The Charlie Kirk Show - March 21, 2023


"Get Trump," No Matter the Cost with Alan Dershowitz


Episode Stats


Length

36 minutes

Words per minute

178.59375

Word count

6,477

Sentence count

514

Harmful content

Misogyny

12

sentences flagged

Toxicity

6

sentences flagged

Hate speech

12

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Alan Dershowitz joins the show to talk about the new push by the left to enforce Jim Crow laws and enforce segregation. He also talks about the ongoing investigation of Donald Trump by the Department of Justice and calls for peaceful protest on college campuses.

Transcript

Transcripts from "The Charlie Kirk Show" are sourced from the Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool. Explore them interactively here.
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Hey, everybody, today the Charlie Kirk Show, Alan Dershowitz joins the program, and also we talk about the left's new push for segregation.
00:00:06.000 That's right, you'll hear it yourself.
00:00:07.000 Email me directly, freedom at charliekirk.com.
00:00:10.000 Make sure to leave us a five-star review, and make sure you're subscribed to the Charlie Kirk Show podcast.
00:00:14.000 Get involved with Turning Point USA, the nation's most important organization, fighting for freedom and liberty, passing down American values from one generation to the next.
00:00:24.000 You can get involved with Turning PointUSA at tpusa.com.
00:00:27.000 That is tpusa.com.
00:00:30.000 Attend one of our upcoming tour stops.
00:00:32.000 Check it all out at tpusa.com.
00:00:34.000 Email me directly, freedom at charliekirk.com.
00:00:37.000 Turning point USA is on the front lines.
00:00:39.000 Become one of our 200,000 donors at tpusa.com.
00:00:43.000 Buckle up, everybody.
00:00:44.000 Here we go.
00:00:45.000 Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
00:00:47.000 Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses.
00:00:49.000 I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
00:00:52.000 Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
00:00:56.000 I want to thank Charlie.
00:00:57.000 He's an incredible guy.
00:00:58.000 His spirit, his love of this country, he's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
00:01:06.000 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.
00:01:15.000 That's why we are here.
00:01:18.000 Brought to you by my friends, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage, 888, 888, 1172 or AndrewandTodd.com.
00:01:29.000 Getting a fair amount of emails from you.
00:01:31.000 People are mad, and you should be.
00:01:34.000 And I think there's also a mixture, a combination of anger and helplessness.
00:01:40.000 And I feel that, and I see that.
00:01:43.000 And that's one of the most frustrating places to be in, right?
00:01:45.000 Because you're really angry about something and you feel as if you're nothing but a spectator.
00:01:49.000 I was getting texts all weekend, Charlie, what can we do?
00:01:51.000 Charlie, what can we do?
00:01:53.000 Now, if I were to just offer a recommendation, instead of, you know, protests in the streets and all that, which is not exactly helpful in some ways, it's fine if you want to do it.
00:02:05.000 Just be very careful and be peaceful and don't allow federal agents as agitators in there.
00:02:09.000 I think you should do something like we should just all fly our flags upside down for a couple of days, something like that.
00:02:14.000 That could be easily done.
00:02:14.000 Millions of people do it.
00:02:16.000 And it would be very powerful.
00:02:20.000 And that doesn't do much, right?
00:02:22.000 That's something that should be done.
00:02:25.000 But I understand the kind of combination of helplessness and total and complete anger.
00:02:35.000 Because what we're seeing is a destruction, an erosion of basic and fundamental civil liberties.
00:02:42.000 And we're going to have Alan Dershowitz, by the way, join us in a moment, who has a new book out called Get Trump.
00:02:46.000 I don't know if it's new or not.
00:02:48.000 He has so many books, I can't keep track of it.
00:02:50.000 Where is the new one Getting Trump?
00:02:53.000 Got it.
00:02:54.000 And it's the threat to civil liberties, due process, and our constitutional rule of law.
00:02:59.000 And Alan Dershowitz, I disagree with him on politics on lots of different things, but to his great credit, has been consistent and principled about how government should not be used to be weaponized against political dissidents or opponents.
00:03:11.000 And that's exactly what's happening here.
00:03:13.000 And interestingly, the left used to be champions of this, the ACLU, about government overreach and prosecutorial authority.
00:03:21.000 No, they've been taken over by totalitarians.
00:03:23.000 And it's really sad to see.
00:03:24.000 It's sad for the country because now we're entering into a very dark phase where it's going to be back and forth and back and forth.
00:03:32.000 And I'm afraid that's the only way to proceed because I'm not comfortable just allowing this to continually indict Donald Trump and come after Republican opponents and conservative opponents.
00:03:43.000 So obvious and it's so clear that it's for political purposes.
00:03:50.000 The Constitution is supposed to be a bedrock for all people, Regardless of power or status or race or color or creed or background.
00:04:03.000 And they've now investigated Donald Trump relentlessly at every level of government.
