Tyler Robinson's Trial Date + AMA 283

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 going to end up miserable. But if the most important thing is doing good, you will 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 a Turning Point USA college chapter. Go start a Turning Point USA high school chapter. Go find out how your church can get involved. Sign up and become an activist. I gave my life to the Lord in fifth grade. Most important decision I ever made in my life, and I encourage you to do the same. Here I am. 00:00:46 Speaker 2: Lord, use me. 00:00:48 Speaker 3: Buckle up, everybody. 00:00:49 Speaker 4: Here we go. 00:00:56 Speaker 1: 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 at noblegoldinvestments.com. That is noblegoldinvestments.com. 00:01:17 Speaker 2: All right. Welcome, everybody. It is Friday, October 23rd, 2026. I'm on assignment still back in the studio on Monday, but Blake's holding it down on the YREFI studios in Phoenix, Arizona. How are we doing, Blake? 00:01:29 Speaker 3: We're doing lovely. 00:01:30 Speaker 2: We have another drop, Blake, out of Maricopa County. And I love to keep you guys updated on this because I want to continue proving to you, in this audience, the power of a ground game. The power of a ground game is something that can defy the polls, and that is critically important. So I just want to start with this very quickly. Another 53,260 votes. Ballots have been dropped in Maricopa County. This time for a fourth day in a row, Republicans take the county. And as you know, as goes Maricopa, so goes the state. We took it by 4.8 points. 4.8 points. So Republicans brought in 40.1% of the ballots. Democrats, 35.3. Other, which would be Indies, 24.6. So Republicans just took a margin of 4.8 in Maricopa. We did not win a single drop until the Friday before the election. So that is a great, great update out of Maricopa. Blake and I and the team, we've been out knocking doors around. Blake, why don't you chime in? Because I got to explain this a little bit about my experience door knocking. Explain what it was like for you. 00:02:41 Speaker 5: It's just we had that meetup at the Super Chase event, which kind of just motivated everyone. But then it's literally as simple as, You opened up the Turning Point app and you can ask it to find people near a specific location or just specifically. 00:02:55 Speaker 3: Where you are. And then you actually you go and knock on those doors. 00:02:59 Speaker 5: And a lot of it is if you're just doing that level of door knocking, a lot is just friendly reminders to people. Hey, ballots are out. We know you're someone who's likely friendly to us. We just like to encourage you to get in your early vote. And if you do, you won't have any annoying people showing up at your door ever again, which is good motivation for some of them for sure. 00:03:17 Speaker 2: That was my pitch. 00:03:18 Speaker 3: They're generally very friendly people. 00:03:21 Speaker 5: We had one person we approached, and she just said, like, oh, yeah, I'm going to vote for every Republican. 00:03:26 Speaker 3: Thanks. 00:03:27 Speaker 5: And several cases like that. But it's really just that basic. You just need to... We're so in the thick of it, we can easily forget that for a lot of people, God bless them, really, politics is not their big, everyday obsession. They have Church stuff and family stuff and job stuff and like they're just focused on on the real world and but they're still aligned with us. And if you give them that nudge, you get them over the hump and we just need to get more nudges to our people because a sad disadvantage we've historically had is simply that. The left has more fanatics who are just diehards about destroying this country often than we have fanatics who are diehard about saving it because our people generally have more going on. If you have nothing else great going on in your life, you can get really. 00:04:15 Speaker 3: Obsessed with politics. 00:04:17 Speaker 5: And we just need to have the machinery to counter that. And that's what we spent so long building up in Arizona. And we're hoping it will deliver returns for us in two weeks. 00:04:26 Speaker 2: Absolutely. And I had the same experience as Blake, that when you go up to the doors, people are really lovely. Every single one of the people that we talk to, sometimes you knock on a door and they're not home or whatever. Sometimes it's a little uncomfortable because you got to go through a gate to get to a door and you're like, hey, you know, you stand back, you be respectful. You don't want them to feel like you're threatening them or something. You just say, hey, I'm a volunteer with Turning Point Action. We're just here to remind you to get your ballot in. And I would say Nine out of ten times, if you just extrapolate that out. I think we did almost 50 doors, Ryan and I. But if you extrapolate that out, it was like every single person was, hey, we're voting R up and down the ballot. R up and down the ballot. Okay, we've got to get your ballot in. Do you have a plan to get your ballot in? Can we help you get your ballot in? You know, it was very simple. Do you have your ballot? And by the way, the app is great. It tells you who has a mailed-in ballot that should have been in their possession. And so you can tell them, hey, do you have your ballot? Yeah, it's up on the kitchen counter, right? So it's a really great experience. It's not freaky at all. It's not scary. It's not intimidating. The people are lovely. And what else is very fun, Blake, is you go to these doors, and Ryan and I kept looking at it. It was like they all had Halloween decorations. They seemed like they were community involved, engaged. And then you would pass by the houses that aren't on your list, and you're like, oh, I'm starting to basically be able to predict which house is a Republican because they're just happier and lovelier, and they're just part of the community, and they're invested. So I thought it was like a really good experience in that way as well. So anyways, four days in a row, R-plus drops, early voting in Maricopa, massive, massive sign. We need to just expand this out across the entire country. We really do. We need to get to the next story here, though, Blake. And that is, of course, the story around today's hearing in the Tyler Robinson case. 00:06:11 Speaker 3: Exactly. 00:06:13 Speaker 2: Why don't you give us a primer on where we stand and then I'm going to give my take on how I'm interpreting it. 00:06:19 Speaker 3: Ideally, we would be actually just broadcasting this hearing. That was our plan. 00:06:23 Speaker 5: We planned to broadcast every hearing we're able to. That's why we did the preliminary hearing in July. That's why we did the conclusion to it in September. But very annoyingly, today's hearing, which seems far less dramatic in terms of evidence than other ones, there is not a live stream of it. Judge Graff has been Strangely difficult on this one for some reason. Andrea Burkhart has seemed a little baffled by it herself. That's our attorney who's been closely following this. But right now they are holding a hearing to discuss when will the trial of Tyler Robinson be held. 00:06:59 Speaker 2: Well, the hearing is at 1 p.m. Mountain Time. 00:07:03 Speaker 6: Oh, all right. 00:07:03 Speaker 7: All right. 00:07:03 Speaker 2: 1 p.m. 00:07:04 Speaker 3: Mountain Time. 00:07:04 Speaker 5: So actually starting in a couple hours then. So hopefully not going to take that long. Each side has filed a brief about it, and the state is arguing we could actually be ready within a year, they say, but we think the trial itself will last quite some time, basically almost like three months, basically, or three or four months. And so they say we should start in January 2028 so we're not disrupted by Thanksgiving and by Christmas. 00:07:33 Speaker 3: So they ask for late January 2028. 00:07:36 Speaker 5: And then the opposition, the defense, they're arguing, we're going to be filing objections to every potential expert witness, every potential juror. They basically lay out, they're going to file an insane number of appeals against everything. 00:07:49 Speaker 3: And so they argue, we should have the trial in the third quarter of 2029. 00:07:53 Speaker 5: And honestly, I don't know who's going to pull out ahead, but we are emphatic. Erica, her family, they've filed a request. Don't let this happen. Victims have a right to A speedy trial. It is actually harmful to the body politic that Charlie could be murdered and we have to wait four years for the case to go to trial. 00:08:15 Speaker 3: It's obscene. 00:08:16 Speaker 2: Yeah, so I think this is absurd on its face. And it seems like the defensive strategy is delay, delay, delay. And if you think about it, if they were confident in their case that they believe that Tyler Robinson is in some way innocent, why would you want him to sit in rotten prison for four years? 00:08:33 Speaker 8: Okay? 00:08:33 Speaker 2: Okay. why wouldn't you want to get justice served for your innocent client to get them released and be able to live their life again, right? If you thought that he was really innocent. Now consider this, Charlie's kids were three and one when he was murdered. If you follow the defense's timeline here, they will be seven years old and five years old by the time the verdict is handed down, according to that timeline. So that's pretty wild. So this, this, Obviously feels like an eternity for us. And, you know, the defense is saying that, or the state is saying that they can be ready by October of 2027. That is the request. That is emphatic that, hey, just start when you can start. Why delay anything? Because justice delayed is justice denied. Here's another fact that I want everybody to understand. Utah taxpayers have already spent $ 1. 6 million on this case. $ 1. 6 million. And that figure is going to balloon today. to $ 10 million by the time this is done, maybe more if you go by the defense's timeline. So $ 1. 