The Charlie Kirk Show - Extremely Domestic Extremists with Peachy Keenan and John Yoo

00:00:00.000 Hey everybody, Tana Charlie Kirk Show.

00:00:01.000 Professor Yu joins us to talk about presidential powers and the indictment.

00:00:06.000 And then we have Peachy Keenan to talk about being labeled as a domestic extremist, some reactions to the indictment and more.

00:00:13.000 Email us freedom at charliekirk.com and subscribe to our podcast and get involved with Turning Point Action at tpaction.com and come to our event in West Palm Beach, Florida.

00:00:24.000 Biggest speakers in the movement.

00:00:26.000 We'll be there.

00:00:27.000 I encourage you to check it out at tpaction.com.

00:00:31.000 That is tpaction.com.

00:00:34.000 I think you will really enjoy it.

00:00:36.000 tpaction.com.

00:00:37.000 President Trump, Tucker Carlson, Dan Bongino, Steve Bennon, Josh Hawley, and more, tpaction.com.

00:00:42.000 Buckle up, everybody here.

00:00:43.000 We go.

00:00:44.000 Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.

00:00:46.000 Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.

00:00:48.000 I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.

00:00:51.000 Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.

00:00:55.000 I want to thank Charlie.

00:00:56.000 He's an incredible guy.

00:00:57.000 His spirit, his love of this country.

00:00:59.000 He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.

00:01:05.000 We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.

00:01:14.000 That's why we are here.

00:01:17.000 Brought to you by the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at AndrewandTodd.com.

00:01:26.000 Joining us now is an extremely smart man, someone that I'm honored to have join the program.

00:01:31.000 Professor John Yu.

00:01:33.000 He's Distinguished Professor of Law and University of California Berkeley Visiting Fellow, Hoover Institution, and a non-resident senior fellow at AEI and author of the forthcoming book, Politically Incorrect Guide to the Supreme Court, which we will definitely have him back to discuss.

00:01:46.000 Professor Yu, welcome to the program.

00:01:48.000 Professor Yu, there are a lot of questions about presidential authority here and declassification and your expert legal opinion.

00:01:56.000 How should we think about this indictment?

00:01:58.000 First off, we shouldn't ask necessarily, can President Trump be indicted, but should he be indicted?

00:02:05.000 Should prosecutors, using their best judgment, think this kind of prosecution is in the national interest?

00:02:12.000 We have crossed a constitutional Rubicon here in prosecuting for the first time in our history a former president for prosecuting for the first time in our history the leading candidate of the opposition political party for president.

00:02:29.000 It's got to be, I think, a very high bar, no matter whether President Trump wily the law or not, whether to bring this case at all.

00:02:38.000 Because we don't want future presidents to always be worrying about their personal legal liability when they make the toughest decisions for our country's sake.

00:02:48.000 And we don't want to become a place where the party in power starts to prosecute and throw in jail the people they just beat in the election or the people they're thinking of running against.

00:03:00.000 And so I could see a former president being charged for things like insurrection or rebellion or treason, but for mishandling classified documents in the way that it looks like President Trump did the indictment, I don't think that this rises to that level.

00:03:15.000 Yeah, and that's an argument that needs to be made, which is there's been this unspoken rule that if you're a former president, you're not above the law, but we have to have a really high threshold to cross that Rubicon, right?

00:03:28.000 I mean, it's got to be something that is so decisive because you know what it's going to do to the country.

00:03:32.000 You know it's going to be damaging.

00:03:33.000 You know it's going to tear things apart.

00:03:35.000 And I think that is actually how the Justice Department and the FBI under James Comey justified not charging Hillary Clinton, which is like, okay, we're near an election.

00:03:46.000 You know, we'll kind of do a little bit of a memo.

00:03:49.000 We don't want to have to set this precedent and be known as interfering in election.

00:03:53.000 Professor, it seems as if that's just gone.

00:03:55.000 Now it's like, hey, whoever has power is going to use the power.

00:03:59.000 This unspoken rule has now been shredded.

00:04:02.000 And so I think it's just really damaging for the Republic in general because now you're going, when you have an individual that serves in the presidency, there's all these criminal codes that could then be potentially applied to them.

00:04:19.000 More laws, the less justice.

00:04:20.000 Professor, your reaction.

00:04:23.000 I'm glad you raised this issue, Charlie, because this is even the bigger issue that we should worry about that goes beyond Trump, that goes beyond the presidency, which is the health of our republic.

00:04:33.000 One of the things that makes America exceptional, a unique country, is our faith in law enforcement.

00:04:40.000 We have faith in law enforcement and its integrity.

00:04:43.000 And so most Americans voluntarily cooperate with the law, with the police, with the FBI, even the IRS.

00:04:52.000 Most Americans file their taxes on time voluntarily.

00:04:55.000 They don't need to have the threat of being arrested or thrown in jail.

00:04:59.000 That integrity, that reputation, that integrity depends on nonpartisan application of the law of an unbiased Justice Department.