00:04:08.000 By the way, this might not be the last indictment.
00:04:10.000 Fulton County is saying they might do it.
00:04:13.000 So he might have two indictments and there might be one for Department of Justice for January 6th stuff.
00:04:17.000 So he might have three indictments happening simultaneously.
00:04:23.000 And Alvin Bragg is looking as if, I mean, they're putting up barricades outside of the Manhattan DA's office.
00:04:28.000 Maggie Haberman and others in the New York Times are saying, well, it might not be tomorrow.
00:04:31.000 It might be tomorrow.
00:04:32.000 We don't know.
00:04:33.000 They're kind of wishy-washy back and forth.
00:04:36.000 But it sure seems like it's this week.
00:04:38.000 And Donald Trump did not deny it.
00:04:41.000 Donald Trump this weekend said, yeah, it looks like I'm going to be indicted next week.
00:04:44.000 I'm going to be arrested.
00:04:44.000 I'm going to be fingerprinted.
00:04:45.000 I'm going to be processed.
00:04:48.000 And it really does kind of beg the question of how far are they willing to go?
00:04:52.000 And the answer is they're willing to go very far.
00:04:55.000 If they're willing to put people in a gulag post-January 6th, they're willing to go indict Donald Trump.
00:05:02.000 It's all connected.
00:05:03.000 It's the use of brute naked force.
00:05:08.000 700 riot police are getting ready to defend the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.
00:05:13.000 Oh, wait, so we're the Manhattan DA's office is going to have more protection than the Capitol building did on January 6th.
00:05:22.000 It's interesting.
00:05:24.000 I don't think the mayor of New York is going to deny requests for security there.
00:05:28.000 And by the way, everyone, please just stay peaceful.
00:05:32.000 Stay away from any areas you think might have federal agitators or might get you worked up in a way you might regret.
00:05:37.000 I just can't emphasize that enough.
00:05:39.000 They would love nothing more than to see people act in uncharacteristic ways.
00:05:43.000 It would give them the moral high ground.
00:05:45.000 Just don't do that.
00:05:46.000 I want to play another piece of tape here.
00:05:48.000 Cut 10, Fox News says, a lot of times this happens in lawsuits.
00:05:52.000 Play Cut 10.
00:05:53.000 Oftentimes, as attorneys, we can get sucked into the idea that this is about wins and losses and begin to try to figure out who would win a case when often what's happening is a lawsuit serves its own purpose.
00:06:06.000 Either it moves you towards a settlement, or in this case, it has its own political implications as well.
00:06:11.000 Just in the pursuit of understanding those political implications, on Tuesday, there will probably be photos of President Donald Trump in handcuffs.
00:06:18.000 And that has its own political fallout.
00:06:21.000 You also brought up the timeline.
00:06:22.000 Even if Trump were to win, how long would that take?
00:06:26.000 Because that then impacts his run for president.
00:06:31.000 How is this not election interference?
00:06:34.000 How is it not direct and complete election interference of Donald Trump running for the presidency?
00:06:38.000 They don't care because the rules don't apply to them.
00:06:42.000 It is bold, though.
00:06:43.000 It's a risk because it is a fiction of a legal theory.
00:06:47.000 If Donald Trump's lawyers are able to get any sort of rational person on the jury, it could be dismissed there as well.
00:06:57.000 But it's about slowing him down, distracting him.
00:07:00.000 It's not just about distracting the news cycle, which I think is part of it.
00:07:03.000 They want to distract him.
00:07:04.000 They want to wear him down.
00:07:06.000 They want to break his spirit.
00:07:09.000 They want him to surrender.
00:07:12.000 And I don't know about you, but that just makes me like him even more.
00:07:16.000 If Donald Trump really was not a threat to the bad guys, if he really was not a threat to neoliberalism, they would be ignoring and laughing at him.
00:07:30.000 But they know that there's something larger than life about this guy.
00:07:33.000 There is a life force that they just can't contain.
00:07:36.000 That there's an energy, there's a passion, there's an enthusiasm, there's a focus.
00:07:41.000 And after two impeachments and the DOJ and Fulton County and New York and going through every business transaction from Bedminster to the Trump Hotel to Trump Tower, this is what they have.
00:07:55.000 This is now what they have.
00:07:59.000 After a couple prosecutors passed on this previously and Stormy Daniels came out and denied having the affair, that should probably matter as well.
00:08:09.000 They raided Mar-a-Lago back in the, we forget about that back in the fall over document disputes.
00:08:15.000 It's interesting, the document thing has gone away because Biden has actually violated the document precedent far more egregiously than Trump did.
00:08:22.000 But they're trying to break his personal will.
00:08:26.000 They're trying to make him so distracted, so worn down, that he gives up, that he steps aside and says, I'm done.
00:08:34.000 I'm going to just kind of give up my movement.
00:08:36.000 I'm going to give it up.
00:08:37.000 I can't handle this anymore.
00:08:40.000 They want to break the will of the base.
00:08:42.000 They want to break the will of you, the everyday person.
00:08:48.000 They want to try to break your resolve, your commitment, your perseverance.
00:08:56.000 It's an extraordinary thing we're living through, and it's a sad day.
