session in Virginia. They were claiming that the special session called in May of twenty twenty four to finalize a budget was still alive and open and they could propose the constitutional amendment in it. And the problem with that is the get outside the boundaries of what the special session was called for which it was called, you need a two thirds vote of the General Assembly, and of course they don't have that kind of a majority in Virginia Republicans would never go along with it, so there was no two thirds vote. Those two issues are in front of the Supreme Court of Virginia right now as we speak. The ruling that you ran the Fox Peace on from yesterday from Taswell Circuit Court is a third constitutional challenge because the second time they passed the amendment was January sixteenth. I want to say of this year, twenty twenty six, and the constitution says there must be ninety days between second passage and when it is submitted to the voters. Well, the referendum end date April twenty first was more than ninety days later. But because we have that forty five day election, this was submitted to the voters on March six and the judge in Taswell said, that's not ninety days, folks. You have violated this part of the constitution again, and so he threw it out for that reason. And on top of it, there were statutory reasons as well, like the unfair ballot language and so forth. But there are just so many we could list it. The judge put a laundry list together yesterday of ways they violated the Constitution and laws of Virginia to his credit, but this is going to go fast in the Virginia Supreme Court. They are hearing oral argument nine am on Monday. I think they probably rule in just a couple of weeks. 00:41:40 Speaker 6: So I guess that's the obvious question. What's the setup of the Supreme Court? Do we have a reason to be optimistic? And I suppose if they don't rule the way we want? Is there a potential for federal involvement in this case? 00:41:53 Speaker 10: So our Supreme Court has behaved in a less political manner than most Supreme courts have. It is for three Republican Democrat in terms of appointees throughout twenty twenty six. But I would foresee the possibility of a seven zero ruling on the intervening election question before them, and possibly even the special session question. So the partisan question about justices would go away if it was unanimous. Of course, and the folks who barely squeaked by fifty one and a half to forty eight and a half on Tuesday with the referendum to undo our bipartisan redistricting, which by the way, passed two to one in twenty twenty, it was wildly popular. This referendum outspent the No folks by three or four to one, and early on it was ten to one. So they needed all their money to get by, and now they have to win every single constitutional challenge to hold on to their win. We only have to win one. It doesn't matter if it's unconstitutional for one reason or for four reasons. If it's unconstitutional, the referendum will be thrown out. 00:43:11 Speaker 6: So I know that there was already a lot of skepticism from the courts on all these questions that you bring up, and yet they allowed the referendum to go forward. 00:43:20 Speaker 5: Anyway. The worry that goes in my heart. 00:43:23 Speaker 6: Is I can just see these the courts coming up with some excuse where they would basically say, you know, there's these constitutional questions, they seem really bad, but could we really overturn the expressed will of the people as shown in this referendum. I'm worried that the entire setup was to engineer that excuse that they could offer, let me, let me. 00:43:42 Speaker 10: Ease your heart a bit. So the reason the earlier two constitutional questions that went up to the Supreme Court were held there and they let the referendum go forward is that we have over one hundred years of precedent in Virginia that treat the vote of the people as part of the legislative process that has to be completed before courts can take up any of the issues related to the referendum. It's very much analogous to the governor signing or vetoing a bill the court would never take up. We got an assault weapons ban coming. I expect to sue on it, but I'm not going to sue until the governor either signs or veto's bill. Of course she veto's that I won't sue, but that completes the legislative process, and the courts will not, as a matter of separation of powers, take up a challenge to a law or a referendum until after the legislative process is complete. 00:44:43 Speaker 4: That's really a thorough there Ken, former Attorney General of the Great State of Commonwealth. That's how we do it, right, Great Commonwealth of Virginia. And you should have been governor you okay, So the reason I bring this. 00:44:57 Speaker 6: Up, I was talking to you about it, Tona. This so this referendum, you do it. Blake this referendum. We threw no money at it, and then we end up losing by less than one hundred thousand votes. And I was telling Andrew, I used to live in Virginia, and I've been around the block a bunch of times, and I moved to your state in twenty thirteen, and I remember that race, Ken Kuchinelli, he can't win, let's not spend any money on this, and you lose by one hundred thousand votes. 