6 million already spent, which is significant, which is substantial in a case like this. And it will balloon to as much as $ 10, maybe even more, million dollars that Utah taxpayers have to spend defending somebody the state is alleging is an assassin. So all of this process feels like this slow motion horror story. It's a never ending horror story. And you obviously want a fair trial. Our process and our system demands a fair trial. We want that. We think that's important for this verdict to hold credibility in the eyes of the public. And we want that. But this process should also be fair to the Charlie's parents. And so we are emphatic. I think that's the right word, Blake. Push this forward. Start this as soon as possible because delaying is a form of torture and cruelty that is just unnecessary here. October 15th. Write it down. Set an alarm because the second that date passes, there's no extension, no grace period, no second chance. Liens, wage garnishments, bank account seizures. That's the IRS taking what you've earned. If you filed an extension and haven't submitted your return yet, stop what you're doing and call America Tax Group, the nation's leading tax firm right now. Do so at 888-381-3816. Mention the code Kirk26 when you call for $ 250 off. Miss this deadline and failure to file penalties are assessed immediately with interest, compounding daily, growing your debt every single hour. Every hour past October 15th hands the IRS more power over your life. So if you owe back taxes or haven't filed, understand this. It's not a matter of if the IRS will act, it's when. And that clock is ticking. Dealing with the IRS without professional help is extremely risky, so don't do it. Not with days left on the clock. So protect your financial security with guidance from America Tax Group. Call the firm I trust right now before October 15th, 888-381-3816. Mention the code Kirk26 when you call for $ 250 off. You know, this is the heat of the election season, obviously, and we have so much going on in so many different states. It's almost, I think it's hard for most people to keep up with, but we got to keep our eye on the prize when it comes to voting integrity. There's a news story out of Arizona. So some independent journalists, muckrakers, they basically went and they asked a number of, I guess they were canvassers for different groups, about, you know, could they register to vote? So they posed as non-citizens, Canadians, these types of things, And one time after the next, with all these different canvassers, all Katie Hobbs aligned, all Democrat aligned, they all encouraged these people posing as voters to register to vote anyways. So let's go ahead and play a clip. You'll get a feel for it. It is shocking, shocking news how much fraud, how much cheating is going on here. Sat 6. 00:12:52 Speaker 7: I said I had Canadian friends that wanted to register to vote, and you said take this and tell them to do it online. 00:12:56 Speaker 5: Would I be able to bring down my Canadian friends here and they could register as well? 00:13:00 Speaker 8: Take this and tell them to do it online. 00:13:01 Speaker 3: It seemed like you were ready to register me as an alleged non-citizen. How often do you register non-citizens to vote, if at all? 00:13:07 Speaker 9: Are you a USA citizen? 00:13:09 Speaker 5: Not yet. 00:13:10 Speaker 8: Just put yes. 00:13:11 Speaker 3: Who's going to know? 00:13:12 Speaker 9: Okay, if you want to. 00:13:14 Speaker 7: Why were you ready to submit my form even though I told you that I was a felon on probation? 00:13:18 Speaker 6: I'm on probation for the felon. 00:13:20 Speaker 9: Oh, you're serving it. 00:13:21 Speaker 1: Thank you. 00:13:21 Speaker 5: We've got multiple organizations that are working to re-elect Katie Hobbs that are willing to register non-citizens and felons. 00:13:28 Speaker 2: Katie, do you have any comments? It's one of those things where we know it's going on, but then to see somebody go and expose it like this is very, very troubling. So one of the groups that they spoke with was Stand Indivisible Arizona. So obviously this group has endorsed Governor Hobbs. Indivisible is the same group that does the No Kings protest. 00:13:51 Speaker 6: So. 00:13:52 Speaker 2: their journalist posed as a Canadian citizen, asked to register to vote. The canvasser not only agreed to help the alleged non-citizen register, but when asked whether other Canadians could register too, she said, tell them to do it online. Exhibit A. Another one, worker power that are also working to reelect Governor Hobbs. The journalist told the canvasser they were not a US citizen. Despite this, At the journalist's request, the canvasser marked yes on the citizenship question of the voter registration form. Okay, Exhibit B. When we count, excuse me, this is the DNC's own registration program. Their journalist posed as a felon on probation and asked to register to vote. The canvassers looked up the law and said that a felon on probation is ineligible. Even so, they encouraged the journalist to register. You should just do it. they said, quote unquote. That's Exhibit C. Exhibit D, the AFL-CIO phone bank mobilization voters for Governor Hobbs, their undercover journalists ask a phone bank trainer whether to ask the people being called if they're citizens. The trainers answer, we don't care. That's four different exhibits, Blake, showing Democrat canvassers specifically flouting voting law. And we have been told over and over and over again that non-citizens are not voting, that illegals are not voting. And yet this blows the lid on that entire farce. 00:15:24 Speaker 5: Well, and it shows how it works in a lot of these cases. We pointed this out with 2020, that whatever you think about centrally planned ballot fraud, what 110% happened is they wanted to make the process as loose as possible. 00:15:39 Speaker 3: Just don't check. Don't ask. Don't try to verify what's going on. Creating a lot of friction. So like that last one, should we ask if they're a citizen? We don't care. 00:15:49 Speaker 5: In other words, yeah, just kind of encourage them to come in. And really they know almost no one's likely going to check. Or if they do check, we can use blue states to gum up the process. Or ideally, the best thing possible, what they want to do, what they're doing in California, is they want to make it as easy as possible for illegals or non-citizens to to vote so that they can have enough of it that they can throw up their hands and say, are you going to prosecute all of these people? That is what they want to do. They want to make it so glaring and so over the top that they can basically say, it's too difficult to undo what we've done. And these are the same people who spent a decade telling us that illegal voting is so rare, it basically rounds to zero. 00:16:33 Speaker 3: And they're just, they're full of crap. 00:16:34 Speaker 2: Yeah, well, so, and this kind of piggybacks on a story out of California. We talked about it, but Bill Assele, who's the first assistant United States attorney, produced a list of 20,000 non-citizens on California's voter rolls. 00:16:47 Speaker 5: 20,000. 00:16:48 Speaker 2: This is supposed to be the tip of the spear, by the way, the tip of the iceberg, if you will. And your response is, it's too late. That's California's response. Because they said they already mailed the ballots, the ballots are out, and so they've already been co-mingled. Then- LA basically says, hey, we're really sorry. This is their quote. The registrar is not equipped or authorized to verify voter citizenship because it does not independently house citizenship-related information beyond the voter attestation. So trust me, bro. Take my word for it, bro. As identified in federal and state law. And certainly is not equipped to do so within the election period. So this is a case where we see in Arizona, Obviously, a state we're very invested in. We see canvassers registering people that are eligible to vote, whether because they're a Canadian, they're a felon that's on probation. Whatever the issue is, they're being encouraged to register. So then they get on the voter rolls. And then you have local municipalities, LA, you have the state of California saying, we can't do anything about this. We're following federal law, which is trust me, bro law, which is why we need the Save America Act, by the way. And then they say it's too late to do anything about it. Let me just put this in perspective for you. That's 20,000 votes. We know it's probably a lot larger, but this is what's been flagged thus far by the federal government. So in 2024, Adam Gray, a Democrat, beat John Duarte, a Republican, by 187 votes. And that's in California's 13th. 187 votes. Derek Tran, also in 2024, a Democrat, beat Michelle Steele by 653 votes. Okay, Amy Barra, a Democrat, beat Scott Jones, a Republican, by 6,955 votes. Josh Harder, a Democrat, beat Jeff Denham, a Republican, by 9,990 votes in 2018. Gil Cisneros, a Democrat, beat Young Kim by 7,600 votes in 2018. And on and on and on it goes. Katie Porter, you know, potato face. beats Mimi Walters, a Republican, by 12,500 votes in 2018. There is a series of elections in California that have been decided by much closer margins than this 20,000 that they're flagging. So this is a massive, massive scandal because we know it's happening way more than Democrats want you to believe. This is the safest election, most secure election ever. 00:19:20 Speaker 6: Bull. 00:19:21 Speaker 8: Bull. 00:19:22 Speaker 2: And we know it's bull. That's why you fight tooth and nail to stop common sense reforms like voter ID. 00:19:27 Speaker 3: 100%. This is all about... And remember, they reap the benefits. 00:19:30 Speaker 5: If they're able to eke out a win because of these few hundred people here and there, they get all the benefits from it. Any harms fall on these people. That's why they love to decentralize it. Because if they're all centrally organizing the fraud, you can go down for it. If you just make it easy for people to illegally sign up and vote, usually no one gets in trouble. 