00:08:59.000 It's a tragic day because there are so many legitimate crimes that are happening in the country, and those just kind of get glossed over.
00:09:07.000 Those just kind of get dismissed.
00:09:11.000 I sure hope, though, that it has an opposite effect.
00:09:13.000 I really do.
00:09:14.000 I sure hope that it emboldens the base.
00:09:17.000 That it doesn't weaken, that it doesn't make people surrender or give up.
00:09:22.000 Because boy, is that tempting.
00:09:23.000 It is tempting to want to just become awfully cynical because of what we have seen and what we are seeing.
00:09:32.000 But boy, they're going to get off on the imagery, I'm telling you.
00:09:35.000 They're going to run this.
00:09:36.000 They're going to frame pictures of it.
00:09:37.000 They're going to have parties.
00:09:38.000 They're going to have celebrations.
00:09:40.000 Finally, we got them.
00:09:42.000 Just think about how sick your life must be after so much struggle and even political differences.
00:09:50.000 That's where you find your meaning.
00:09:53.000 You find your meaning in arresting other people for nothing.
00:10:01.000 There's a spiritual crisis in this country, and filling it by locking up political opponents is a really bad idea.
00:10:09.000 Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here.
00:10:11.000 Why do I tell you about Balance of Nature every single day?
00:10:13.000 It's really quite simple.
00:10:14.000 Balance of Nature is real food.
00:10:16.000 It's real science, and it's real nutrition.
00:10:18.000 I take it every day.
00:10:19.000 It's so easy.
00:10:20.000 31 whole fruits and veggies in a capsule.
00:10:22.000 I know a lot of people who take supplements and formulated nutrition packs, but balance in nature goes right to the source.
00:10:28.000 Real fruits and veggies, all that nutrition captured with their advanced vacuum-cold process, packed in a capsule and sent to your doorstep.
00:10:35.000 I give my body what it needs because feeling great is important to me.
00:10:38.000 Getting good daily nutrition is the foundation of all aspects of good health.
00:10:42.000 And that is why you hear me talking about balance of nature on my show.
00:10:45.000 Shipping is always free, but don't forget to get a 35% off your first order as a preferred customer by using discount code Charlie when you go to balanceofnature.com.
00:10:55.000 You can order by phone by calling 800-2468-751 or go to balanceofnature.com.
00:11:01.000 They're a terrific product.
00:11:02.000 I take it every day.
00:11:03.000 Check it out.
00:11:04.000 Balanceofnature.com, discount code Charlie, balanceofnature.com, discount code Charlie.
00:11:12.000 There's so many other stories, though, I want to touch on here.
00:11:15.000 One in particular is just a cultural story that I think is important.
00:11:18.000 I've been saying for a while that the left wants to re-segregate society.
00:11:22.000 And one of the ways that you're able to expose that is you ask these campus activists or academics, do you want black-only dormitories?
00:11:32.000 The left believes race matters. 0.53
00:11:34.000 We do not believe race matters. 0.98
00:11:37.000 The country that we're entering into, this postmodern hellscape, this dystopian nightmare, they're outright calling for segregation.
00:11:46.000 Now, Robin DiAngelo wrote a book that I hope none of you ever have to read.
00:11:50.000 You probably might have to if If you get a job at some corporation, diversity, equity, inclusion requires you to read white fragility. 0.81
00:12:00.000 Really, what white fragility is, is it's white, it's really white wine mom fragility is what it is. 0.95
00:12:07.000 It's a bunch of wine moms that don't really know their place in the cosmos or the world.
00:12:12.000 And so they look for causes because religion was never for them because they were told it was untrue.
00:12:16.000 Or I had a really mean Catholic teacher.
00:12:18.000 And so I need to go find some sort of chakra balancing thing.
00:12:22.000 Okay, whatever.
00:12:23.000 And so, but white fragility speaks to them in religious terms.
00:12:26.000 So it resonates with them.
00:12:28.000 And these are the same people that download the 1619 podcast and listen to the New York Times Daily and NPR and they think they're being great crusaders and they rush into Walgreens to get their three-year-old the COVID vaccine because they're neurotic freaks.
00:12:40.000 You know the type.
00:12:41.000 And anyway, Robin DiAngelo is very well respected in that community of white wine mom activists.
00:12:50.000 And the left always reduces their people or reduces people, not their people, people to their immutable traits over and over again.
00:12:57.000 So listen to Robin DiAngelo, who is paid a ton of money.
00:13:01.000 Blake, can you get the numbers of how much money she was paid by corporations? 0.90
00:13:03.000 Hundreds of thousands of dollars to go talk about white fragility. 1.00
00:13:06.000 She's an outright segregationist. 1.00
00:13:09.000 If you ever had doubt of the type of country the left wants us to live in, they want to divide us purely and solely based on race.
00:13:17.000 They are not for integration.
00:13:19.000 They are not for a colorblind society.
00:13:21.000 They want whites to live in certain neighborhoods and blacks to live in certain neighborhoods. 0.81
00:13:25.000 They want to undo, they want to reverse any progress, moral progress that was done by the civil rights movement.