00:45:25 Speaker 4: Yeah, and there was a libertarian in that race, right that siphoned some of the vote for you as well. You could have been governor, should have been governor. And now here we are, fast forward twenty twenty six, and we have all these court questions that you're making really good points on, Ken, But we shouldn't even have to get there, because listen, so I just want you to kind of give your POV. I don't mean to make this political. You're very legal minded and you're pretty good about staying above the fray. But what does that mean to you as a Virginian and an American as a conservative when you see the way that we are prioritizing different races around the country. Ken Paxton versus Corning in Texas comes to mind. One hundred hundred and fifty million dollars blown on our r VR fighting. 00:46:07 Speaker 10: What do you think, Ken, Well, certainly in this referendum, the money that did come to our side came late. 00:46:15 Speaker 11: And so. 00:46:17 Speaker 10: Let's break out the voting. We have three types of voting in Virginia. I told you we have forty five days of voting thanks to the Democrats. No state needs forty five days of voting, it's silly. But the in person voting, the in person early voting, Yes beat No by about a point and a half. It was actually only half of the margin of the total on election day, and that was about twenty nine percent of the vote. On election day. Our side won fifty four to forty five in person voting on election day, that was about fifty six percent of the voter. So, but where they won the race was the mail in battle, which they won by forty five points. Even though it was only eleven or twelve percent of the total vote. The margin was so big. And this is where you're supposedly nonpartisan, non political entities that people get tax deductions to support, and their donations are not reported in election spending. This is the kind of dark money that the left loves. While ranting against dark money, and we got hammered with it in Virginia for sure. And you need that money early to run a mail program. You don't just stand a mail program up at the last second when money starts to come in. So we got hurt in two different ways because of the amount of money and when it arrived. 00:47:48 Speaker 2: Now, okay, go ahead. 00:47:49 Speaker 6: I know we've seen some complaints on X and other venues where people have said, I mean, the classic thing is Fairfax always drops their votes last. Some people have said the mail in votes came out last. Do you think there's any signs of foul play or do you think we should focus on just you know, the money stuff, the constitutional questions and so on. 00:48:12 Speaker 10: Well, first of all, we should absolutely focus like a laser beam on the constitutional questions. We are believers in constitutions and we are in our well positioned to rely on it to protect us here. Constitutions in part are to protect minorities and to reign in governments, and that's exactly what's happening here in Virginia. We have a good chance of winning on that basis alone. So you know, there are a lot of other issues. There's national political consequences of this, and That's how the Democrats argued this. They ran against Trump, you know, they said Trump is terrible and he's trying to take Congress. So we need to skew our map ten to one, and because there's national reasons, and that's a pretty rare and new power play. I mean, the voting yes, knew what they were doing. They knew they were just grabbing power, and they're risking an escalation here. The pendulum does swing right. I am a believer in our Virginia court system as it stands now. I think the Virginia Supreme Court will strike this down, and I think the Democrats will have wasted seventy million dollars of money that could have gone to other places. But to your point, we ended up with around twenty three million being spent on our side, so about three to one or more. If that had come earlier, we would have won. If there had been more of it, we probably would have won on the vote without the legal fight. So there's always a limited amount of money, and where it gets spent is always controversial, but it does drive me crazy where you get so much establishment money that far and away their first priority has nothing to do with principles it's just protecting their own power. So here we are complaining about a power grab by the Democrats, and it happens on the Republican side too in how they keep gather and spend money. 