00:19:49 Speaker 3: But if. 00:19:49 Speaker 5: anyone does, it's them. Absolutely heinous behavior. These people should be indicted. 00:19:54 Speaker 2: Just a reminder, every single non-European ethnicity votes Democrat. I want to tell you about a new movie from Angel called Drummer Boy. And even better, I'm going to tell you how you can get two complimentary tickets to see it in theaters. Drummer Boy hits theaters November 6th. And if you enjoyed a movie like The Greatest Showman, you're going to want to put this one on your radar. I'm telling you, it's big, uplifting musical with an emotional story. incredible performances, and original music from King & Country. This is the kind of movie that really deserves a theater experience. I'm telling you, you're going to want to see this in the theater. The music, the energy, the emotion, all of it. And here's the deal. Become a premium member of the Angel Guild today, and you'll get two complimentary tickets to see Drummer Boy. But the value doesn't stop there. Your premium membership also gives you access to Angel's growing library of movies and shows, including Sound of Freedom, The Last Rodeo, Young Washington, Solo Mio, and plenty more. So join the premium Angel Guild by visiting angel.com slash LO, claim your two tickets, and make plans to see Drummer Boy in theaters November 6th. Again, it's a movie you are going to want to experience on the big screen. All right. Without further ado, we have Professor Steele from Hillsdale, an amazing guy. We had this conversation last week, and it was so good that I wanted to have it again because we just barely scratched the surface, Professor, and it is the moral question of our day. And every week, new issues come up. The newest one is coming out of New York, and it looks like the city of New York is trying to control who has access to buy goods. distressed housing which does not feel very capitalist but this is exact i think it's a precursor an important story blake flagged it for me this morning i was told you already read it by the time i got it to you new york wants to control who can buy troubled housing here's how the city council is set to pass a bill the community opportunity to purchase act that gives certain non-profits non-profits a head start on buying distressed buildings why is this so wrong Professor Steele? 00:22:08 Speaker 8: Well, the first thing that it does, that's a really good question. I'm really happy to be here because this is really important stuff. And maybe I'll say before I get going, there are three fundamental points that I hope to make before we're done here on the ethics questions. But the COPA, as it's called, this Community Opportunity Property Act, is fundamentally what it does is it says that owners of buildings cannot sell them, if they decide to sell, for 90 days, only the government or some sort of NGO can purchase them. And that will be at a discount because you won't be able to put it on the free market. It's a kind of confiscation, really. It's a backdoor to confiscating and for the government to get control of private property. There are all kinds of economic questions about why that would be bad or issues. But the moral question is, who owns it? If people's private property isn't theirs, if the government can take it, that's theft. And that's a fundamentally wrong thing. 00:23:20 Speaker 2: Yeah, I agree. Because ultimately, we go back to seizing the means of production. These are these buzz expressions, phrases of the far left. And one of the central tenets of the American way is is that we believe in private property. If you own a property, you have the right to sell it. You have a right to monetize it. You have a right to do with it as you will within certain boundaries, certainly. But this is actually a massive, massive blow to what we've always assumed and taken for granted here in this country, that you have a right to your own property. This is why that squatters story a few years back blew up in such a massive way. People realize, hey, in certain jurisdictions, you don't have control of your own private property. 00:24:04 Speaker 3: Well, but let's dive. 00:24:05 Speaker 2: The local left-wing Democrats have... Go ahead, Blake. 00:24:07 Speaker 5: Well, let's dive even further into it. This is, as you say, it's a step towards confiscation. It's essentially saying, yeah, if you have to have a narrow pool of potential buyers who have this right of first refusal, it's obviously not... Oh, non-profits have a right to buy it? Who are those going to be aligned with? And then, what could the city do? A lot of these are distressed properties because they're under strict rent control. The city could do things like exempt the NGOs and exempt these non-profits from the same rent control rules... It's totally a way to build a politically allied constituency that then owns housing. And you're the expert here, Professor Steele. Will this actually lower prices of housing in New York or get better housing? And if not, what's a better way for them to do it? 00:24:49 Speaker 8: No, it will not lower prices. It might lower the price that is charged to the person who's lucky enough to get one of these things. Or maybe it'll end up being unfortunate enough to be put into one. 00:25:01 Speaker 3: The buyer, yeah. 00:25:02 Speaker 8: But the, so first, consider that it isn't just any old NGO. This will be a select pool and it will be people who are allied with the, ultimately the DSA, but with the left. And it puts things into the hands of those people. Now, this is, there's a kind of, I don't want to say cleverness, there's a kind of strategy that they have involved here And that's that they can't lower prices. What they can do is shift those prices to someone else, shift those costs to someone else, because it will be covered by taxes if they can't pay for the upkeep. The upkeep also, they won't have a very good incentive, because they won't profit from it, to make these things truly livable. Community housing, government housing in New York, and I saw some of it when I lived there, is not good. The projects are not good places because they are maintained by the government not for profit. There's no cost control because there's no incentive to hold costs down. And at the same time, no incentive to provide quality because it is, you know, you've got basically a captive customer. But those are, again, those are kind of economic questions. The moral question is also fundamental. And maybe the first point I want to make is that capitalism, is a moral system. It's got some fundamental moral principles built into it. It is built upon moral principles. And the first one is the inalienable right of the individual. Those rights are God-given for a non-believer. They're just a part of our nature. But they are a part of our nature. They are given to us, and they are superior to government. Any power that government gets is derived from us. Any just power that government has is derived from us giving it permissions. Capitalism is built on that fundamental recognition, and from private, or from these unalienable rights, we then get the right to private property, the things that people have justly acquired through building it, creating it, having been given it voluntarily, and through free trade. Free trade is a fundamental moral principle, because if we are constrained by each other's rights, All trade is voluntary. That means that the parties to a trade both benefit. That's a moral principle. It creates wealth or well-being for both parties to a trade. And if it doesn't, the trade doesn't occur. They have the right to back out of it, to not accept the trade. Fundamental principles. Deep down, that's what capitalism is. And it's a moral system. Owning property is a fundamental moral principle. Shall we contrast that with socialism? One more thing I'll point out about that, about capitalism first, is that that's also a very positive way of looking at the world. It's one that is, it's not zero sum, it's that there is mutual gain and that we can all benefit living together and cooperating. Socialism, should we talk about that a bit? 00:28:28 Speaker 10: Yes. 00:28:29 Speaker 2: Contrast it, please. 00:28:31 Speaker 8: Contrast it. The socialist system actually violates all of that. Socialism, well, they often will say, well, this is a moral system that provides for dignity for people and things. There's no dignity if your rights aren't respected. It may be the first thing to say. But the socialist system fundamentally is antagonistic. It pits people against people. It treats them unequally And we hear a socialist say things like, well, there should be no billionaires, as if the wealth earned by one person hurt others. It's not true. It was mutually beneficial trade that creates the great wealth in capitalism. But that lifts all boats. The socialist remedy is to pit people against each other and to take. It teaches envy. It teaches people to feel as if they are victims and that they are helpless and that they need government, they need the state to intervene and take care of them. That's a fundamentally bad principle. And the principle of taking people's problems that's theft. That's the fundamental basis of socialism. 00:29:45 Speaker 5: So, Professor, accepting all that is true, but so we're seeing some headlines, you know, touting there's been a lot of wins for America. So, for example, there's a piece in the Wall Street Journal yesterday saying, American exceptionalism is no myth, and it points out a fact that's gotten viral lately that even in the poorest U.S. states like Mississippi are now significantly higher income and wealthier than places we thought are kind of our equals like Britain, Germany, France. 00:30:07 Speaker 3: We're just richer than everybody now, way richer. 