00:05:10.000 What have we seen now, unfortunately, is a train of abuses, starting with, you just mentioned Jim Comey and his expansion, his aggregation, his exaggeration of this Russia hoax, his effort to entrap President Trump into lying to the government.

00:05:34.000 And then you have reports, most recently from the Durham Report, about the problems with the Justice Department.

00:05:40.000 You had an internal investigation of the Justice Department showing that high-level members of the FBI may have lied to the government.

00:05:47.000 So when you already have people losing faith in the Justice Department, and then you bring a case like this one, when Hillary Clinton back in 2016, the case you mentioned, was not charged, when what she did to create this server to root all her government emails in and out of was designed to prevent government surveillance and scrutiny of official documents.

00:06:10.000 People are going to think that prosecution is becoming biased and then they won't cooperate with it.

00:06:15.000 And then we will lose a vital aspect of a republic, which is faith in the integrity of the justice system.

00:06:22.000 I totally agree.

00:06:23.000 I want to get your reaction here.

00:06:24.000 And again, this is just a cable news host bloviating and pontificating, but I think there's more to the story here.

00:06:31.000 I'm going to get your reaction to Rachel Maddow wondering out loud if the DOJ could make a deal with Donald Trump to not charge him if he drops out of the race.

00:06:40.000 Just as this is a trial balloon is shocking.

00:06:44.000 Cut seven, please.

00:06:45.000 You have to wonder if the Justice Department is considering whether there is some political solution to this criminal problem, whether part of the issue here is not just that Trump has committed crimes, but that Trump has committed crimes and plans on being back in the White House.

00:07:02.000 Do they consider, as part of a potential plea offer, something that would prescribe him, proscribe him from running for office again?

00:07:10.000 Now, that's just cable news chatter.

00:07:12.000 Or is it, Professor Yu, if the DOJ did something like that, how should we think?

00:07:16.000 I mean, is there anything more interfering with an election than something like that, potentially?

00:07:21.000 This is exactly why we should not have partisans in charge of the application and enforcement of the law, because you aren't supposed to pick cases based on their political consequences.

00:07:35.000 And you're supposed to not refrain from prosecuting because of their political consequences.

00:07:40.000 You want to prosecute based on deterrence and the stopping of harm to the country and the national interest.

00:07:47.000 Thinking like this is just exactly the way the Justice Department and Jim Comey thought about not prosecuting Hillary Clinton.

00:07:56.000 This is why you can't have people who think this way anywhere near the way the Justice Department acts.

00:08:02.000 But when the Justice Department doesn't charge Hillary and then charges Donald Trump, then people, regular Americans, are going to see that and say, is law being enforced in a biased way?

00:08:13.000 Are people, not necessarily Rachel Nadow, I hope, but the people who think like her actually calling the shots and what kind of cases are brought or not?

00:08:21.000 And I'm afraid we're already there, right?

00:08:23.000 I mean, and if that were to ever be the case.

00:08:26.000 So I want to ask you, Professor, you know, there was this long-standing policy, it was not law, but the internal memo that the DOJ would not or would be very careful to indict a current presidential candidate.

00:08:40.000 Is that correct?

00:08:40.000 That there was some sort of rule, and I think it was post-1990s or something.

00:08:45.000 There's also a rule, not a law, that they wouldn't indict a sitting president.

00:08:51.000 So now that they said that, well, we don't care about the candidate thing, does that mean that they could potentially go after Joe Biden?

00:08:57.000 And where did these rules come from?

00:08:59.000 And so just fill us in on this because it seems as if these internal policies have just been steamrolled.

00:09:05.000 So there is an opinion of the Justice Department, internal opinion, it only applies to the Justice Department and to the executive branch, which says DOJ prosecutors will not bring charges against a sitting president.

00:09:19.000 And the reason for that is because, and it underscores here, who's really responsible for all of this.

00:09:25.000 The reason for that is because under the Constitution, there's only one person who has the responsibility to enforce the law, and that's the president.

00:09:32.000 So the Attorney General, Special Counsel, Jack Smith, every line attorney throughout the Justice Department is just constitutionally assisting Joe Biden in that responsibility.

00:09:44.000 So your point, Charlie, is an excellent one, which I think has been missed by a lot of people, which is it's not just Jack Smith's decision to bring these charges.

00:09:53.000 It's not just Merrick Garland's decision, which it is to bring these charges.

00:09:58.000 Ultimately, it is Joe Biden's decision to bring these charges.

00:10:02.000 Yeah, and I think people are missing this: there is some sort of a weird word game that is being played of Joe Biden, like, oh, I didn't talk to Garland and all that.

00:10:13.000 Like, hold on a second.

00:10:14.000 You authorized NARA to go after.

00:10:17.000 You allowed this whole process.

00:10:19.000 And you're trying to tell me with a straight face that there was not a wink, a nod, a whisper, an ombudsman or a messenger that whispered in the ear of Joe Biden or his handlers that this thing was going to proceed to criminal charges, that Joe Biden read about it in the papers.