00:50:14 Speaker 4: Yeah, Ken, I totally, and we're going to see it, by the way, in South Carolina as well with Lindsey Graham. So just keep your eyes up for that. But Ken, what about Fairfax this point? They always hold their vote back. 00:50:23 Speaker 10: Yeah, So that's first of all, it's big, and Fairfax likes everybody to think they're well run. It's not that well run. It just isn't. And so there's a lot of just there lumbering along. They're the biggest OAF in the race, and so don't read too much into it. We do have to pay attention because Fairfax was caught cheating in Youngkin's race in twenty twenty one. They were handing out ballot ballots without voter ID for mail in ballots, hundreds of them. So they do have a history of cheating, But I haven't yet seen that scale. 00:51:02 Speaker 3: Fairness that would this vote. 00:51:04 Speaker 2: Ken Kuchinelli. 00:51:06 Speaker 4: Please, if somebody offers you a job in the DOJ, please take it. That's all I'm saying, Okay, great to see you again and thank you for your really important analysis. 00:51:17 Speaker 2: There. 00:51:19 Speaker 4: I want to talk to you about an issue so many Americans face, and that's health insurance. There's an organization I really really appreciate called Christian Healthcare Ministries CHM is a faith based alternative to health insurance. And this is real stuff, Folks like you've got to listen in With CHM. You're not paying into a company's profit margin. You're investing in a community with less overhead than the competition. You get reliable support through the giving and prayer of fellow members. Members contribute every month to help pay for each other's medical bills, allowing believers to afford the care they need. Because they're not insurance, you get access to your preferred doctor or hospital with network restrictions. You heard that right. If you want to see massive savings in your healthcare budget, c HM has four low cost programs for every stage of life, starting at just one hundred and fifteen dollars a month, plus. You can enroll or switch your program at any time. See why so many believers are taking a leap of faith. Start today by visiting Chministries dot org. Slash Charlie and use promo code Charlie for a fifty percent credit towards your first month. That's shministries dot org. Slash Charlie and use promo code Charlie. 00:52:34 Speaker 2: You know, Charlie used to talk about rubber rooms a lot. You remember that. 00:52:39 Speaker 4: Yeah, he was really, really not a fan of rubber rooms. 00:52:44 Speaker 2: And we're going to get into that, Blake. Why don't you take us away? 00:52:46 Speaker 6: Alrighty, Well, this is this is an interesting segment that we've heard about. As you said, yeah, charlieused to talk about rubber rooms. For those who've forgotten, that's the classic thing in American public education. Our public schools have unionized teachers across the vast majority of the country. That gets them a lot of benefits for them, and one of them is they're very difficult to fire. Is that good for our kids? Is that good for the country. Well, we're going to talk about that with John Manly. He is a partner at Manly Stuart Finalde and he's got a case about the Los Angeles Unified School District. John, are you there, yes, sir, Hello, welcome to the program. Why don't you just lay out for our viewers what is going on with teachers in the City of Los Angeles. 00:53:32 Speaker 11: Well, it's we've had cases against LAUSD since twenty twelve, when the Supreme Court first allowed people to file against school districts. In most dates, you can't sue a school district even if they know that a teacher has molested kids, and they don't take him out of circulation. They allow him access. Fortunately, we change the law. But to give you a scope nationally, there's two national studies, one in two thousand and four by Carol Shakeshaft who was hired by the Department of Education to examine how many children in public schools in this country in K through twelve will suffer some sort of sexual misconduct by a teacher or other school employee. And the figure she came up with was ten percent. That's in the George W. Bush administration and the Obama administration. The Justice Department initiated another study, how many children in K through twelve schools will be molested by suffer excuse me, suffer some sort of sexual misconduct by teachers, administrators, school employees, etc. And what the Justice Department concluded it's ten percent. So to give you an idea, there are fifty seven million children in K through twelve public schools in this country. That means every year five point seven million kids will suffer sexual misconduct. That's more than the population in many states. LAUSD is perhaps possibly the worst example. They've paid hundreds of millions of dollars to settle these cases, and it's important to understand in these cases, it's not enough to prove the abuse happened. Sadly, that's the easy part. Because many of them are charged and convicted. We have to show a jury that the school district knew or should have known that this teacher was molesting kids and did nothing. 00:55:31 Speaker 2: Well. 00:55:32 Speaker 6: God, so we've got a specific example when we were told about apparently there are two teachers still employed by the Los Angeles School District who have been convicted. 00:55:43 Speaker 5: Of sex offenses. 