00:30:10 Speaker 5: So that's clearly related to capitalism, but then why in America does it seem like so many young people are unhappy, people constantly are saying they feel stuck, that they're not getting ahead? We hear how rich America is. It seems like people are all claiming they don't feel very rich. What's going on there, you think? Because it seems like it's a threat to our capitalist system that people feel this way. 00:30:34 Speaker 8: Yes, it is. And I think, first of all, it is something more fundamental than economics. 00:30:38 Speaker 3: It's mindset. 00:30:39 Speaker 8: The ideas that people have, they're taught to feel victim. This is what colleges, most colleges, not Hillsdale, teach, is that you're a victim. I've had students who have transferred from other schools, and they told me at my big state school that I attended, I think that 50% of the people were actually mentally unstable, and they all felt like victims. They're taught to feel victimhood, and they're taught that someone else is responsible. Capitalism teaches self-responsibility. Socialism teaches dependency. Socialist leaders need dependence. And I think that's the fundamental point. 00:31:21 Speaker 2: This is amazing stuff. I mean, really, I love the way you boiled it down, Professor, that the morality inherent in a capitalist system is lacking. And actually, it's inverted. Socialism at one level is theft. It is stealing from people. And you see this story in New York, which is why I think it's so important that we highlight it. This is not making headline news around the country right now, but it is massive, massive, massive, because it is a precursor of what is to come from the DSA crowd. They're dipping their toe in the water, and it's just terrifying to watch it play out. 00:31:59 Speaker 5: This is going to be the first election that I'm going to have the opportunity to cast my vote in. 00:32:04 Speaker 3: These midterm elections, what do you think is going to be the most relevant piece? to the younger generation of voters. 00:32:09 Speaker 4: Across the age spectrum, people are finding that what we were taught. 00:32:13 Speaker 7: Was the American dream is just completely a lie. 00:32:17 Speaker 4: It doesn't exist anymore. 00:32:19 Speaker 2: What Grace said over there, you know, she said the American dream's gone. And I think young people need to understand that this is still America. This is still the land of opportunity, the home of the brave. 00:32:29 Speaker 10: I mean. 00:32:30 Speaker 2: We have such a blessing. You should kiss the ground that you walk on that you get to live in this country and never forget that. Yeah, there's problems. Yeah, there's issues. This is still America. So I don't believe in downsizing the American dream at all. 00:32:43 Speaker 3: You have to understand that the love that Andrew talks about how you should have for this country, and I agree with him, even. 00:32:50 Speaker 1: With all of our problems. There are people who don't think like that. 00:32:54 Speaker 3: Weed them out, get rid of them. 00:32:56 Speaker 1: That's what you do. 00:32:59 Speaker 2: A little throwback to our News Nation experience with Stephen A. I was glad he agreed with me there, Dr. 00:33:07 Speaker 6: Steele. 00:33:07 Speaker 2: I thought that was actually a good moment to have Stephen A. agree with me against the DSA. That Grace gal that said the American dream is dead, that's a DSA socialist. She's the co-chair of the New York City DSA. So that's what they believe. That's why they're going to seize these distressed properties and give them to these NGOs that they bless. 00:33:28 Speaker 8: If someone really believes that the American dream is not possible, they ought to go spend, we ought to finance them to go spend some time in the third world. I've been to countries in West Africa. It was in the poorest, I think it was ranked at the time the fourth poorest country in the world. You have no idea if you think that this is, that the American dream is dead and that there are no opportunities here. You have no idea what you're talking about. you're surrounded by some of the greatest wealth and the greatest opportunities that have ever existed for any human being, and you are turning your back on them. That's a totally wrong thing. The socialists do this. They preach this because that's how they'll get their power. That's their goal. They want to rip down the system, and they're fundamental about that. Maybe there's one more point that I was hoping to make, but go ahead. 00:34:25 Speaker 3: Go ahead. I was just like, you're saying like, you know, pay to send them to third world countries. 00:34:29 Speaker 2: Yeah. 00:34:29 Speaker 5: Like third world countries, like the UK or Germany. We really got a lot of enjoyment this week. That Wired article, people moving out of America because they're mad about Trump or whatever. And then they're just hitting a wall and they're saying, even again, we would have thought of as peer countries. They go to Germany and it's endless bureaucracy to do anything. You need infinity permits. And this permeates throughout the culture. I love this line about Britain from one of the people in this piece saying, She says, I thought British politeness existed like in movies, but the reality is that present day British culture is very individualistic, but without the sense of charity and helpfulness that many parts of American culture value. I pay a huge amount of taxes and an immigration surcharge just to access the NHS. It's not even free and just goes on about everything. Like there's extortionate prices to draw by train. She thought it'd just be free train travel everywhere. 00:35:22 Speaker 3: Like, They go. 00:35:24 Speaker 5: Abroad and this socialist attitude kind of, it does permeate things. And one of those real things is in America, as people always notice, we're actually really helpful and nice to people. And I think part of that is our system rewards being helpful and kind to people. Whereas in these socialist systems, they much more reward kind of being a jerk to everyone else. 00:35:45 Speaker 3: They encourage that sort of mentality. 00:35:47 Speaker 7: Blake. 00:35:48 Speaker 2: Blake, you bring up the UK, but then there's all these stories out of France. We're expecting more riots in France tomorrow. They're gearing up for that. Yes, it's a lot of Muslims. It's a lot of children of migrants. But it's being spearheaded by socialists and communists. So they are actually spearheading and getting their foot soldiers out into the streets. This is a country with free health care. This is a country with massive, massive government subsidies and handouts to everybody up and down the income spectrum. And they're still rioting. They are burning down their country. So I thought that socialism was supposed to make all this go away. I thought it was supposed to make the anger go away within the population. But it seems to have the opposite effect. 00:36:31 Speaker 5: Dr. 00:36:31 Speaker 2: Steele. 00:36:32 Speaker 8: It very definitely has the opposite effect because it makes people poorer. It does not lift boats. It basically sinks boats. People are not better off under socialism. And again, socialism teaches envy. That's one of the fundamental things that it does, and that's a bad way to go through life, thinking that you'll be better off by tearing each other down. The real thing that we ought to be working on, of course, is providing opportunities so that people can be self-sufficient, make themselves better off, and that's where true dignity comes from. I do want to make a point about morality, if I can just do that. One of the points that socialists will make is that, well, you're just in it for yourself. It's individualistic. Capitalism is bad. We're actually, each one of us is given by our creator. We're put in charge of ourselves. We are given self-responsibility and self-interest is the thing that we are given so that we'll have the incentive to take care of ourselves. That's not a negative thing because we also take care of each other. We're social beings. This is economics. This is Adam Smith, but it's also biblical. The Bible in the Torah, the Old Testament, Leviticus, talks about the principle of justice and says do not treat rich people or poor people favorably because of their status. Treat everyone equally. Another point that is made in the Bible is love your neighbor as yourself. That is, you have self-love and love for your neighbor. Those are moral principles, but those are embodied in capitalism. They are not embodied in socialism, which inspires class struggle, class warfare, and tearing. 00:38:22 Speaker 6: Down each other. 00:38:23 Speaker 2: So, Professor Steele, you're making way too much sense for your average commie or socialist. But this is the battle lines in our country, and I want everybody to have access to this. What I'm about to tell you, I want you to take it. I want you to send it to your friends. I want you to send it to your family members. I want your kids to take this course. It's Understanding Capitalism. This is Dr. Steele's course at Hillsdale. So go to charlieforhillsdale.com. Check this out, Understanding Capitalism. It's seven lessons, so seven lectures total. They're about 25 minutes long. You can do it piece by piece. But capitalism rewardings man profit or punishes his loss depending on the merit of his actions. It expresses the freedom and rationality of human nature in an economic system. 00:39:09 Speaker 3: I think, Dr. 00:39:10 Speaker 2: Steele, what you have done here in this course, what you're expressing on this show, this is the front line. The number one thing Blake and I encounter when we talk to students, well-intentioned students on college campuses, our students at Turning Point, is they do not understand the fundamentals of the economy, how it works, how it rewards you, how it punishes you. We have to explain capitalism all over again. Final 15 seconds to you, Dr. Steele, to maybe encourage people to take the course. 