00:13:32.000 Now, the Civil Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act had a lot of problems.
00:13:34.000 We've talked about that on the program.
00:13:36.000 Just read Christopher Caldwell's book, Age of Entitlement.
00:13:39.000 Oh, by the way, this anti-racist article writer, she charges $14,000 per speech and she makes $728,000 just from speaking every single year.
00:13:49.000 Listen to Robin DiAngelo.
00:13:51.000 She is one of the quote-unquote thought leaders of race politics.
00:13:54.000 This is the country they want your kids to live in where race matters. 1.00
00:13:58.000 Play cut seven.
00:13:59.000 And then I'm a big believer in affinity space and affinity work.
00:14:03.000 And I think people of color need to get away from white people and have some community with each other.
00:14:11.000 And I'll let that go and maybe see if anyone else wants to pick it up. 0.70
00:14:16.000 That's someone who writes books for your children, affinity space, that they have to get away from white people. 1.00
00:14:22.000 They have to detach from white people. 1.00
00:14:24.000 How is her argument right there any morally different than the presidential candidate who won a couple states and a couple electoral votes?
00:14:36.000 People forget this.
00:14:38.000 Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.
00:14:43.000 How is it any different than the bitter southern segregationists of the Democrat Party?
00:14:51.000 How is it in any categorically different moral terms?
00:14:56.000 Khaleesa Wing on Twitter says, I'm so exhausted with white folks in these PD sessions. 1.00
00:15:02.000 This lady actually has the audacity to say that black people can be racist too. 0.99
00:15:06.000 They don't believe black people can become racist. 1.00
00:15:08.000 They believe you're immune from racism because you're black. 0.93
00:15:11.000 It's quite remarkable.
00:15:13.000 What was his name?
00:15:14.000 He was running for president.
00:15:15.000 Oh, geez, I should know this.
00:15:18.000 He ran and he won a couple states.
00:15:20.000 I think it was in the 1964, 1968 presidential election.
00:15:25.000 He was a southern governor.
00:15:26.000 Thank you, George Wallace, of course.
00:15:27.000 George Wallace, segregation today.
00:15:29.000 I knew it was George something.
00:15:30.000 I was going to say something else.
00:15:31.000 I'm glad I didn't.
00:15:32.000 Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.
00:15:35.000 And here's the essence of it.
00:15:37.000 It's because the left hasn't changed.
00:15:40.000 The left is the same race-obsessed movement that they were when they owned slaves, when they brought slaves in, when they managed slaves, and then eventually when they created segregation.
00:15:51.000 They have always been obsessed with race and they have a heart desire to re-segregate America.
00:15:57.000 Whites over here, blacks over here. 1.00
00:15:59.000 Under Robin D'Angelo's America, if you were to walk into a restaurant and you had bathrooms for whites and bathrooms for blacks, that would be acceptable to her. 0.67
00:16:10.000 And she's considered to be smart and successful. 0.76
00:16:12.000 Fortune 100 companies hire her.
00:16:17.000 Look, it's kind of a confusing time right now to be in the housing market.
00:16:21.000 In times of uncertainty and challenge, you need seasoned mortgage experts with decades of experience that are problem solvers and solution providers.
00:16:29.000 Just this weekend, I was talking with my friends, Andrew and Todd from AndrewandTodd.com about a potential home that we might want to buy.
00:16:35.000 And we were talking about the pros and the negatives and the cons.
00:16:38.000 I've used them and they're amazing.
00:16:39.000 They're quick.
00:16:40.000 They're transparent.
00:16:40.000 They're seamless.
00:16:41.000 They know how to solve your tough mortgage issues.
00:16:43.000 In some markets, it's actually a buyer's market because prices have come down.
00:16:47.000 In others, it's time for refinancing.
00:16:49.000 And for other people, you say, boy, I just got married.
00:16:51.000 I got to buy a home.
00:16:52.000 And that's the thing.
00:16:53.000 You might say, Charlie, the interest rates are too high.
00:16:55.000 Yeah, they are high, but you could always refinance.
00:16:57.000 And by the way, there's a lot of dollar bills out there in certain markets, especially the Sunbelt.
00:17:01.000 Asset prices still might go up.
00:17:03.000 So if it's the right home and right time for you, then go to andrewandtodd.com.
00:17:07.000 Are you self-employed?
00:17:08.000 They can get you qualified based on bank statements, not tax returns.
00:17:12.000 Are you an investor?
00:17:12.000 They have debt service loans that can use cash flow and invest income analysis.
00:17:16.000 Need a private investor loan?
00:17:18.000 They offer non-traditional loans as well.
00:17:20.000 Just visit them at andrewandtodd.com and they'll find solutions to those tough mortgage issues for you and your friends.
00:17:25.000 Visit andrewandTodd.com to fill out a short form and they'll get back to work for you.
00:17:30.000 Again, I love Andrew and Todd.
00:17:31.000 They love the Lord.
00:17:32.000 They're great people.
00:17:33.000 They love liberty.
00:17:34.000 And by the way, stop using those woke banks.
00:17:36.000 Unacceptable.
00:17:36.000 Stop it.
00:17:38.000 Okay?
00:17:38.000 Those big banks, you know what I'm talking about.
00:17:40.000 Stop using them, especially for your mortgages.
00:17:43.000 Instead, go to a bank and people, human beings you can talk to that share your values.