00:55:44 Speaker 6: But they're just they're either reassigned or they're even just assigned to sort of fake jobs. Apparently, in LAUSD you can just their policies explicitly say you can just get reassigned instead of fired for sexually harassing students or a carently deliberately exposing students to pornography. 00:56:03 Speaker 5: Is that accurate? 00:56:04 Speaker 11: I think the two student teachers you're talking about were convicted of sexual offenses. What they were convicting of is knowingly failing to report someone who was molesting children. And that's heyesus and Gulu and Maria sonamoyor they themselves didn't molest anybody, but they pled guilty to violating or nol violating California's mandatory reporting laws. And by not reporting him, this individual who was molesting kids went on to molest more children, and so they were charged by the DA, pled guilty. They were on a leave from the school district, and then then they hired him back. So what message does that send? And the message is play ball with us, conceal and we'll take care of you. And this is not I'm go ahead. 00:56:54 Speaker 4: I I just wanted to pause there really quickly, because if you know about a crime and you do not report it, that makes you complicit. And I think that there is some weird cultural phenomenon. I I've been thinking about this a long time because you know, you think about what happened with Charlie, and there was all these people that seem seemingly knew that something was going to happen that day, and it's one of the things I pull my hair out about candidly that there hasn't been more action on it. I'm trying to work proper channels and get action on it. But the point is, if you know something is going to happen, if you know something did happen, you are morally and legally obligated to report that so justice can be done. And so I feel like what's probably happening here is you've got the unions and they're they're you know, the people that are supposed to be protecting these these teachers, they are they are not drawing the moral weight that is, you know, mandated by that that that crime, that that that inaction, And it frustrates me because there's no moral uh weight behind it anymore. 00:57:56 Speaker 2: If you know about a crime, you have to report it. 00:57:59 Speaker 4: And I don't know where we lost the plot as a society in that, I don't know where our bureaucrats lost the plot on that you have to report it. So I just it makes me infuriated when I hear stories like that, it's just as. 00:58:10 Speaker 11: Bad it should it should. Let me tell you how bad it is. And this is largely driven by teachers union and school districts and because most members of school boards actually are former teachers. Now, let me tell you not all teachers are bad. In many of our cases. The teachers who are heroes are the ones who actually report. And you know what happens. Often when they do report, they get run over because they're you know, they're a rat or something. Teachers un Engiines nationally oppose mandatory reporting. Imagine someone who represents people who teach children, and you oppose mandatory reporting of someone you suspect as a child molester. You know, people are exercised, and rightfully so about Epstein. But Epstein had two or three hundred victims. We're talking about thousands and thousands of children victimize it in this country. 00:59:01 Speaker 4: This is morally repulsive to me to hear I did not know that, John, that the teachers Union's nationally oppose mandatory reporting of crimes that. 00:59:13 Speaker 2: They see take place. Are you freaking white? 00:59:16 Speaker 11: The American Federation of Teachers. Absolutely, they've put stuff out on it, policies out on it. And we're talking about third graders, little boys and little girls who are in schools and they know. Let me tell you a shocking statistic. So most parents, I think, assume if they send their kids to a public school and the school suspects and credibly suspects that the teacher, their child's teacher, is a molester, and they remove them from the classroom. They tell the parents, not the law. Not the law in any state. In fact, LAUSD has a policy that says, well, the local administrator or the local superintendent, excuse me, tell the parents not shell may I have cases in LAUSD, in Miramante, in the Mirramante case, all over the district where teachers were removed from schools because they were suspected of child abuse and parents weren't told. And you know, if children don't spon typically spontaneously report. If that teacher is in a classroom with children and molest one, he probably or she probably molest twenty. And so you have people, you have little boys and little girls that are going through their whole lives that were molested that typically don't report till their thirties and forties and living with this. And let me tell you, when this happens to a child, it is emotional murder. It is the worst, most evil thing, and I mean evil in the satanic equal sense of the word. 01:00:53 Speaker 2: You know, we were talking earlier. 