00:39:40 Speaker 8: Yes, take the course. And I'm going to say one more thing, and that is that I'm not speaking to the hardcore Marxist. I'm speaking to all the people who want answers and think maybe that's the answer. And there are a lot of them. They should look at capitalism. 00:39:55 Speaker 10: Amen. 00:39:56 Speaker 2: This course will help so many, so many people. So please spread it around. Get your kids and family members to take it. An important message from Noble Gold Investments. November 3rd, control of Congress is on the line. And whatever happens, your savings are going to feel it. If Democrats take power, we could be looking at years of gridlock, followed by the same policies that fueled inflation before. More spending, bigger deficits, and a weaker dollar. We lived through this already. In June 2022, inflation was out of control and unchecked. Now, the national debt is over $ 40 trillion, and Washington isn't slowing down. What has gold done since 2022? 00:40:33 Speaker 8: Doubled. 00:40:33 Speaker 2: Up over 100%. That's right. You can't control what happens on election day. You can control how prepared you are. That's why so many Americans are turning to physical gold and silver. Visit noblegoldinvestments.com slash kirk. That's noblegoldinvestments.com slash kirk. And download your free wealth protection kit. Noblegoldinvestments.com slash kirk. Is your wealth protected? If not, now is the time to act. Past performance does not guarantee future results. It is our Ask Us Anything hour, and I thought we'd mix it up this week. It's where you get to send questions in. If you're a member at members.charliekirk.com, if you join us there and become a paying member, you are our nearest and dearest family, and you get to be a part of our Friday show, hour two. The questions are all yours. But we're bringing in Sean Davis, who is the founder and CEO of The Federalist, a great American institution. Sean, good to see you, my friend. 00:41:35 Speaker 4: Good to be seen. Thank you for having me. 00:41:36 Speaker 2: Well, listen, we've got a lot of news going on and we have a lot of questions in the queue here. So we're going to get started right away. But it's just so much fun to have somebody that is not used to doing the AMAs do it with us. So why don't we get started here? I think our first caller is Abby. Abby, are you there? Please unmute yourself. 00:41:57 Speaker 3: Good morning. 00:41:58 Speaker 9: How are you guys? 00:42:00 Speaker 3: We're doing excellent. 00:42:00 Speaker 2: Great, Abby. Great to have you. 00:42:03 Speaker 9: So I actually have a theological question for you this time. I remember Charlie talking about the Bible verse Psalm 9710, which says, Let those who love the Lord hate evil. And if we as Christ followers are commanded to hate evil, then what is the evil we're supposed to hate? And how are we supposed to hate this evil without it turning into hatred? I remember seeing a clip of Charlie on the show of him talking about this. I haven't been able to find it. but he mentioned narco terrorists and human traffickers as evil. 00:42:37 Speaker 2: Um, we, okay. So yeah, this is a great theological question. Good thing. Sean's a Christian too, by the way. Um, I pulled up the Bible verse Proverbs six, 16 through 19. There are six things the Lord hates seven that are detestable to him. Haughty eyes, a lying tongue. So it doesn't like liars. It doesn't like the proud hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet, that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies, and a person who stirs up conflict in the community. That's what initially comes to my mind when you talk about hating evil, but there's other examples. Actually, I was thinking about this this week because of this Call Her Daddy clip that went viral where they're basically encouraging women that it's never too late to get a divorce and you can find somebody. 00:43:27 Speaker 3: Better for you. You can always do better. You can always do better. 00:43:29 Speaker 2: You can always do better. 00:43:30 Speaker 6: Yeah. 00:43:31 Speaker 8: Yeah. 00:43:31 Speaker 2: Well, the Lord says in Malachi, for I hate divorce. So, you know, there's that too. I don't know, Blake, if you, Blake or Sean, you got things you want to add to this? 00:43:41 Speaker 5: Well, I think, yeah, we are called to love our enemies, in fact, and to forgive those who persecute you. But that is, it's the classic thing that you do have to divorce the individual person with a soul who we hope may be saved through God's mercy. 00:43:56 Speaker 6: And. 00:43:57 Speaker 5: the evil that flows forth from them and from all of us, that we have to hate evil, because if you do not hate evil, that is, iniquity, lies, violence, wrath, any number of those things that God abhors, if you don't despise those things, you are ultimately not trying your hardest to love God, to love what is good. 00:44:18 Speaker 3: And in fact, when you properly hate evil. 00:44:22 Speaker 5: that is probably the best way to avoid falling into hatred. Because hatred, wrath itself, is actually a quite evil thing. And it is when you are properly pursuing love of God. It's like what we saw with that Call Her Daddy thing. When we saw that clip, we might even want to play it again. It's like all of us, we jerked back because it was so appalling how repellent what they were saying was. And that evil flowing forth from it, that drives us towards good and Charlie would be able to give a far better answer on this point, but do we have it? 00:44:56 Speaker 3: We have a clip on this? 00:44:56 Speaker 2: All right. 00:44:57 Speaker 3: Danny says we have a clip. Let's get clip 10. 00:45:01 Speaker 1: Yes, I do hate, and I'll tell you who. The Bible tells me in Psalm 97, 10, if you love God, you must hate evil. I hate people that call themselves doctors that butchered Chloe Cole. That's who I hate. I hate people that call themselves doctors and perform the million abortions we see every single year in the abortion industry. I hate people that Sex traffic women into this country under the guise of immigration on the border. So I do not have hate for a group. I do not have hate for a people. I have hate for actions and individuals, especially that are in professions that institutionalize evil. How could I hate that which I have a heart for? 00:45:35 Speaker 3: All right. That's interesting. Because as we were saying, you aren't deep down. 00:45:40 Speaker 5: We're not. We are supposed to love even sinners. And I think Charlie would probably agree. be more precise on that if he was pushed back but obviously we have to just detest evil that is out in the world and only through like really getting this intense reaction to that sort of evil are we able to cultivate good you have to you have to develop your moral sensibility to the point where when you see wantonly wicked things it just you like can't even bear to look at it you can't casually accept. 00:46:11 Speaker 2: It Sean You, uh, you're good at hating things. Uh, I've seen you do it before. Yeah. 00:46:17 Speaker 4: I'd like to weigh in on this one. 00:46:19 Speaker 2: Give us your take. 00:46:20 Speaker 6: Yeah. 00:46:21 Speaker 4: So we're called to love what God loves and hate what God hates. So God obviously hates sin. And there's a reason he hates sin because it's incompatible with him. You, you can't be sinful and be in his presence. It's why we had to have Christ, uh, take the sin upon him, become sin for us and die in that our sins might be forgiven through him, that we might one day be reconciled to God. So God hates evil, and he calls us to hate evil. So I was reminded of Psalm 139 here, and I apologize for bending down and showing everyone my very shiny forehead here. 00:46:54 Speaker 2: But yeah, this is Psalm 139. 00:46:55 Speaker 4: It's towards the end. It's David saying, So we were told that David was a man after God's own heart. Obviously, we know he was sinful, that he had people killed. We know the story of Uriah and Bathsheba. He was not a perfect man by any means. But when we have David, whose kingdom is what Christ on earth descended from, he traces his earthly royal lineage to David. And when we have David saying, Lord, I hate your enemies with complete hatred, I think that tells us something about how we should feel towards those who hate God and towards the hatred of God. And where that becomes difficult is that it's easy to say, well, I'm going to hate the bad things and love the good things. But what are the bad things? What are the evil things? And that requires discernment. And discernment requires the Holy Spirit. It requires faith in God. It requires time in the word. And if you just go out there trying to be hateful, I'm going to hate this and I hate that because this psalm says to be hateful. but you don't have the discernment and you don't actually have the underlying love that you're supposed to have for everyone else who is made in God's image, that's where you're going to end up being consumed by, I think, an evil hatred and an evil malice. But we are called to hate what God hates and love what God loves. And so I think we probably need to remove the stigma on hating things that are very deserving of being hated. 00:48:33 Speaker 2: Does that answer your question? 00:48:35 Speaker 3: That was a great answer. 00:48:37 Speaker 9: Thank you. 00:48:38 Speaker 3: I'm glad we had Sean. 00:48:39 Speaker 5: Sean's answer was better than either of ours, Andrew. 