00:10:35.000 No way.

00:10:36.000 And if that is then the case, then that is someone using the federal government of the United States to directly go after someone that is currently running them against them in the presidency.

00:10:48.000 Hey, everybody.

00:10:49.000 Look, if you're pro-life, listen carefully.

00:10:51.000 It's important to advocate for pro-life laws.

00:10:54.000 I'm all in favor of that.

00:10:55.000 Pro-life legislation, supporting pro-life candidates.

00:10:58.000 But you have to simultaneously do the other thing.

00:11:00.000 I believe you actually have an obligation, which is to support women in need and babies in need that are at risk of being aborted.

00:11:08.000 Look, when you introduce a girl to her baby by providing an ultrasound, you're giving her the truth at the most critical and important time in her life.

00:11:17.000 85% of the time when they actually see the baby, they choose life.

00:11:23.000 Now, mind you, pre-born provides resources.

00:11:26.000 They provide diapers, baby clothes.

00:11:28.000 And I encourage you, if you're pro-life, to pray about this, are you giving money to actually support the unborn if you are voting for pro-life?

00:11:35.000 Look, $140 gives five mothers a free ultrasound and saves babies.

00:11:39.000 $280 can save 10 babies, and just $28 a month can save a baby a month for less than a dollar a day.

00:11:44.000 I'm a donor to this organization, and you should be too.

00:11:46.000 A $15,000 gift will provide an ultrasound machine that will save lives for years to come.

00:11:51.000 Whether you want to save one baby or five or hundreds, this opportunity is just a phone call or click away.

00:11:57.000 I think the world of pre-born, I give money financially.

00:12:01.000 And every one of you that are pro-life, I believe you have a duty and an obligation to go to preborn.org/slash Kirk and give as you can, give your best gift, or call 833-850-2229.

00:12:13.000 That is 833-850-BABY.

00:12:16.000 Go to preborn.org/slash Kirk.

00:12:18.000 That is preborn.org/slash Kirk.

00:12:23.000 Professor, reading through the indictment, what do you think is the most serious charge against Trump here or the evidence that is going to be the most difficult for his defense team to navigate?

00:12:34.000 So I think the charges are getting all the headlines right now: President Trump taking classified documents, President Trump storing classified documents.

00:12:43.000 I don't think that's really his vulnerability because former Vice President Biden and former Vice President Pence did the exact same thing.

00:12:53.000 They didn't get charged.

00:12:55.000 The difference between the two cases is really over obstruction of justice and lying to federal agents, what we call process charges.

00:13:05.000 You could even be innocent of the underlying real charges, but still commit a process charge like lying, and that could still get you in trouble.

00:13:13.000 But then, this is what really makes this case and Hillary's case harder to distinguish: obstruction. 0.84

00:13:21.000 Because, again, if you recall with Hillary's case, she created, again, a computer server through which she rooted all her emails. 0.79

00:13:30.000 And then, when the government found out about it and asked to see the emails, she had her lawyers destroy thousands and thousands of the messages and never allowed the FBI to see them, only said, These are the ones we think you would be interested in.

00:13:43.000 So, I ask you, and I think regular Americans are asking, how are these cases any different?

00:13:47.000 Isn't actually what Hillary did far worse than what Trump is alleged to have done, and he's the one being charged.

00:13:53.000 Well, Professor, there's other important differences, and you're touching on it.

00:13:57.000 Everything was recovered by the government with President Trump.

00:14:01.000 We believe that's the case.

00:14:03.000 There is this question about the document that he was talking about on camera.

00:14:10.000 Did the government get that back or not?

00:14:13.000 But the other important component here that I think people are missing is Hillary Clinton did not have the ability to declassify something. 0.98

00:14:21.000 She was Secretary of State.

00:14:23.000 Is that only the president can do that at will?

00:14:26.000 So, let me just ask you, Professor, this might be a strange legal argument, but you said something.

00:14:30.000 I want to make sure he can declare it declassified.

00:14:33.000 Was that the word you used?

00:14:35.000 So, could Donald Trump's defense say, Yeah, I was just walking in the halls and I said to the ceiling, declassified?

00:14:42.000 I mean, what does a declaration mean exactly?

00:14:45.000 I mean, does he have to tell one person?

00:14:47.000 Does he have to tell himself?

00:14:49.000 Does he have to write it on a napkin?

00:14:50.000 Does it have to be a I mean, I'm being somewhat silly, but I'm actually being deathly serious.

00:14:54.000 No.

00:14:55.000 No, no, this is not silly, and this is actually a key element in the trial.

00:15:00.000 So, all the classification of all documents in the government actually stems from the president's executive power under the Constitution.

00:15:09.000 Donald Trump's not making that up.

00:15:10.000 The Supreme Court said this in a case called Navy versus Egan.

00:15:15.000 All the classification power stems from the president.

00:15:18.000 The president can therefore declassify anything he wants.

00:15:22.000 If the president says out loud something that's classified, say in a press conference, it's automatically declassified by that very act.