01:00:54 Speaker 4: Now one about Hassan Piker talking about social murder. You want to talk about social murder? How about Randy Weingarten needs to be brought before Congress and explain herself for opposing something so fricking common sense as mandatory reporting of the molestation of a child. 01:01:10 Speaker 6: As we mentioned another thing, since we're looping in Piker, he also believes private schooling. 01:01:15 Speaker 5: Should be illegal. So we're kind of creating this world. 01:01:17 Speaker 6: They want it to be required to go to public schools, and then these public school teachers aren't mandatory reporters don't have to be fired for extreme misconduct in cases like this. And then, just to paint another part of this, this school district they just negotiated a new contract with the city of Los Angeles because they were going to go on strike otherwise. Where their base salary when you start fresh out of school seventy thousand, and you can get one hundred and sixty thousand dollars a year as a teacher in laus. 01:01:48 Speaker 2: T for failing to report molesters in your class for nine months a year of work where you don't have to report molesters. This is obscene. 01:01:56 Speaker 4: I genuinely don't think that the average person understands that teacher that the public school teacher unions and Randy Weingarten is opposing mandatory you know, reporting of an incident of a criminal, disgusting, evil, vile incident on young kids. 01:02:15 Speaker 11: Well, they actually have reports on their website. You can go on it if you search opposing mandatory Reporting Teachers Union on Google little bit. 01:02:22 Speaker 2: What's their rationale, John. 01:02:25 Speaker 11: Well, what they what they say is oh, we're going to separate families. They don't focus on the sexual abuse at all. 01:02:31 Speaker 2: What do you mean they're going to separate families. 01:02:34 Speaker 11: When you mandatory reporting doesn't just include sexual abuse, it includes child abuse and this sort of thing. And they and they basically say, look, we need we need to support parents, not report parents. But what they don't address at all is the sexual abuse component. And here's my theory. Imagine if the Catholic bishops in two thousand and two, at the height of the pre scandal, took the position they opposed me inventory reporting. Imagine the reaction that that would have incurred. Imagine ten percent of picking airlines flight attendants or molesting children. Imagine the outrage that would occur. And here we have ten percent of school of our America's children, America's children in public schools. And by the way, it's not like you know, church, you have to go to public school. You have to go to school, or your parents go to jail. So we're making people go to this place that's not safe. You know, we've hardened schools and put fences around because of a fear of school shootings. I think we've had less than three hundred kids tragically killed in school shootings if those statistics are correct, and these are not my statistics, this is Barack Obama's administration statistics and George W. Bush administration statistics. We have a holocaust of children in public schools, and the teachers that are trying to stop it are punished. 01:04:01 Speaker 2: It's obscene. 01:04:02 Speaker 4: And you know, they're conflating two different issues here with this policy. But Randy Warrengarden is an absolute crazy, lunatic leftist. And I'm not kidding John hearing this, I want I want her dragged before Congress to explain herself on this blake. This whole mandatory reporting thing is true, we have like images of it. When mandatory reporting does more harm than good tools for a new approach. 01:04:27 Speaker 5: More harm than good. 01:04:28 Speaker 4: Yeah, did your student have bruises all over his arm and is lashing out? Well, here's a new approach. You know, it's true. This is a real thing we've built. 01:04:38 Speaker 6: I think a lot of people are not aware of just how much power these unionized teachers have. And keep in mind, when you have a union in the private sector, there's certain limits on what they can demand because if the company goes under, everyone loses. But when you have the union at the Los Angeles Unified School District, they're negoti with people who are members of their own party, who actually have a political interest in placating them, and they can just soak taxpayers for it. It's a completely messed up arrangement and they can just demand more and more and more, and the end result is your children are basically left as pray for predators. 01:05:20 Speaker 2: And they's subject to the state basically. I mean. 01:05:24 Speaker 4: Anyways, John Manley, you were you were about ready to hold forth, so please I continue on with what you were saying. 