00:17:49.000 Those people are Andrew Delray and Todd Avakian.
00:17:52.000 They're fabulous patriots.
00:17:53.000 They focus on what matters.
00:17:54.000 They're responsive.
00:17:55.000 They're excellent.
00:17:56.000 And I think the world of them.
00:17:57.000 Go to AndrewandTodd.com.
00:17:59.000 That is AndrewandTodd.com.
00:18:04.000 Reports indicate that this week, Donald Trump will be arrested in New York.
00:18:08.000 No better guess to help us talk about how this is outrageous than the author of the book, Get Trump, The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law, Alan Dershowitz, New York, number one New York Times bestseller.
00:18:20.000 Professor Dershowitz, welcome back to the program.
00:18:22.000 Well, you have to admit, my timing is pretty good.
00:18:25.000 This book was two days ago.
00:18:27.000 Did you have an inside source or something at the DA's office and you just timed it up with publication date?
00:18:33.000 No, I just know who the DA is and that he wanted his 15 minutes of fame, but I didn't know when he would indict.
00:18:41.000 You know, ironically, this is the weakest of the four cases that they're investigating against Trump, the weakest politically, the weakest legally, the weakest factually.
00:18:51.000 And yet Bragg wants to be the first out there.
00:18:54.000 Hopefully he's going to think of trying to get money for reelection from George Soros.
00:18:59.000 But in any event, this is one of the weakest cases I've ever seen in my 60 years of practicing law.
00:19:05.000 You know, they worked for months and months and months and months and went through every statute and they produced a mouse called Mickey.
00:19:11.000 This is a Mickey Mouse case.
00:19:13.000 So let's talk about that then more broadly.
00:19:16.000 I mean, even if you were to play the other side, Professor, what is the best case for them?
00:19:23.000 What is the best argument?
00:19:24.000 It seems so weak, so fragile, and also it just sets terrible precedent.
00:19:29.000 If I understand it correctly, it was a private transaction that we do not know all the facts surrounding that they're applying to a campaign finance law.
00:19:37.000 So now that personal finances can then impact campaign finance, even though it wasn't a campaign expenditure.
00:19:45.000 Am I understanding this correctly?
00:19:47.000 Well, it's impossible to understand it.
00:19:50.000 It's gobbly.
00:19:51.000 First of all, the federal government didn't prosecute this case.
00:19:54.000 They are the ones who have jurisdiction over election campaign contributions.
00:20:00.000 They said no.
00:20:01.000 So did Bragg's predecessors say no?
00:20:03.000 No, we're not prosecuting.
00:20:04.000 This is a state case.
00:20:06.000 And then Bragg comes in, and for his 15 minutes of fame and his perp walk, he gets to say, well, you know, it was a state misdemeanor.
00:20:15.000 He had records wrong.
00:20:17.000 It's only a misdemeanor with the statute of limitations, by the way, of two years.
00:20:21.000 But now, if we can find that he was motivated to fraudulently enter these records in order to prevent himself from being caught for a federal crime, then it turns into a state felony.
00:20:33.000 It's one in one plus 11.
00:20:34.000 It doesn't work.
00:20:35.000 You know, the great Justice Robert Jackson once said any good prosecutor can rummage through the hundreds of statutes and pick out something with which to get somebody who they don't like.
00:20:47.000 And that's not the way the law should operate.
00:20:49.000 This is a perfect example of Get Trump.
00:20:51.000 You know, the district attorney and the Attorney General of New York ran on the campaign to get Trump.
00:20:56.000 I got the title of my book, Get Trump, from their campaign.
00:21:00.000 They said, get Trump, and now they're trying to get him.
00:21:03.000 And in New York, it's possible they will get him because it's a very blue city and it's a very likely to be biased against Trump jury pool.
00:21:12.000 Now, it's, I think it's even worse than show me the man, show me the crime.
00:21:15.000 It's show me the man, I'll make up the crime and kind of twist the statute.
00:21:19.000 It's so, it's, I don't know if it's ever been used before, has it?
00:21:22.000 It's never been used before.
00:21:24.000 This is worse than Al Capone.
00:21:25.000 In Al Capone, they found actual tax violations that they went after him on because they couldn't get him on for murder.
00:21:31.000 Here, they can't even find a crime.
00:21:35.000 All they had to do was make up a crime, add one in one and get 11.
00:21:40.000 And it just won't work.
00:21:42.000 They'll get an indictment because, as the chief judge of New York once said, a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich.
00:21:48.000 And in New York, a petty jury will convict a ham sandwich if his name is Trump.
00:21:53.000 And so there is a possibility that he'll get convicted.
00:21:56.000 I think it'll be reversed on appeal, but by that time, we're well into the 2024 election.
00:22:02.000 So this is a real interference with my right to vote against him for the third time and anybody else's right to vote for him for the third time.
00:22:11.000 Let the electors decide who is going to be the next president, not some local DA who has a political bias and a political agenda to try to rerun for office on the basis of getting Trump.
00:22:24.000 That just is not the way the American system is supposed to operate.