00:48:42 Speaker 2: Yeah, well, that's why we bring him in. That's why we hire the big guns with the beautiful foreheads. Yeah, I mean, listen, I think you have to hate evil, though. I think you have to hate evil. And by the way, one other thing I'll add to this is that I think immeasurable harm has been done to our country by something that I call sewing circle Christians, where we have this aversion to To hating evil, really, is what it is. Or fighting back. We're so concerned about having the appearance of good that we allow evil to fester. And so I've basically rejected that. And a lot of things that have happened in the last year have pushed me. in that direction. A little bit of breaking news here. President Trump has just chimed in on the Tyler Robinson trial. Image 150 here says the judge in the Charlie Kirk case is doing a terrible job. This case should be tried within a month, not three years. It's actually four years. And it should be over with. The judge is desecrating the memory of the great Charlie Kirk while taking forever to ask questions that people already know the answers to. The whole country is mocking him and our quote-unquote legal system. Justice for Charlie, President Donald J. 00:49:50 Speaker 8: Trump. 00:49:51 Speaker 2: I mean, I could quibble, but directionally, I completely agree. And I'm actually grateful to the president that he would sound up on this and chime in because I can just tell you, being on this end of it, I know Blake will agree, it is like a never-ending, it's just cruelty, the amount of time this takes. And then, Blake, Sean, you guys can both chime in on this if you want. I love it that if you say that on social media, everybody goes, well, the average takes two to four years in a capital case. It shouldn't. Yeah, that's the problem. 00:50:24 Speaker 3: It shouldn't. 00:50:25 Speaker 2: That's the problem. Comparing it to a broken system does not justify the timeline here. 00:50:31 Speaker 5: Anyways, Blake, Sean, I'm glad the president, I mean, whether we agree exactly on his characterization, is it. 00:50:38 Speaker 3: The judge's fault? Is it the law's fault? 00:50:40 Speaker 5: Whatever it is, I think a reasonable takeaway from this, just in every red state, we control our state's justice systems. It should be a general reform priority. If we need to spend a few million extra bucks to have a few extra judges, a few extra public defenders, bailiffs, courtrooms, whatever it needs to be, but especially since COVID-19, Legal proceedings have gotten stretched out. More people have realized all these ways they can game the process to make it last longer. And I 100% believe with this defense, part of their strategy out there is they know if they can drag this on, the more weird conspiracy theories will just percolate out into the atmosphere, get out into the environment, make it harder for them to do proper or dire things. in this case for jurors, and they just increase the chances they can get some sort of Lindsay Clancy situation, get a holdout juror who's not going to go one way or the other. I think that's part of their strategy. And one of the ways you fight against this is, especially in a case like this, huge amount of evidence was gathered right away. This case should have been able to be taken to trial in four months, not four years. 00:51:44 Speaker 3: Amen. 00:51:46 Speaker 2: Our next question comes from Mary. Mary, unmute yourself. Welcome to The Charlie Kirk Show. And once again, just... Join us, members.charliekirk.com, if you want to be a part of our AMAs on Friday. Lots of other great stuff, too. But, Mary, you are on with us. Please unmute yourself. Mary, are you there? Looks like we don't have Mary. That's the first that's happened in a long time. Do we want to read her question? I think we have the written version here. Mary asked, what would you say to voters who say they... Oh, did we get her there? Oh, she's there. 00:52:17 Speaker 6: Hey, Mary. 00:52:18 Speaker 7: We're door-knocking this morning, so I'm just taking a quick break. 00:52:21 Speaker 3: Oh, that's amazing. 00:52:22 Speaker 2: Oh, God bless you. 00:52:23 Speaker 7: The question my group had is we've had a lot of voters where we've gone up to the door and they've told us either they've switched parties and they're leaning toward GSA or they're saying that they don't want anything to do with the election or voting ever again. What would you guys say? Because the script we're using isn't working right now. 00:52:44 Speaker 4: I've got some good answers for you on that one. So people who are not voting... or say they don't want to vote again, you have to ask them, do you think everyone else in America is smarter than you are? I'm going to guess most people are going to say no to that. And then I think you say, well, why would you want a bunch of people who are dumber than you voting? That seems silly. That seems silly and self-destructive. Unless they're going to vote for Democrats, then of course they shouldn't vote. They should let everyone else vote. 00:53:12 Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, are you saying that it's more of a cynical, like they're just, both parties are awful? Is that kind of the take? 00:53:20 Speaker 7: Some of the houses have said that, and then a handful have actually been pretty threatening and violent that we've just not gone back to those houses. I've just said thank you and left. 00:53:31 Speaker 2: Where are you door knocking? 00:53:33 Speaker 7: We're in Mesa right now, but the one area of Mesa has not been very nice. 00:53:38 Speaker 10: Oof. 00:53:39 Speaker 7: Hmm. 00:53:40 Speaker 2: I've heard Mesa is increasingly purple. 00:53:43 Speaker 5: Increasingly purple, but nevertheless, these people should be on our list because they're people we suspected would be favorable. 00:53:51 Speaker 3: Can you elaborate more? You say your script's not working. 00:53:53 Speaker 5: What are they pointing to if they give voice to the reason they're so jaded? I guess when you say they're not voting ever again, maybe we got their vote in 24, now they're very angry. Are they saying specifically why? 00:54:07 Speaker 7: Some haven't. The one thing we've heard a lot about is if there's a big scandal that was on the news, they'd bring up. A lot of them just didn't like Trump anymore. If there's one guy that told us that we were all pedophiles and that now that we've stepped foot on his property, he had to go and wash the front porch. 00:54:31 Speaker 5: That sounds like a colorful individual, to say the least. I mean, if they're angry about Trump, Charlie would always say, you're not voting for a perfect person. You're not expressing your undying love in the belief of the perfection of a specific person. You're voting for the direction you want your country to go in and the direction. There's a lot of stuff you can point towards for the direction of this country being better, that the border is secure, that a lot of people who are illegally here are getting deported. that they're building billion-dollar battery factories and chip factories and car factories in America to reindustrialize our country. There's a lot of that, but if someone's violently angry at you, unfortunately, you do have your work cut out for you on that one, I agree. 00:55:19 Speaker 2: Well, let me just say this. There is an absolute positive case to be made. And if they bring up the Epstein stuff, I would just challenge them and say, well, listen, more documents have been released under the Trump administration than were ever released from Biden or Obama. As a matter of fact, they didn't even bring up the Epstein case, the entirety of Biden's administration. So why is that? And so point that out. And you can say, listen, I don't love the way everything's been handled. I don't agree the way it was rolled out. But we've still had more progress than that. But let me just brass tacks it for you. In a period where you're going to have some of these defectors that don't like Trump anymore, the actual best strategy is to just point out how bad the opposition is. And I hate to be sort of cynical like that, but this is why negative ads on TV work, is because the DSA, the Democrats, party writ large has gone way further down the left wing rabbit hole than most voters realize. They are awful. They are anti-American. Their ideas don't work. And if they don't care about politics, guess what? Politics is going to care about them. Politics is going to come for them. So point out the fact that the DSA that is basically now the Democrat party, you get pluralities or majorities when polled of Democrats that prefer socialism. Those ideas will wreck their lives. So you might be disappointed with President Trump. You might have objections about certain policies, about Iran, about gas prices. But that does not mean that the DSA isn't going to commit their one fatal flaw and the Democrats in general. They never know when to stop. They will go too far. They will destroy this country. So sitting on the sideline is never an option. And that's just a political reality that in a cycle where your people are less popular and Point out the flaws on the other side. It tends to be the most effective strategy. It sounds maybe cynical, but it works. I talk about jobs and industries on this show all the time, but I didn't expect to find an entire skills trade community on TikTok. Plumbers, electricians, builders, and contractors sharing the work they do every day. And it went way beyond tips and tricks. People were sharing their craft. connecting with local contractors, and talking about how they were building their businesses and growing their teams. It opened my eyes to how people in the trades are using TikTok to share their skills, make connections, and find new opportunities. I remember thinking, this is exactly what we need more of, people sharing what they know and creating opportunities for others. And I never expected to find a community like this that's the thing about TikTok. You start with something you know, and suddenly you're finding a whole new side of it that surprises you and leaves you wanting to know more. Your next discovery is waiting for you on TikTok. Learn more at TikTok.com slash discover more. What's our next question? Who's up next? 00:58:15 Speaker 3: I think Elizabeth is next. 00:58:17 Speaker 2: Elizabeth, welcome to the show. Unmute yourself. 00:58:20 Speaker 6: Hi, Andrew. 00:58:21 Speaker 1: Hi, Blake. 