00:15:31.000 So, President Trump's lawyer should make the argument that all these documents were declassified when he sent them to Mar Ilago at the end of his presidency.

00:15:41.000 But The hard thing is there is a little comment in the indictment where President Trump allegedly says, I think, to a reporter on tape, see, I've got this document.

00:15:52.000 I know, I know I shouldn't have it.

00:15:53.000 It's still secret and close.

00:15:55.000 His defense would have to be, Professor, that was just me doing showmanship, right?

00:16:00.000 I was just being entertaining.

00:16:02.000 That's a tough argument to make to a jury, though, isn't it?

00:16:05.000 I was joking doesn't always hit, right?

00:16:08.000 That's a tough one.

00:16:09.000 Also, the other piece of evidence that was hard for him is his own lawyers testifying against him.

00:16:15.000 But that's also a big vulnerability in the prosecution's case.

00:16:19.000 It's because usually, yeah, usually you have a privilege to say anything to discuss your legal issues with your attorney.

00:16:25.000 This is one of the oldest privileges in Anglo-American history.

00:16:30.000 So here in this case, a judge allowed the DOJ to override that right, which has existed for hundreds and hundreds of years.

00:16:37.000 That is an appealable issue.

00:16:39.000 President Trump may take that one, and then this declassification one, and then one about executive push, all the way to the Supreme Court.

00:16:44.000 This is not going to be over just in the middle.

00:16:46.000 I think you're right.

00:16:47.000 I mean, and as far as the declassification, again, the facts will have to learn, but I would imagine President Trump's defense is going to be, hey, when I was leaving the White House for Marine One at the last time, it was communicated to my staff, you know, hey, all that stuff's declassified.

00:17:02.000 And I can't imagine if they had a problem.

00:17:04.000 Why'd they allow that stuff to be stacked up on the side of the street if this stuff was highly sensitive and confidential?

00:17:10.000 That's going to have to be remedied by a U.S. Supreme Court.

00:17:13.000 What does a declaration of declassification mean?

00:17:17.000 I agree, though.

00:17:17.000 It's going to be a challenge.

00:17:18.000 It's going to be a thicket for his defense lawyers because President Trump, in the sense of showing off the document, that on the stuff they have on audio is going to be a challenge because that one, the prosecutors probably smiled when they got that audio, if they actually wanted to proceed with that.

00:17:38.000 Professor, you'd love to have you back on to talk about the Supreme Court and your book.

00:17:43.000 But excellent commentary.

00:17:44.000 The Supreme Court.

00:17:45.000 I'd love to.

00:17:46.000 The politically incorrect guide of the Supreme Court will have you on very soon.

00:17:52.000 I want to tell you guys about something every single one of you can benefit from, and you guys need to change.

00:17:57.000 It's who we use when we go to get mortgages.

00:18:00.000 Look, I balance a lot of stuff.

00:18:01.000 I'm traveling all the time, my show, and I recently needed to get a mortgage to get something figured out.

00:18:06.000 And it was a tough one.

00:18:07.000 And I didn't want to go to those woke banks.

00:18:10.000 I did previous, my last mortgage we did.

00:18:12.000 It was with a woke bank, and they were just, they were bureaucratic, and they donate the BLM and the gay agenda and all that stuff. 0.87

00:18:19.000 And I said, what can I do to actually, and I said, of course, duh, hello, AndrewandTodd.com. 0.84

00:18:25.000 They're Christian.

00:18:26.000 They're conservative.

00:18:27.000 Our worldviews are aligned.

00:18:28.000 They're fabulous people.

00:18:30.000 When I needed a mortgage, of course, I went to my friends, Andrew Delray and Todd of Aiken at Sierra Pacific.

00:18:36.000 And look, this was the first time I used them because, you know, we were just recently started doing stuff on the show and partners.

00:18:40.000 I said, okay, let's see how it is.

00:18:41.000 You know, we do a lot of things.

00:18:43.000 Together, it's blown away.

00:18:44.000 They respond within minutes.

00:18:45.000 They walk me through everything.

00:18:46.000 They took care of all those details I didn't have time for.

00:18:49.000 And I said, boy, guys, I now see how great you guys actually are.

00:18:52.000 Responsive.

00:18:53.000 And yes, no more of this woke stuff.

00:18:55.000 Stop using the woke banks.

00:18:58.000 Oh, I want to refinance my home and I'm going to go to a bank that hates me.

00:19:00.000 Stop doing that.

00:19:01.000 Instead, go to andrewandod.com.

00:19:03.000 So if you or someone you know is moving from blue states to red states, androidandodd.com.

00:19:08.000 Have an aging family member that needs financial relief?

00:19:11.000 Because maybe a reverse mortgage, AndrewNTodd.com.

00:19:14.000 Are you self-employed and finding it hard to qualify?

00:19:16.000 Or first-time homebuyer?

00:19:18.000 AndrewandTodd.com.

00:19:20.000 Again, what I love, again, I'm just friends with them.