00:22:27.000 Yeah, so Professor, you mentioned four cases.
00:22:29.000 I want to make sure I'm tracking.
00:22:31.000 Georgia, DOJ, New York, what is the fourth?
00:22:35.000 Florida, the confidential material.
00:22:40.000 That actually is the strongest case legally and factually, but the weakest one politically, because the American public will say, if they didn't go after Biden and they didn't go after Pence, why are they going after Trump, even if the facts are somewhat different?
00:22:54.000 So I don't think there'll be a prosecution for the Florida confidential material.
00:23:00.000 Yes, got it.
00:23:02.000 And I don't think there'll be a DC.
00:23:04.000 That would be the most serious one because it involves disqualification from running for office if he's convicted of some kind of sedition crime.
00:23:14.000 But the speech he made was constitutionally protected.
00:23:17.000 He said he wanted people to demonstrate peacefully and patriotically.
00:23:21.000 And the last one is that phone call.
00:23:23.000 But in the phone call, he said, I need to find, not make up, not concoct.
00:23:28.000 I need to find.
00:23:29.000 Find has a dictionary definition.
00:23:31.000 It means something's lost.
00:23:32.000 It's there.
00:23:33.000 And you have to search around to find it.
00:23:35.000 And so the most likely explanation for that call is to the state Secretary of State, please look hard.
00:23:41.000 There may be votes that have not been counted.
00:23:43.000 That's a perfectly legitimate phone call.
00:23:45.000 I got to tell you, Professor, that was the best summary of the Georgia defense I've heard from anyone.
00:23:50.000 You did that in 30 seconds.
00:23:51.000 You isolated the word.
00:23:52.000 You defined it.
00:23:53.000 It was very succinct.
00:23:54.000 And I find that to be persuasive.
00:23:56.000 But let's talk about your book.
00:23:57.000 I encourage everyone to get it, Get Trump.
00:23:59.000 One of the reasons why I think this is really powerful, Professor, is that you and I have lots of political differences.
00:24:05.000 But we both agree that the justice system as it's designed in America, if it's properly enacted, is beautiful and is the standard of the world.
00:24:14.000 But there are threats to our civil liberties beyond just getting Trump.
00:24:18.000 Can you talk about how this is bigger than Trump?
00:24:20.000 About if you're able to do this to political opponents and dissidents, it sets bad precedent.
00:24:24.000 It allows prosecutors to go above and beyond, and it actually makes us less free.
00:24:30.000 Without a doubt, there was a South American dictator who said, for my friends, everything, for my enemies, the law.
00:24:37.000 You can use the law to get anybody, as Justice Jackson said, or as the KGB had said, show me the man and I'll find you the crime.
00:24:46.000 This is the worst example in my 60 years of practicing criminal law, of targeting somebody for prosecution and then rummaging through the books, giving people immunity and trying to concoct a crime that doesn't exist.
00:25:00.000 And if this is allowed to succeed, none of our liberties is safe.
00:25:03.000 You know, today it's a Republican who's a target.
00:25:06.000 Tomorrow, it's a Democrat.
00:25:07.000 And the day after tomorrow, it's your Uncle Charlie or your nephew or your niece.
00:25:12.000 There'd be no limits on what prosecutors can do to their political enemies.
00:25:15.000 And they're going to do it to people who are running against them for DA next.
00:25:20.000 And it's just such a violation.
00:25:23.000 And not only a violation of American law and civil liberties, it's actually a violation of the Bible.
00:25:28.000 The Bible instructs judges two things.
00:25:30.000 Don't take bribes.
00:25:31.000 That's obvious.
00:25:32.000 But the number one thing is don't recognize faces.
00:25:36.000 And that's exactly right.
00:25:38.000 Do not favor anyone in the court.
00:25:38.000 Yes.
00:25:40.000 Yes, that's exactly right.
00:25:41.000 Continue.
00:25:41.000 Yes.
00:25:42.000 Sorry.
00:25:43.000 No, and that's why it violates every core of American value.
00:25:47.000 That's why this is one of the worst prosecutions I have ever seen.
00:25:51.000 Believe me, I've seen some bad prosecutions, some good ones.
00:25:54.000 I've seen guilty people acquitted and innocent people convicted, but I've never quite seen a prosecution like this where you had to staple together two unrelated statutes, one federal, one state, violate the statute of limitations, violate the rule of law, and concoct a crime.
00:26:11.000 You know, Thomas Jefferson once said for a criminal statute to be constitutional, you have to be able to understand it if you read it while running.
00:26:20.000 I'm sitting and I can't understand this prosecution.
00:26:24.000 So, Professor, I want to ask something about kind of high society liberals that are pushing for this.
00:26:31.000 And you've actually had a difficult couple years because of your principled stand.
00:26:35.000 And you joke around that all of a sudden the dinner invite stopped as soon as you started to defend Donald Trump.
00:26:40.000 I find that to be very interesting.
00:26:43.000 But can you, can you, maybe you don't have a good answer to this, but can you help me understand what is the psychology of people that for years were classical liberals and donors to the ACLU and were always fighting for the little guy against the big, awful criminal justice system that, you know, civil libertarians that seem enthusiastic now about using the instruments of government power to go after a political opponent.