00:58:22 Speaker 6: Also, hello to Sean Davis. Huge, huge fan. And I love how sassy your Twitter account is. It makes me happy. Well, thank you. 00:58:30 Speaker 2: You are sassy, Sean. So my question. 00:58:35 Speaker 6: Is, I don't know, obviously the Christina Pike execution did not go well. And also what really annoyed me is that they took 30 years to even try to attempt to do the. 00:58:51 Speaker 5: Execution. 00:58:52 Speaker 6: And I don't understand. I know like when you get found guilty and you're sentenced to death, do an automatic appeal to that. But like, how can we do it? Like, okay, you've been found guilty. You've been sentenced to death. How do we get that appeal process and the actual execution to be like less than 10 years? 00:59:09 Speaker 2: That's a huge, huge question. It's a big question. Do you know that the average death sentence to execution timeline in the U.S. is about 20 to 23 years? In the 1980s, it was just six years. 00:59:19 Speaker 8: Okay. 00:59:23 Speaker 2: That's how far we've fallen as a country. Blake, this feels like a Blake question. 00:59:28 Speaker 3: It's a tough question. It's very complicated. 00:59:32 Speaker 5: One is, generally, you basically have a ton of special appeals you don't normally see in normal cases. You basically have the right to direct appeal to the Supreme Court on any death penalty case. That's why you always see that bit where the Supreme Court will have to dismiss this last appeal. 00:59:51 Speaker 3: That's as an example. There's a lot of. 00:59:53 Speaker 5: I know there's something related to the habeas corpus, they call it state habeas, where basically lawyers are allowed to raise tons of legal issues that are not even in the trial record, so they can basically say, oh, ineffective defense lawyer, jurors engaged in misconduct. We have new evidence that requires new investigation, and sort of the built-up, we have common law, a lot of built-up legal precedent makes it so that the norm is just incredibly time-consuming. And now, how could we speed it up? I know at the federal process, there's been a lot of power. Trump has emphasized this, really moving ahead, trying to make executions happen as quickly as possible. And that's gotten it to where It can happen in a few years. I remember Timothy McVeigh, I guess this is 26 years ago at this point, but he was executed within about five years of the Oklahoma City bombing. And I think we could certainly aspire to that at the federal level. At the state level, I would guess the biggest barrier would be what we were talking about. You should, if you made it so that we're going to pay to make every appeal in a death penalty case happen as quickly as possible, we're going to put special judges on this to hear those cases, get through the appeals, bam, bam, bam, bam. you could probably speed up the process quite a bit. To make it go even faster, I think we're going to need new Supreme Court precedents. We do have a pretty friendly Supreme Court right now. Get them on board with, if like a state, maybe Oklahoma, Texas, Tennessee, some state that's pretty friendly to us, if they tried really hard to build up a speedy process of judicial appeals to get an execution happening in under 10 years, under 8 years, under 5 years... I think we'd have a good Supreme Court setup to be open to this idea. But you just got to make it a priority. And I think, sadly, it's not been a big priority in a lot of states to make that happen. 01:01:49 Speaker 4: Well, there's also been a very concerted movement over the last 30 or 40 years by the left, almost exclusively the left. to jam up the process, to make it as painful as possible, to torment the victims, to try and make it as drawn out and lengthy as possible in the hopes that maybe this witness will die or that witness will die. And then you can go and get a new trial and then there won't be any facts left because everyone who witnesses it is dead. And oh, well, I guess we just can't kill this person anymore. I don't think it is a problem with our mechanisms. I think we have a lack of will as a people. We have a judiciary that is puffed up on its own importance to now view themselves as not a co-equal branch, but as a superior branch. And I think it's not a mechanical solution where, oh, we just need to do X, Y, and Z and this will happen. We have this kind of sickness throughout the entire judiciary, the entire legal movement, where it's almost a fetish in how long it takes. Look how fair we are. Look how many appeals we exhausted. What should happen is that when someone faces a capital charge, They should be tried almost immediately. The appeal should be heard immediately afterwards. And then there should be a tree and a long rope out back behind the courthouse to finish the job. We didn't have problems with this early in our history because we didn't have people obsessed with this fetishization of process where they could pat themselves on the back for how fair they were. They were actually focused on justice. And I think it's important to remember that mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent. And we are doing a grave disjustice to victims and their families with this absurd process we have. When the first two vials of the penobarbital or whatever it was used on Krista Pike didn't work. They should have brought in a third, a fourth, a fifth, or a sixth. This business where now she's out and we were somehow doing like resuscitations on someone who was sentenced to death is absolutely insane to me. I suspect it was illegal, but we should not be having debates about, oh, should we try to execute her again? Yes, a jury ruled on it. She should have been executed that night. And this business where we take forever is completely insane. 01:03:56 Speaker 2: What we have is. 01:03:57 Speaker 4: Not a process problem. We have a will and a courage problem in this country. And I actually think that's going to be a lot more difficult to address than just doing some mechanical steps in the judiciary. 01:04:07 Speaker 3: Yeah. 01:04:08 Speaker 5: I'm like looking, I spent while you were talking, Sean, I was looking at some of the delays and it's crazy. Some of the stuff, for example, death penalty appeals, there's essentially a specialized bar for it. And as a result, one way you can delay this, if you're a state that has the death penalty, but your elites don't really like it, like California, They have a shortage of death penalty lawyers, and so it takes ages for a convicted person sentenced to death to be assigned this defense lawyer who's barred. 01:04:37 Speaker 3: For capital cases. Oh, what do you know? 01:04:39 Speaker 5: I guess it's just going to take us 50 years to execute this person. They, of course, don't want to execute them. I think very often it's also a matter, I think, it's kind of considered untoward to pursue the death penalty, to try to pursue it aggressively. I think even among Republicans, there's often this concession, oh, the death penalty is not really good. We should aspire to get rid of it. And so we just have this unequal thing. It's what you were saying, Sean. They're fanatics about making sure nobody is ever executed. And we're not comparatively as gung-ho about saying people who have convicted heinous crimes need to face the sentence that was handed to them. And You've got to make it a priority. And we've seen President Trump's done that, and that's why we actually have federal executions again. 01:05:24 Speaker 2: Yeah, and I would just remind everybody, you know, the entirety of the defense for Tyler Robinson, for example, these are crusaders against the death penalty. That's what they've devoted their entire career to. They want to end and abolish the death penalty, if not in statute, in practicality. That's what they want. And so they're willing to fly around the country, take these cases where they know that the defendant is– you know, guilty and they can see it from all the evidence, but they, they still, they loathe the death penalty. And so they devote their careers to it. They fight it, they fight it, divide it. And by the way, the state of Utah is going to be on the hook for over $ 10 million when this is probably all said and done to defend an assassin. So that's, you know, but they, they're proud of this. They want to set up precedents that block and gum up the works increasingly. And to Blake's point, the states that adequately resource the post-conviction counsel. So if you're paying for these post-conviction counsel for the appeals process, you can shorten the timeline. But a lot of these states, they don't want to fund it. They don't want to resource these divisions because they don't believe in it and they don't like it. They think it's icky. But I'm with Sean. It needs to be accelerated. Justice delayed is justice denied. Next question. Who's up next, guys? Anthony. Anthony, welcome back to the show. Unmute yourself. 01:06:45 Speaker 11: Hi, guys. 01:06:46 Speaker 6: Hi, Sean. 01:06:46 Speaker 11: Welcome. I love Sean's funny question about when he leans his head forward real quick about, hey, just to shine off my head, you have the John Smoltz haircut. So we'll just go with that. 01:06:58 Speaker 4: Of course I don't have the John Smoltz arm. 01:07:00 Speaker 2: Commentary. 01:07:03 Speaker 11: We can all hope we do. 01:07:05 Speaker 2: But here's my question. I can't stand his commentary in the postseason, by the way. Oh, I will agree. 01:07:09 Speaker 11: His commentary is bad. So my question is, my caucus voted me on our vetting committee for our local elections coming up for town board stuff, county legislator. So I've done hiring of people for jobs and stuff, but like vetting a candidate that wants to run for reelection, other than looking at their voting track record, what are some other things you guys would recommend to look for? Because we have a town candidate who sided with two far left Democrats to clear cut 18 acres for a solar farm when we had another Republican and a Democrat voted no. And this Republican wants to run for reelection. So what would you guys recommend I should ask them? other than how they voted and everything. 