00:19:22.000 So I could tell you, I have no other reason to say this except that it's true.

00:19:26.000 They work hard.

00:19:26.000 They're fabulous.

00:19:27.000 We go out to dinner together.

00:19:28.000 They're great people.

00:19:30.000 So don't depend on those woke banks, the big banks.

00:19:32.000 They do a terrible job, by the way.

00:19:34.000 They're funding all the destructive stuff.

00:19:36.000 They want centralized bank digital currency.

00:19:37.000 They're all part of the great reset.

00:19:39.000 This is a group of guys.

00:19:40.000 They do a great job.

00:19:41.000 And stop depending on woke banks for what I needed.

00:19:44.000 I saw it firsthand.

00:19:45.000 They got it done for me, and it was very complicated.

00:19:48.000 It was a ficket, it was a maze, it was a labyrinth.

00:19:51.000 And they said, Oh, you got to do this and this, and I'll make this phone call.

00:19:53.000 We'll do this and this paperwork.

00:19:54.000 And again, these other banks that I deal with, it's like, here's 955,000 pages to sign, and they don't call you back, and they don't work weekends.

00:20:02.000 I had a problem with one of the things on the process because it was one thing that wasn't filled out.

00:20:06.000 And they respond on a Sunday within minutes. 0.91

00:20:08.000 You're trying to get a response from a woke bank on a Sunday. 0.63

00:20:10.000 You'll say, Sorry, no response. 0.82

00:20:13.000 So check it out.

00:20:13.000 It's AndrewandTodd.com, 888, 888, 1172.

00:20:17.000 That's how you call them.

00:20:18.000 And say, Charlie Kirk sent you.

00:20:19.000 You might actually get them on the phone.

00:20:21.000 Again, they're value-aligned, honest, trustworthy, wonderful people.

00:20:25.000 I use them.

00:20:26.000 You should use them too.

00:20:27.000 Super responsive, blown away.

00:20:29.000 And I could say, if they're good for me, they're good for you.

00:20:32.000 Love these guys.

00:20:32.000 AndrewandTodd.com, triple 8, 88, 1172.

00:20:35.000 And finally, some of you might say, oh, Charlie, bad time to buy you a home.

00:20:39.000 I don't know about that.

00:20:41.000 You should look what's happening.

00:20:42.000 Commercial real estate is one thing.

00:20:44.000 Private single-family home ownership, it might actually stabilize and go up in the next year.

00:20:50.000 If you're young, it might be the time to get in.

00:20:53.000 Think about it, pray about it.

00:20:54.000 But most importantly, go to AndrewandTodd.com for all your mortgage needs.

00:20:57.000 Great guys, AndrewandTodd.com.

00:21:02.000 Okay, joining us now is a very special guest called The Greatest Writer in America by Citizen Free Press, contributor to The American Mind, Federalist, labeled a domestic extremist, Peachy Keenan.

00:21:16.000 Hello, Peachy. 0.86

00:21:17.000 Welcome to the program.

00:21:18.000 Hi, Charlie.

00:21:19.000 Great to be here.

00:21:20.000 Yes, very, very good.

00:21:22.000 So is that a pseudonym?

00:21:23.000 I have to ask.

00:21:25.000 Yes, it is a pseudonym.

00:21:27.000 I had to start writing under a pseudonym because at the time I was working for a very large entertainment company here in Los Angeles.

00:21:34.000 So for obvious reasons, that should be in the closet.

00:21:38.000 Yeah, I got a copy of your book.

00:21:39.000 I look forward to reading it.

00:21:40.000 And you're a very, very talented writer.

00:21:42.000 Tons of topics I want to talk about.

00:21:44.000 I want to introduce you to our audience.

00:21:46.000 But first, immediate reactions, indictment, arraignment.

00:21:49.000 Trump's in the courthouse right now.

00:21:50.000 How should we think about it?

00:21:52.000 Your response.

00:21:54.000 I mean, you know, I really don't care if you're for Trump or for DeSantis or whoever, but what's happening today and what's been happening since he was first elected is really a travesty.

00:22:05.000 It's a joke.

00:22:06.000 I mean, we, I mean, they keep talking about our sacred democracy.

00:22:10.000 I'm not seeing a lot of evidence that they actually believe in having a sacred democracy. 0.93

00:22:15.000 It's just become a banana republic. 0.77

00:22:18.000 And, you know, they want to take him down. 0.73

00:22:20.000 And, but really, what they, what they want to, who they want to take down are the people who support him and the people who don't like the direction his country is going.

00:22:28.000 I've read your stuff on American Mind for quite some time.

00:22:32.000 I want to connect this.

00:22:33.000 I think one of the reasons why Donald Trump is so popular, and to be perfectly honest, I think the other people running for the presidency don't get this, is that there is this micro connection to a macro trend of a sense of persecution.

00:22:48.000 So, for example, if I were to go to one of our Turning Point USA meetings and I say, How many of you have been persecuted because of your conservative views?