00:27:10.000 It's shocking to me.
00:27:11.000 People like my former colleague Lawrence Tribe and others who were good civil libertarians, now they're willing to trash the Constitution just to get Trump, no matter what it takes, just to get Trump.
00:27:22.000 Look, some of these people think Trump is like Adolf Hitler.
00:27:25.000 And, you know, we assassinate Adolf Hitler. 0.75
00:27:28.000 And they want to legally assassinate Donald Trump, not physically, but legally.
00:27:33.000 And they're willing to sacrifice the Constitution.
00:27:36.000 What they say is a Trump presidency is more dangerous than unconstitutional actions.
00:27:41.000 And they're just wrong about that.
00:27:43.000 Precedents endure forever, as Justice Jackson said, they lie around like loaded weapons, ready for the hand of any tyrant to use it against their enemies.
00:27:52.000 And that's what's being done here.
00:27:54.000 They're establishing a precedent that any tyrant today, it's again a Democrat against Republican.
00:28:00.000 Tomorrow it could be a renewal of McCarthyism.
00:28:03.000 You know, in the South, when I was growing up in the 1950s and 60s, the segregationist South used to go against target civil rights workers like Martin Luther King.
00:28:13.000 They would find any little violation, any trespassing violation, anything, and use that to target them and lock them up and put them in jail.
00:28:22.000 And all of us were opposed to that.
00:28:24.000 And that's what's being done today.
00:28:26.000 The shoe doesn't fit on the other foot for most civil libertarians today.
00:28:30.000 Yeah, and it's so just personally when you communicate with them, I don't know how much you do.
00:28:34.000 Is that really the argument they make?
00:28:35.000 Is that this is such a argument?
00:28:37.000 Look, they don't communicate with me anymore except to shout at me and yell at me like Larry David.
00:28:42.000 I'm sorry.
00:28:44.000 But, you know, it's shocking that the way people are prepared to violate their own principles and to create precedents that are so, so dangerous for their children and their grandchildren.
00:28:58.000 You know, we look back today at people who own slaves.
00:29:00.000 I think 100 years from now, people will look back at civil libertarians and say, why were you quiet?
00:29:07.000 Why were you silent?
00:29:08.000 Why did you let 110,000 Japanese Americans end up in camps during the Second World War?
00:29:15.000 Why didn't you protest that?
00:29:16.000 Why didn't you protest when Donald Trump was prosecuted for something that wasn't a crime at all?
00:29:22.000 Why didn't you protest?
00:29:23.000 And I think people will be held to account for that in years to come.
00:29:28.000 I may be unpopular today with people on the left, and I am, but I think history will vindicate what I've been saying.
00:29:36.000 And, you know, I wrote my book, Get Trump for History.
00:29:39.000 I want to make sure that my grandchildren and great-grandchildren know that I was on the right side of this issue, even though I voted against Trump.
00:29:47.000 I stood up for the Constitution on behalf of Trump, which very, very few civil libertarians and liberals are doing.
00:29:54.000 I think that's really smart.
00:29:55.000 I think this actually doesn't feel as big as it will 40 years from now.
00:29:58.000 I want to talk about, if we can, Professor, another segment really quick about the historical implications here.
00:30:04.000 First time in American history, and you would think would be for a good reason, right? 1.00
00:30:07.000 Maybe they have him on film murdering somebody or burning down a building.
00:30:12.000 But I mean, to cross that Rubicon over this.
00:30:17.000 The double Rubicon.
00:30:18.000 It's not only a past president.
00:30:19.000 It's a person who's running for president now.
00:30:21.000 Yeah, that's true.
00:30:24.000 That's Banana Republic style.
00:30:26.000 Boy, we're going to talk about what we can do to fight it.
00:30:28.000 Part of it is actually reading your book.
00:30:30.000 And I appreciate the moral clarity and the courage from Professor Dershowitz on this because so many people on the classical liberal side disappear when the topic of Trump comes up.
00:30:40.000 Professor, you mentioned this, but I just want to recap.
00:30:43.000 If you were from the prosecutor standpoint, or if you were President Trump's defense attorney, which I recommend you do that again, like you did in the impeachment, which is the strongest case against Trump?
00:30:51.000 You said the document one, but you don't think they actually might advance that?
00:30:54.000 I don't think they will advance that.
00:30:55.000 I think that is the strongest case because factually there were classified material.
00:31:00.000 Trump's defense is likely to be ID classified them.
00:31:03.000 His lawyers haven't made that defense, probably because there's not a strong evidentiary basis for it.
00:31:10.000 But juries won't convict and people won't accept a selected prosecution where they go after Trump, but not after other people.
00:31:18.000 And I have said right from the beginning, if you go into any former president's residence, you're going to find some classified material, of course.
00:31:26.000 People are careless, and there's no indication that any of the people involved did it for malicious reasons, unlike Sandy Berger, who we know put classified material into his sock in order to take it home just for convenience so he could write his book.