01:07:55 Speaker 4: Yeah, so my general view on candidates, whether they're for judicial positions, for politicians, I would like to know the politics of their spouse. Because in my experience, if you're looking, for example, at a male politician, if their spouse is much more conservative and right-wing than they are, you're probably going to be safe for a very long time. If you're looking at a male Republican who's got a super lefty or squishy wife, I'm sorry, you're cooked. So I would look for the candidates whose spouses are even more right wing than they are. 01:08:25 Speaker 3: That's also a good rule for picking Supreme Court justices, it turns out. 01:08:30 Speaker 6: Yep. 01:08:30 Speaker 2: And picking spouses. 01:08:32 Speaker 11: That I would never have thought to ask. That's actually a really good idea and a good question. I like that. 01:08:36 Speaker 3: That's an amazing one. 01:08:37 Speaker 2: Yeah. We have Tessa next. Tessa, please unmute yourself. What's your question? 01:08:45 Speaker 3: Oh, we lost Tessa? 01:08:47 Speaker 5: I want to say that anyway, though, because I want to read her cue, because I think it's actually a pretty interesting one, and I don't know that she's asked a question before either, so I'd love to get to her. But she asked, did sign gifts and with the apostles in our opinion. And that is of course, uh, the acts of the apostles describes many signs and wonders, uh, achieved by the apostles, similar to the miracles of Jesus, that they were able to drive out demons, heal people, perform other miracles. And people have wondered since we don't see this happening as prominently today, uh, Did some people have speculated maybe that was just an apostolic era gift to get the church on a roll and then lapsed? I mean, others believe these are actively going on. So do either of you guys have a take on that? 01:09:33 Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm not a cessationist, which is what you would call somebody that believes the Acts of the Apostles, like use the Catholic phraseology there. I believe that the gifts are still ongoing. I mean, even in the Catholic Church, you have these great stories from throughout Catholic tradition of priests getting blown back to the back of the sanctuary, but then the Holy Spirit came on them. And I've seen it as well. I mean, I tend to be pretty skeptical when I see these prophets on social media. People are fainting all over the place. I get pretty skeptical about that, but I have seen it in my own life. I've seen people work in the prophetic. I've seen people have words of knowledge that are really powerful. I've seen people get healed. So I actually really believe this stuff, but I am skeptical, especially when it is not done, especially the gift of tongues not done the way that the Bible ascribes. So, you know, you're supposed to have an interpreter if you're going to do that in public. Most churches that do tongues in public, they don't ever have an interpreter. That's something that I'm always skeptical of. Sean, what's your take on it? You're a good evangelical young man. 01:10:36 Speaker 4: Well, thank you. 01:10:37 Speaker 2: Yeah. 01:10:38 Speaker 4: I've never been, I guess what they call a secessionist. Um, God can choose to have miracles whenever, however, uh, he wants. Um, he, he doesn't, you know, we can't limit God. And I think we do this thing a lot where we decide that if we don't see something very often, um, then that must mean that it can't happen or it won't happen. Um, I also think kind of post enlightenment, we have gotten way too comfortable with trying to, um, make everything way too cerebral and technical and mechanical. We try to take away from the spiritual and heavenly realms and try to say, well, this was for a scientific reason. I think miracles happen all the time. I think if your eyes are open to them, you see them in every little thing that happens every day. And I think in a sad sense, we've lost our wonder of the mystical, especially when it comes to God's power. Now, when it comes to the frequency of seeing certain things in Acts, the whole book is about these amazing miracles. And the book itself is not even a fraction of them. It even says there were so many more signs and wonders that weren't ever done. But, you know, I think they can happen. I'm sure they do happen, whether they happen with the frequency that they did in the Bible. I have no idea. I tend to believe now that, you know, post-resurrection, crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, there's a different mission in the church than there was at the time. There was no church then. It was this little seedling of a church that needed to be fed and spread. I feel like we're at a different stage of, I guess, apostolic history now. It's almost impossible for anyone anywhere not to have heard the word, to not have heard the gospel. And I think that probably may be the larger reason maybe we don't see all these crazy dramatic miracles of the like that were in Acts anymore. 01:12:31 Speaker 2: Yeah, well said. What is the Catholic position on it? 01:12:36 Speaker 5: That specific framing is not as common in the Catholic Church, but generally the Church believes that miracles can still occur, that they generally won't say you must believe in any specific one with rare exceptions. So as an example, Fatima, a very popular miracle, but you're not required to believe that that occurred, or Our Lady of Guadalupe, similar ones, similar stuff with various saints. But nevertheless, there's a very strong church tradition that certain saints, like St. Francis, St. Thomas Aquinas, that they had miracles occur in their life. There's a rich tradition of that, and we certainly do not believe that miracles have stopped being able to happen. 01:13:17 Speaker 3: And so that would be the. 01:13:18 Speaker 2: Catholic perspective on it. In order to become a saint, you have to have certain miracles sort of like you know, you have to be responsible for certain miracles or something, right? So that makes perfect sense. What's our last question here? 01:13:32 Speaker 3: I want to do Julia. 01:13:34 Speaker 5: This is another religion question. I think it's really exciting. So Julia, unmute yourself and what's your question? 01:13:39 Speaker 10: Hi, can you guys hear me? 01:13:40 Speaker 3: Yes, we can. 01:13:41 Speaker 10: Okay, amazing. Yeah, so my question is about Charlie's eschatology. I know that he talked about it, but he wasn't that specific, probably for good reason. But I was kind of wondering if he was post or pre or all millennial, mainly because I had been doing a lot of research and I was always kind of on the pre side, but lately I find so much hope in the post side. Um, and I just have so many pre millennial like people in churches around me saying like, Oh, like this is so bad. The world's so bad, you know, thank God. Like The Lord is coming soon. I'm like, that's it. That's your answer. Like, you're not going to fight or take a stake in the game. So that's my question. 01:14:19 Speaker 6: Yeah. 01:14:19 Speaker 5: So just to explain that for those who don't know, pre post a millennialism, this is the belief in the Bible. It refers to like a 1000 year reign of Christ on Earth. And people debate what form would that take. Amillennials would say that's maybe not a literal thing. Premillennials, this is what you probably encounter the most in evangelical circles, they believe, that's often associated with the belief in the rapture, there will be a period of tribulation for the church, it will end with Christ's return, he will rule on earth, and then there will ultimately be the final judgment and last things. And then post-millennialism, this is associated a lot with maybe kind of liberal Christians who believe we'll kind of create the millennium on earth through evangelism, and then Christ will return after that millennium. 01:15:03 Speaker 3: As for what Charlie believed. 01:15:05 Speaker 5: Charlie focused a lot on going against people who argue, we know we're in the end times right now. Jesus is going to return. I think he had a once line, you know, Jesus is going to return this Thursday or this Friday. I think Charlie existed in that milieu. I think he leaned towards the rapture would happen, that we would have some sort of tribulation, premillennialism. But he pushed back very hard on people who say, We know when this is going to occur. We know we're in the end times. We have a lot of specificity on this because he ran into what you said, that people, they use it as an excuse to be inactive, to say, oh, I'm checked out from things. 01:15:40 Speaker 3: And that was what Charlie fought against more than the specifics on the end times. 01:15:43 Speaker 2: You're reminding me, Blake. You're reminding me, Blake. He used to always say, People ask me, am I pre-trib, am I post-trib? He's like, I'm pan-trib, that it's all going to pan out in the end. That's what he said. So he expressed sympathies for premillennialism, but he said he wasn't necessarily a dispensationalist. I think that Charlie was hesitant to wade into these waters too definitively because a lot of his friends feel differently, and he was always kind of behind-the-scenes defensively. picking their brains. I know that Jack Hibbs, he would talk with him a lot about this stuff and they would kind of disagree and argue, but it was friendly. But it's a great question. Thank you. Sean, you don't get to chime in on this one, I guess. We ran out of time. 01:16:25 Speaker 3: Those are great questions. 01:16:26 Speaker 4: Just accept Jesus as your savior. Just accept Jesus and have faith. 01:16:29 Speaker 2: All right. 01:16:30 Speaker 3: That's what you need. 01:16:31 Speaker 6: Amen. 01:16:32 Speaker 2: It's all going to pan out. 01:16:37 Speaker 3: For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.