01:05:31 Speaker 11: Well, I wanted to give you an example in California what we're dealing with. So what the I think what what I'll call the educator, the public educational establishment is afraid of is that if Americans understand the magnitude and the scope of the molestations, that there's going to be a political volcanic reaction. And so we have Assemblyman Robert Reeves, who the speaker of the California Assembly, a guy named Senator Ben Allen who represents the Santa Monica Malibu area, an Assemblyman Ward who represents San Diego an assemblymen, I'm sorry, Senator John Wiener who represents San Francisco who's currently running for Nancy Pelosi seat. Collectively, these individuals are trying to get a bill passed that would effectively eliminate the ability of parents to sue school districts when they knowingly allow a molest in a classroom. Instead, what they wanted to do is put together what they called a nine to eleven style victims fund. Now, if you have to put a victim's fund together, you have a massive problem. Unfortunately, we and actually it was a coalition of Republicans and a few Democrats, heroic Democrats who stood up and said, we're not doing this. This is wrong. We're not going to allow you to do this to children. And that's their solution of the problem. Their solution of the problem is effectively make it go away, because every time we file a lawsuit in one of these cases, the perpetrator gets removed from the classroom, and most of the time they get charged because of the failure to report. That the widespread failure to report. The only two people I've been doing this since nineteen ninety seven I've ever seen charged in any abuse case, and I've probably done thousands are those two people at LAUSD. That's it. The statutes two years for failure to report, and it's a misdemeanor. No one goes to jail. In the priest cases. What really happened is the bishops took notice of the liability. But what really stopped it is when you know people who were in high positions and dioceses knowingly covered this up. They went to prison. It stopped and the church had died. Opted in two thousand and two, UH this rule that said, hey, if we have a credibly accused priest, we're going to disclose it. There are very few, very few current priest abuse cases because of those policies, and frankly because of the courage of survivors that came forward. The public schools have nothing like that. There is no central list anywhere in any state of teachers who are abused. You can't figure it out. You can't go to the calendar like the bar e's at the bar and say who you know, was this lawyer just barred? You can't do that on these sites. It's completely pased. 01:08:35 Speaker 5: I just well, I'm getting so angry. 01:08:37 Speaker 6: Is they're sending us more stuff, the outrageous justifications they do. This is more from the American Federation of Teachers Winegarten's outfit. Mandatory reporting disproportionately harms black and Indigenous children, who are more likely to be involved in the child welfare system. This is sometimes due to implicit bias in mandatory reporters. 01:08:54 Speaker 2: This is crap, by the way. 01:08:56 Speaker 4: You know that's crap because everybody in the La U s Unified School District is like minority. 01:09:02 Speaker 2: There's only what ten percent white kids. So stop stop with this crap. 01:09:06 Speaker 11: All of our clients are Ladino and. 01:09:08 Speaker 4: Yeah, exactly, so stop with this crap. It's not You're not like it's us versus the world anymore. 01:09:12 Speaker 2: You are LA. 01:09:13 Speaker 4: Now you are LA Unified School District. I'm gonna play this this ted talk that your referenced before was a shake shake shaft, cheryl, shake shaft, shake shaft? 01:09:23 Speaker 2: Yeah? Uh eight. 01:09:25 Speaker 12: Does this happen a lot? Yes, at any one time, ten percent of elementary, middle and high school students are the target of school employee sexual misconduct. That's five point seven million students at any one time. And as to the second question, why does school employees sexually abuse and exploit students? I now know the answer to that too, because they can. 01:10:02 Speaker 2: So let me. 01:10:04 Speaker 11: Yeah. Well, here's the really bad news. So that woman published a book. Actually she didn't publish it. Harvard University Press published it, so not exactly a bastion of right wing thought in tooth. In December of twenty four they publish her book. She now comes to the conclusion, and I think rightfully so the numbers actually seventeen percent of children are subject to some sort of sexual misconduct by school personnel in public schools. This needs to stop. It shouldn't be a part of an issue. We need national hearings, Senate or House hearings on this issue. There is, to my knowledge, there has never been a public hearing anywhere on this topic. And you know, I beg any right ticking person on a left wing, right wing democratic, socialist, conservative Republican. Please step up for our kids, because this is real, John. We deal with it every. 01:11:04 Speaker 2: Day, John, great stuff, really important. 01:11:08 Speaker 11: Thank you. 01:11:08 Speaker 4: We need to get some action items for folks, so we're going to revisit this, but thank you so much. 01:11:13 Speaker 11: Thanks guys. 01:11:18 Speaker 2: For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to Charliekirk dot com