00:22:56.000 And they all raise their hand, graded differently and all this.

00:22:58.000 You have personal experience.

00:22:59.000 Donald Trump, they have this in common with Trump.

00:23:02.000 And they say, hey, he being at the courthouse is no different than, for example, Erica, our turning point USA New Mexico chapter leader, who had to go through Title IX investigations for six months because she was hosting an event for Tommy Lairn at University of New Mexico.

00:23:20.000 And Tifa was trying to come in, and some other people were trying to come in.

00:23:24.000 She said, Oh, those people look normal.

00:23:25.000 Let them in, which they were just normal people, not with masks.

00:23:29.000 She gets a nine-month Title IX investigation.

00:23:32.000 So when they see this courthouse, it is a connection.

00:23:34.000 It is a commonality.

00:23:35.000 Your thoughts, PG?

00:23:36.000 Yeah.

00:23:37.000 Yeah.

00:23:37.000 I mean, we see, you know, his base, his supporters loved him because he really did seem to speak for, like, you know, what he would call the forgotten men and women of America, middle America, the normal people.

00:23:48.000 Okay.

00:23:48.000 And that's why I called my book domestic extremists because it's ironic.

00:23:53.000 You know, we just want to raise our families.

00:23:55.000 We just want, we want to have the country back, the one that we grew up with, with the one that I remember from, you know, the 80s and 90s.

00:24:01.000 We don't have to look that far back to remember a time when it was okay to be conservative and there was two sides and we could have a debate.

00:24:07.000 But now it feels like if you don't go along with the regime, if you are a conservative, if you voice your opinions, you have to be silenced, suppressed, canceled, fired, and Trump under indictment.

00:24:19.000 I mean, are we next?

00:24:20.000 I mean, we like to joke about, you know, we're all going to be put into the gulags, but it really feels like that's where we're headed.

00:24:27.000 I mean, I just don't understand how he, you know, they keep talking about no one is above the law, which is, you know, it makes me laugh.

00:24:35.000 How do they say that with a straight face when the president himself is smoking gun proof that he is accepting bribes from foreign countries?

00:24:43.000 Like, where's Jake Tapper on that one?

00:24:46.000 No kidding.

00:24:47.000 So I want to ask about something specific in regard to feeling persecuted.

00:24:52.000 You had a viral threat a few months ago about what college admissions have become for ordinary middle-class white people who are not disabled or victims.

00:25:00.000 Can you tell our victims what you heard from our friends and readers?

00:25:05.000 Yeah, I had a friend texting me an anecdote.

00:25:09.000 Her niece had been rejected from basically every California school, all the UCs didn't get in anywhere. 0.58

00:25:17.000 She was a really great student.

00:25:18.000 She had above 4.0, very high SAT, was a competitive gymnast.

00:25:22.000 And she ended up having to go to community college for two years. 0.51

00:25:25.000 And I've been hearing many stories of friends at our school whose children were the valedictorian and they got rejected from every single UC.

00:25:33.000 The University of California schools used to be the place where middle-class drivers could go and get a great and affordable education.

00:25:41.000 And it feels like now those are just completely out of reach. 1.00

00:25:44.000 And yes, unfortunately, it is based on skin color.

00:25:48.000 I mean, you know, the UCs have a colorblind admission policy.

00:25:51.000 But in my course of my investigation of like what is going on here, their applications ask you very precise questions that are, you know, easily, you could just easily deduce what someone's ethnic or racial heritage is.

00:26:04.000 And so kids who normally would have gone into these schools have, I mean, I'm sorry, there is like a great replacement theory.

00:26:08.000 It's real if you look at the stats.

00:26:10.000 And so that's what that tweet was about.

00:26:12.000 And people jumped on my throat.

00:26:14.000 I got fact-checked by the New York Times, Hannah Nicole Jones, Jamal Bowie.

00:26:18.000 I was a racist.

00:26:19.000 How dare I point out this thing that was actually really happening?

00:26:24.000 Maybe she was just a terrible student and she had a bad personality. 1.00

00:26:27.000 That's why she didn't get into school. 0.99

00:26:29.000 It was really fascinating.

00:26:30.000 It was like the blue dress.

00:26:31.000 You know, is the dress blue or is the dress white?

00:26:34.000 Depending on where you are politically, that's how you're looking at what is going on in college admissions, which has been totally taken over by DEI.

00:26:41.000 It's incredibly telling.

00:26:43.000 Kind of connecting to the blue dress analogy, which people may or may not remember.

00:26:49.000 That was like big, what, six or seven years ago, right?

00:26:52.000 It was something like that.

00:26:54.000 I feel as if this Republican primary has a blue dress moment right now, not the Lewinsky blue dress stuff.

00:26:59.000 We're talking about the data.

00:27:00.000 Can you pull this up, Ryan?

00:27:02.000 This thing, you know what I'm talking about.

00:27:04.000 And where I actually don't know the science of why some people saw it differently than others, but I feel as if only one other person besides Donald Trump sees the dress the way that we do, right?