00:31:41.000 But at least he did it deliberately.
00:31:42.000 The others probably did it just carelessly.
00:31:45.000 That's the strongest case, and it's pretty weak.
00:31:48.000 I think the strongest case in terms of impact would be January 6th, but they don't have the facts there.
00:31:55.000 And the same thing is true of the phone call in Georgia.
00:31:59.000 The facts are too ambiguous.
00:32:01.000 So, look, there's a lot of smoke here, but there's no fire.
00:32:03.000 And sometimes when there's smoke, there's arson.
00:32:05.000 And that's what's going on here.
00:32:07.000 They're planting cases against Trump, not a single one of them as the basis for succeeding.
00:32:13.000 So, Professor, you made a strong comparison that failure to speak out against slavery 150 years ago was a moral injustice, and the failure to speak out about the political persecution against Trump is a moral injustice.
00:32:25.000 And history will not judge those people kindly.
00:32:29.000 Talk about the historical weight here.
00:32:31.000 As you said, it's a double crossing of the Rubicon for something that is a novel, would put it nicely, but unique and complete just twisting of the legal code.
00:32:41.000 Again, it's not as if they have a video of Donald Trump carjacking something, something that would be very visible, very violent, or something that would be Bernie Madoff-style pain or suffering.
00:32:52.000 We're talking about a private payment and not even applicable in a way that would be rational.
00:32:58.000 But talk about the historical significance here, Professor.
00:33:01.000 The historical significance is for the first time in history, an election has been affected by a prosecution.
00:33:08.000 Look, it may have been affected in 2016 by the ill-advised statement made by the head of the FBI, who was acting essentially as Attorney General when he gave his personal views of Hillary Clinton.
00:33:22.000 But that was just one person's personal views.
00:33:25.000 There was no prosecution.
00:33:27.000 Had there been a prosecution in that case, that too would have been a Rubicon prosecuting somebody just before an election.
00:33:33.000 That should never happen unless the evidence is overwhelming.
00:33:37.000 I like to talk about the two tests that have to be passed.
00:33:39.000 One is the Nixon test, and that is the only reason Nixon was removed from office because Republicans wanted to move.
00:33:46.000 It has to be bipartisan.
00:33:47.000 If you're going after the former president or a future potential president, it must be bipartisan.
00:33:54.000 It can't be seen as in any way partisan with political advantage.
00:33:59.000 The other is the Hillary Clinton stand, that she wasn't prosecuted, even though there was some, you know, pretty arguable evidence about her having in her possession material that she shouldn't have had.
00:34:10.000 So unless you can satisfy those criteria, I don't think a criminal prosecution is warranted, especially when you have to make up the crime.
00:34:19.000 And here, I think any honest criminal lawyer will tell you that this is a stretch beyond contortion, that this is not something that any responsible prosecutor would ever bring.
00:34:31.000 As I said, in the Al Capone case, at least there was evidence that he actually violated the income tax laws, even though they went after him because he was a murderer.
00:34:39.000 Here, they have to make up the crime.
00:34:41.000 And there's no original crime like the murder.
00:34:45.000 Their original crime, Professor, is him winning the 2016 election.
00:34:48.000 Not murder, but the killing of Hillary Clinton's presidential ambitions.
00:34:52.000 I think it's revenge-driven.
00:34:54.000 Do you think that plays into this?
00:34:55.000 Oh, I do.
00:34:56.000 Of course it does.
00:34:57.000 Look, I was a Hillary Clinton supporter.
00:34:59.000 I was a friend of Hillary Clinton.
00:35:00.000 I wanted her to win, but she lost. 1.00
00:35:03.000 She lost because she didn't campaign very well, and she made some wrong decisions. 1.00
00:35:08.000 It could have gone the other way.
00:35:09.000 She lost. 0.86
00:35:10.000 She won the popular vote.
00:35:12.000 But you have to accept it.
00:35:13.000 And I think President Trump should have accepted the 2020 election.
00:35:17.000 I hope he does before the 2024 election.
00:35:21.000 But look, Andrew Jackson didn't accept really the results of the election when John Quincy Adams beat him improperly.
00:35:29.000 And then he came back and he did win overwhelmingly in the next election.
00:35:33.000 So, you know, the American public has the right to decide who the next president should be, not District Attorney Bragg.
00:35:39.000 I agree.
00:35:40.000 Not generals, not anybody else except the people.
00:35:44.000 Gotta run.
00:35:45.000 Professor, thank you, everyone.
00:35:46.000 Check out the book, Get Trump.
00:35:48.000 It is the most important book that has come out in the last couple of weeks because it's written for today.
00:35:53.000 I don't know how you did the timing, but it's pretty remarkable.
00:35:57.000 Professor, thank you so much.
00:35:58.000 It's a pleasure to be on with you.
00:36:00.000 Thank you.
00:36:01.000 Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
00:36:02.000 Email me your thoughts as always: freedom at charliekirk.com.
00:36:05.000 Thank you so much for listening, and God bless.
00:36:12.000 For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.