00:27:19.000 Blue or gold, where all these other people, why is it that only one Republican candidate running for the presidency showed up to Miami today?

00:27:26.000 Where were these other people?

00:27:28.000 And do you think this is a missed opportunity, for example, the governor of Florida to not show up?

00:27:34.000 Yeah, I mean, I actually just tweeted about this yesterday.

00:27:37.000 You know, in light of what they were doing to Donald Trump, I mean, you know, it hurts me what they're doing to him.

00:27:44.000 Like, I don't know, I take it personally.

00:27:46.000 It just feels like, what, what, what is this about?

00:27:49.000 Um, this personal destruction.

00:27:50.000 They want him to die in prison.

00:27:52.000 Like, he doesn't say what you want about his personal life. 0.71

00:27:55.000 He doesn't deserve that.

00:27:56.000 And so I tweeted yesterday that, like, this is so far beyond one election.

00:28:01.000 And it just gives me a bad taste in my mouth to see GOP candidates who may be able to capitalize on his, you know, conviction or potential imprisonment, who may like rise in the polls or even win because his main opponent, their main opponent, has been taken out by the enemies, our enemies.

00:28:19.000 And I feel like this is a time for them to kind of join up and like say, you know what?

00:28:23.000 Not on our watch.

00:28:24.000 Like politics is fine.

00:28:26.000 We all want to win an election.

00:28:28.000 That's great.

00:28:28.000 But this is something like higher.

00:28:30.000 This requires us to sort of put those things aside, at least for the next few months.

00:28:35.000 I mean, forget about next year.

00:28:36.000 Maybe, you know, go ahead.

00:28:37.000 But right now, it feels like there would be such an incredible power if all the GOP candidates could kind of shuck off their hatred of him and come together and say, you may not do this to a member of our party, to the leader.

00:28:50.000 You know, he's the de facto leader of the party.

00:28:53.000 It just, I don't know, it just leaves me like, I'm less able to support one of them, I think, now because they're just not backing him enough.

00:29:01.000 Yeah.

00:29:02.000 It's not about win or lose.

00:29:03.000 It just seems like this massive missed opportunity.

00:29:06.000 And there's only one person that shows up and decides to voice some opinion there.

00:29:12.000 I want to play a piece of tape here.

00:29:16.000 Let's see.

00:29:17.000 We haven't had a chance to go through this.

00:29:20.000 Let's go to I think I had Nikki Haley here somewhere. 1.00

00:29:24.000 Actually, let's go to Vivek.

00:29:25.000 Vivek does Vivek deserves some credit here.

00:29:27.000 Let's play Cut 34.

00:29:29.000 I will tell you that we have sent this letter, and I'm happy to announce this is my commitment on January 20th, 2025.

00:29:40.000 If I'm elected the next U.S. president to pardon Donald J. Trump for these offenses in this federal case, and I have challenged, I have demanded that every other candidate in this race either sign this commitment to pardon on January 20th, 2025, or else to explain why they are not.

00:30:04.000 Peachy, your thoughts here.

00:30:05.000 I mean, it's better than not.

00:30:07.000 I mean, he's also kind of trying to say that Donald Trump will inevitably be indicted, but at least he's there on the ground.

00:30:13.000 Most are not.

00:30:15.000 I mean, it's good, but he is saying that, you know, he's basically trying to use that as a way to pull Trump's Trump voters away from Trump towards him because he'll save their guy.

00:30:27.000 So it is slightly exploitive of Trump's predicament, I think, in a way.

00:30:34.000 It comes off a little weird.

00:30:35.000 I mean, he doesn't have a chance.

00:30:36.000 I don't think.

00:30:37.000 I mean, I like Vivek.

00:30:38.000 I think he's a good, great guy.

00:30:39.000 You know, I think he'd probably be a fine president.

00:30:41.000 I don't think he has a chance.

00:30:42.000 I just think it'd be so much more powerful if all the candidates could just draw a line in the sand and just say, you know, no, you're not doing this to him.

00:30:50.000 We will not allow this.

00:30:52.000 Like, come what may.

00:30:54.000 Well, I agree.

00:30:55.000 Peachy, plug your book.

00:30:57.000 Okay, so it came out last Tuesday: Domestic Extremists: A Practical Guide to Winning the Culture War.

00:31:02.000 You can get it right now.

00:31:03.000 It's right here behind me.

00:31:04.000 I'm going to right here on Amazon, Bars and Noble, anywhere books are sold.

00:31:08.000 And please follow me on Twitter at Keenan Peachy and you can read more about it.

00:31:13.000 Thank you so much, Peachy.

00:31:14.000 I appreciate it.

00:31:14.000 Thanks so much.

00:31:15.000 Thanks so much, Charlie.

00:31:19.000 MSNBC is having quite a field day here.

00:31:23.000 Without the narrative of domestic violent extremism, these people are going to lose.

00:31:30.000 I am more confident than ever before that we're on a trajectory for inevitable victory if we can stay peaceful and they cannot incite us towards some sort of domestic violent extremism.

00:31:43.000 Because rioting and messing up your society is really unpopular.

00:31:43.000 Guess why?

00:31:49.000 It's what made BLM unpopular.

00:31:51.000 Play cut 28.

00:31:53.000 Donald Trump on social media has now threatened his successor, Joe Biden, with a special prosecutor as one of the first things he'd do if he gets reelected.

00:32:04.000 And there are domestic terrorists all over the place on the internet threatening violence.

00:32:09.000 Any of those things would be unusual in American history.

00:32:13.000 We've now got a confluence.

00:32:15.000 And all I'm saying is, as we watch all this, let us not become so inured to this that we don't realize what an extraordinary and in certain ways terrible situation this is.

00:32:27.000 Wait, he's saying that threats of violence are unusual in American history?

00:32:30.000 Yeah, I don't think so.

00:32:32.000 But they're not excusable, but I don't think it's unusual in American history. 0.71

00:32:35.000 We'd BLM burn down our entire country and we were told it's a racial reckoning. 0.71

00:32:40.000 But their narrative is the same. 0.65

00:32:42.000 The narrative is the same.

00:32:42.000 It's not about governing, improving people's lives.

00:32:44.000 It's a threat to democracy.

00:32:46.000 Play cut 21.

00:32:47.000 If right-wing folks in this country concluded that they can no longer win elections democratically, they wouldn't abandon conservatism.

00:32:58.000 They'd abandon democracy.

00:33:00.000 And what we're seeing from some of these calls to violence coming from some of the more extreme members of the right wing in this country is an abandonment of democracy.

00:33:12.000 And that should frighten everyday Americans.

00:33:15.000 Okay, I think we have Ben Berquam, if I'm hearing correctly.

00:33:18.000 Ben, live on the ground in Miami, Florida.

00:33:20.000 What is the latest on the ground?

00:33:22.000 One thing that Natalie just mentioned that you notice here, and I mentioned there's one lady that had a sign that said lock him up, referring to President Trump.

00:33:31.000 And she was out in the middle of all of the Trump supporters, and she was protected.

00:33:35.000 She was safe.

00:33:36.000 Now, people disagreed with her.

00:33:37.000 They had a conversation.

00:33:38.000 But that's the difference between the right and the left.

00:33:40.000 If you go out to a Trump rally against Trump, you're going to be treated respectfully.

00:33:45.000 If the tables were turned and you took out a Trump sign to an Antifa rally, you're going to get beat up.

00:33:50.000 You're going to get attacked.

00:33:51.000 That's the difference.

00:33:52.000 Real quick, folks, final thoughts.

00:33:54.000 Why are you out here?

00:33:55.000 It's hot.

00:33:56.000 We're sweating.

00:33:57.000 You got President Trump, what they're doing.

00:33:58.000 What's your message to America?

00:34:01.000 Okay.

00:34:01.000 America is the last stop for freedom.

00:34:04.000 If we lose this battle, we have nowhere to flee.

00:34:09.000 Right.

00:34:09.000 And we are immigrant.

00:34:11.000 I'm coming from China.

00:34:13.000 And we don't want America to turn to the place where we came from.

00:34:18.000 Right.

00:34:19.000 Thank you.

00:34:20.000 Thank you, President Trump.

00:34:21.000 Keep fighting for us.

00:34:22.000 God bless you.

00:34:24.000 Okay.

00:34:25.000 We are doing something unprecedented in television history where we have two hosts simultaneously going live with the same correspondent.

00:34:35.000 Somehow that all worked.

00:34:36.000 You could cut him off, guys.

00:34:37.000 I hear him in my ear.

00:34:38.000 So Ben Berquam from the front lines.

00:34:40.000 But isn't it interesting?

00:34:41.000 That's the third or fourth person that we have interviewed on this program on the ground in Miami that is a first-generation American warning us about this.

00:34:54.000 It's really powerful.

00:34:55.000 You have Cubans, Venezuelans, Chinese, Southeast Asians.

00:34:59.000 Yeah, they've seen this movie before.

00:35:01.000 They played this game before.

00:35:03.000 It is not good.

00:35:04.000 They are coming here to try to warn us or caution us.

00:35:08.000 And we don't care to listen. 0.72

00:35:11.000 Maybe the liberals will start to listen to us if we teach them the story of the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks.

00:35:17.000 I don't think they care.

00:35:18.000 You guys will get indicted too.

00:35:20.000 The beast will come for you eventually.

00:35:22.000 I don't think they care.

00:35:24.000 They hate Trump that much.

00:35:25.000 It is a sworn blood oath that they must go after Trump at all possible costs.

00:35:37.000 Thanks so much for listening, everybody.

00:35:38.000 Email us your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:35:41.000 Thanks so much for listening, and God bless.

00:35:46.000 For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk. com.

The Charlie Kirk Show - June 14, 2023

Extremely Domestic Extremists with Peachy Keenan and John Yoo

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript