The Charlie Kirk Show - Getting to the Bottom of What REALLY Happened on January 6th with Darren Beattie

00:00:00.000 Hey, everybody.

00:00:00.000 Today in the Charlie Kirk Show, super important episode.

00:00:03.000 Stop what you're doing and listen to every word of this.

00:00:05.000 But before we get into it, please consider supporting us at charliekirk.com slash support.

00:00:13.000 That's where it all is made possible at charliekirk.com/slash support.

00:00:17.000 As always, you can email us your questions, freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:00:20.000 Action-packed episode, everybody.

00:00:22.000 Thank you for supporting us.

00:00:23.000 Thank you for emailing us.

00:00:25.000 And also, get involved with TurningPointUSA at tpusa.com.

00:00:28.000 Can't forget that.

00:00:29.000 Buckle up, everybody.

00:00:30.000 Here we go.

00:00:32.000 Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.

00:00:33.000 Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.

00:00:36.000 I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.

00:00:39.000 Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.

00:00:42.000 I want to thank Charlie.

00:00:43.000 He's an incredible guy.

00:00:44.000 His spirit, his love of this country, he's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.

00:00:51.000 Turning point USA.

00:00:53.000 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.

00:01:01.000 That's why we are here.

00:01:05.000 Did you know that 80% of all grass-fed beef sold in the United States is imported from overseas?

00:01:10.000 It's staggering and it's a problem.

00:01:12.000 You need to buy meat made in America.

00:01:14.000 And that's why I get my meat from goodranchers.com.

00:01:16.000 So look, I talked to good ranchers on the phone.

00:01:18.000 I said, send me the box that you send our listeners.

00:01:21.000 And I could you not?

00:01:22.000 I got a box that you wouldn't believe.

00:01:24.000 This could feed the 101st airborne.

00:01:26.000 There is enough meat for July 4th, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year's, Valentine's Day, St. Patrick's, and Tax Day.

00:01:37.000 And I know you need to eat a lot on Tax Day because that's not a good day.

00:01:40.000 And sometimes you got to eat.

00:01:42.000 But my friends, Good Ranchers, they've traveled the entire United States and met with actual people, real farmers, not the corporate hacks.

00:01:48.000 Look, Good Ranchers, they love their country. 0.65

00:01:50.000 Unlike all these wokesters and they sell you this fake vegan meat made in a laboratory with Bill Gates and underwater or whatever he's doing, this is real because their product is 100% American. 0.98

00:02:01.000 When you buy steak and chicken from Good Ranchers, not only are you getting amazing meat, but you're also supporting American farms. 0.99

00:02:06.000 In fact, producer Connor, I went back to go into the freezer and all the meat was gone.

00:02:11.000 It was gone.

00:02:12.000 I said, what did you do?

00:02:13.000 He said, it's goodranchers, goodranchers.com.

00:02:16.000 I had to eat it.

00:02:17.000 And he was right.

00:02:18.000 Check out the Family Fest bundle.

00:02:20.000 If you subscribe, you'll save 20% off with each purchase.

00:02:22.000 So here's how it works.

00:02:24.000 Imagine if you had like a dollar shave club for meat.

00:02:28.000 It's that simple.

00:02:29.000 You get the meat delivered to your door and you don't have to go grocery shopping, no more lines, no more mystery meat, none of that stuff.

00:02:35.000 So stop guessing.

00:02:37.000 Support your country.

00:02:38.000 Know where your meat comes from with goodranchers.com.

00:02:40.000 Support American farmers.

00:02:42.000 Go to goodranchers.com slash Charlie to get $20 off and free express shipping.

00:02:47.000 It's 100% American beef and it's goodranchers.com slash Charlie.

00:02:51.000 Ranchers of the Ness.

00:02:52.000 It's a safe and convenient way to shop.

00:02:54.000 You'll get a big box and you'll be happy.

00:02:56.000 I know a lot of you guys want to do cookouts this summer.

00:02:59.000 Maybe it's beef, maybe it's steak, maybe it's pork, maybe it's chicken, whatever it is.

00:03:02.000 Goodranchersofthaness.com slash Charlie.

00:03:04.000 Look, I have a, I'm going to guess, just a wild guess here.

00:03:08.000 All of you listening are going to have to eat at some point.

00:03:11.000 If you have to eat, you might as well buy from someone who helps the Charlie Kirk show.

00:03:16.000 So do that at goodranchers.com slash Charlie, goodranchers.com slash Charlie.

00:03:23.000 Hey, everybody.

00:03:24.000 Welcome to this episode of the Charlie Kirk Show.

00:03:27.000 With us today, Darren Beatty from Revolver.news.

00:03:32.000 You probably saw Darren on Tucker Carlson recently breaking what was probably the biggest story in the country.

00:03:39.000 And I could say it probably still is.

00:03:41.000 It's a shocking story, and I want to explore it in great detail, uninterrupted by any sort of corporate censors here with Darren Beattie.

00:03:49.000 Darren, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk Show.

00:03:51.000 Great to be here.

00:03:52.000 Thanks for having me.

00:03:54.000 So you run a website, revolver.news.

00:03:56.000 I visit it every day, and it's very interesting.

00:03:59.000 It's somewhat of a news aggregator, but also more than that, you guys are breaking your own news.

00:04:05.000 You texted me this story last week, and I was doing like 500 different things at once, and you said you had a big thing coming.

00:04:12.000 And so usually when people say that, it's like, yeah, okay, well, you actually had a really big story, and it somewhat broke the internet and had tech companies involved and people responding to accusations that didn't exist.

00:04:25.000 Walk us through in detail how you came across this story.

00:04:28.000 What is the story?

00:04:30.000 Because some of our listeners might be doing 100 things at once.

00:04:32.000 They might have heard it and they weren't really sure.

00:04:35.000 Walk us through all of this.

00:04:37.000 So, yeah, this revolver.news investigative piece, just to give people a flavor of the magnitude of this, I've heard from many people this is the most important and the darkest piece of investigative journalism they've seen in years.

00:04:53.000 And it does explore some extremely disturbing possibilities.

00:04:58.000 But the whole reason I think this is important and that it's worth the risk and it's worth talking about is that the American people really deserve to know the truth about 1.6.

00:05:11.000 And we've all heard, I think, by now about the case of Ashley Babbitt, who was shot in cold blood by some kind of officer.

00:05:20.000 We still don't have answers to that.

00:05:22.000 This is not just on her behalf.

00:05:24.000 It's not just on behalf of the hundreds of political protesters on January 6th who are now being held in solitary confinement in horrible conditions, human rights violation level conditions, as has been reported by Julie Kelly, who's done great work on this.

00:05:43.000 It's not just for them.

00:05:44.000 It's actually for all of us, Charlie, it's for you.

00:05:47.000 It's for me.

00:05:48.000 It's for the 70 plus million people who are Trump voters, Trump supporters, or who simply disagree with our corrupt ruling class, who have been designated now by our own government as de facto domestic terrorists.

00:06:05.000 And the media apparatus and the government is using 1.6 to facilitate that very narrative.

00:06:14.000 And so that's what's at stake in getting to the bottom of 1.6, getting to the truth of 1.6.

00:06:20.000 And the way this revolver.news piece sets up the question here is to say the key to unlocking the truth about 1.6 is the following question.

00:06:32.000 Of the major militia groups that the government has imputed to 1.6, oath keepers, proud boys, three percenters, to what degree was there infiltration involved?

00:06:47.000 Secondly, to put an even finer point on it, of the unindicted persons mentioned in the charging documents related to 1.6, to those who are actually indicted, the people referenced who aren't indicted,

00:07:02.000 who occupy senior positions of said militias, to what extent do they remain unindicted on the basis of a prior relationship with the federal government as either an informant or an undercover operative?

00:07:18.000 And to put it simply, since the establishment has coalesced around this narrative that 1.6 was a result of an intelligence failure, we had uniquely bad security and they just had no idea there was a potential for violence.

00:07:32.000 Do we accept the FBI director Christopher Wray's position that this was an intelligence failure?

00:07:39.000 Or is the truth more along the lines of what this revolver.news piece suggests, which is that it's actually an intelligence setup?

00:07:49.000 So you were the first news outlet to kind of say what everyone was sort of suspecting out loud.

00:07:56.000 Can you walk through some of the evidence that you presented in this story at Revolver Not News that caught the attention of Tucker Carlson and he ran with it probably quicker and more forcefully than I bet you even anticipated, where he led with it, doubled down on it, and tripled down on it.

00:08:16.000 Can you walk through the evidence in great detail to some people that are just saying, oh, this is just another theory.

00:08:23.000 What makes this so different?

00:08:27.000 That's a great question.

00:08:28.000 And right before I get into that, I want to jump on something you mentioned as you set out the question, which is we'd all kind of been thinking about this, but this piece really laid it out and articulates it in extensive detail and with persuasive force.

00:08:46.000 I think this really goes to show how important it is to have the right narrative and how we can be completely distracted, just spinning our wheels if we're just kind of close to the right narrative, but not quite there.

00:09:03.000 As I mentioned, there's been great reporting exposing the unjust conditions that a lot of the protesters are now suffering under.

00:09:12.000 There's been a lot of reporting basically affirming the general truth that many of the people who participated in generous X, even who went into the Capitol building when the doors were open, were not domestic terrorists.

00:09:26.000 They were basically tourists taking selfies.

00:09:30.000 That's been another kind of narrative.

00:09:32.000 And there's been another narrative that a lot of the people who were most egregiously involved, that they were Antifa or leftists or something like this.

00:09:42.000 And all of those narratives just didn't really quite catch on.

00:09:46.000 They didn't touch the nerve that this narrative of is it an Intel failure or an Intel setup.

00:09:54.000 But once we're over that narrative, you see how the media has absolutely freaked out.

00:10:00.000 And it reinforces the reality here that finding the right narrative, pinpointing on just what is the key that unlocks the real truth to this, the profound effect and the profound difference that can make.

00:10:14.000 So I just want to point out that since this piece came out, the narrative is no longer, oh, they were taking selfies or, oh, it was a bunch of left-wing Antifa people.

00:10:23.000 The narrative now, the question now, the only question that matters that we need to pursue until we have answers is what did the elements in the government know?

00:10:32.000 When did they know it?

00:10:33.000 And to what extent were they involved?

00:10:36.000 So like to get that out of the way.

00:10:38.000 As for the evidence, I mean, the question is, where do I start?

00:10:42.000 I might start by addressing the concerns of some of your listeners who may be hearing this saying, what is this guy talking about?

00:10:50.000 Our government doesn't do that sort of thing.

00:10:52.000 This is outrageous.

00:10:53.000 Or in the words of Paul Ryan, that's just not who we are.

00:10:57.000 I suspect a lot of people will be thinking about that.

00:11:00.000 And I sympathize with that because, frankly, I wish it weren't the case.

00:11:05.000 I wish that weren't the reality.

00:11:08.000 But to spare everyone the lesson of going all the way back to the days of J. Edgar Hoover, we don't need to go that far back.

00:11:15.000 And this is what's so remarkable.

00:11:18.000 We only need to go back three months before this so-called storming of the Capitol in 1.6 to this Michigan kidnapping plot, which maybe people sort of vaguely remember, but not really because the news cycle is so accelerated and crazy.

00:11:37.000 So what is this Michigan kidnapping plot?

00:11:39.000 Well, the parallels to 1.6 are striking.

00:11:43.000 In the Michigan kidnapping plot, that is this plot to kidnap the governor of Michigan, this plot also involved storming the Michigan state capitol.

00:11:57.000 That's interesting.

00:11:59.000 And many of the key players indicted on this plot or imputed to this plot are said by the government to be members of one of the three main militia groups imputed to 1.6.

00:12:14.000 That's the three percenters.

00:12:15.000 The so-called mastermind of this plot named Adam Fox, government says, oh, he's a leader of the three percenters. 0.89

00:12:24.000 That's interesting.

00:12:26.000 Now, what else is interesting?

00:12:28.000 Well, of the 18 people who are plotters in this or said to be plotters involved in the plot, we know now for a fact that at least five of that 18 are federal informants or undercover agents.

00:12:47.000 And the fifth actually revealed himself in a spectacular fashion, which we cover in more detail in the Revolver.news piece.

00:12:55.000 So we have, oh yes, and for the cherry on top, and this is really the best part.

00:13:01.000 The head of the Michigan infiltration operation, the head of the Detroit FBI field office who ran that infiltration operation, Stephen D'Antono.

00:13:14.000 Just days after these so-called plotters were arrested, FBI Director Christopher Wray quietly and suspiciously promoted D'Antoono from the Detroit field office to the coveted DC field office, where he went on to oversee, you guessed it, the investigation into 1.6.

00:13:35.000 So I'm saying that is a heck of a coincidence.

00:13:38.000 We have just months before the 1.6 storming of the Capitol, a plot to storm the Michigan state capitol involving one of the main militia groups imputed to 1.6, and where the head of that infiltration operation was subsequently promoted to investigate 1.6.

00:13:58.000 And they had a Fed infiltration ratio of five out of 18 at least and maybe even more.

00:14:05.000 That I think is shocking.

00:14:10.000 Did you ever read the fine print that appears when you start browsing in incognito mode?

00:14:14.000 It says that your activity might still be visible to your employer, your school, or your internet service provider.

00:14:19.000 How can they even call it incognito?

00:14:20.000 To really stop these people from visiting, from seeing the sites you visit, you need to do what I do and use ExpressVPN.

00:14:27.000 Think about all the times you've used the Wi-Fi at a coffee shop, a hotel, or even at your parents' home.

00:14:31.000 Without ExpressVPN, every single site you visit could be logged by the admin of that network.

00:14:37.000 And that's still true when you're in incognito mode.

00:14:40.000 What's more is your home internet provider, I'm talking about Comcast, AT ⁇ T, or whatever, can also see and record your browsing data.

00:14:47.000 ExpressVPN is an application.

00:14:49.000 It's an app that encrypts all of your network data and reroutes it through a network of secure servers that your private online activity says just that, private.

00:14:57.000 ExpressVPN works on all of your devices and it's super easy to use.

00:15:01.000 So stop letting strangers invade your online privacy.

00:15:04.000 Protect yourself at expressvpn.com slash Charlie.

00:15:08.000 Use my link at expressvpn.com slash Charlie.

00:15:11.000 That's exprsvpn.com slash Charlie to learn more.

00:15:18.000 So Darren, let's go through the three different kind of buckets throughout your piece.

00:15:22.000 Things we know, things we think we know, and things we don't know that we need to find out.

00:15:27.000 Let's start with things that we know.

00:15:29.000 What do we know 100% true?

00:15:32.000 For example, I'm going to read from your piece.

00:15:34.000 There are what appears to be upwards of 20 unindicted co-conspirators in the Oathkeepers indictments, all playing various roles in the conspiracy, who have not yet been charged for virtually the exact same activities, and in some cases, much more severe activities as those named alongside the indictments.

00:15:52.000 So we know there's 20 of these people.

00:15:54.000 Now, some people will say, oh, we're not going to name them because they might eventually get indicted.

00:16:00.000 Is that the case, Darren?

00:16:01.000 What is an unindicted co-conspirator?

00:16:04.000 What does that mean?

00:16:05.000 Right.

00:16:07.000 It's a very good, very important question.

00:16:09.000 And to set up the answer to that question, I'd like to say a little bit about how I set up the argument.

00:16:15.000 All that stuff I just said about Michigan, I'm not saying all this stuff happened in Michigan and the logical conclusion is it necessarily happened in 1.6.

00:16:25.000 I'm not making that leap.

00:16:27.000 I simply adduce the example of Michigan to help reinforce the intuition and help to underscore the pressing plausibility of the 1.6 thesis to those who might initially be skeptical.

00:16:42.000 You don't have to go that far back.

00:16:44.000 They were doing exactly this same thing just months before with the same group, with the same plan.

00:16:49.000 So what's the argument in relation to 1.6 itself?

00:16:53.000 Well, the argument is this.

00:16:55.000 To understand why the unindicted persons are important and why the fact that they're unindicted is important and suspicious, you have to understand the standard of prosecution that's applied to many of the people who are actually indicted.

00:17:14.000 Now, one of the lead people in prosecutions called Michael Sherwin, he said in an interview very smugly, with great self-satisfaction, that he was going to apply a quote, shock and awe standard of prosecution to these 1.6 cases, invoking wartime terminology from the Iraq War, believe it or not, which is striking in and of itself,

00:17:42.000 given how they're trying to use 1.6 to push this new Patriot Act, only this time against Patriots.

00:17:48.000 So, what does this shock and awe standard of prosecution mean?

00:17:52.000 Well, to illustrate, I would offer the case of George Tanios, who is facing 60 years in prison.

00:18:00.000 He's this sandwich shop owner who is around the Capitol, around the melee.

00:18:05.000 He didn't go into the Capitol.

00:18:07.000 He was around the Capitol as all the skirmishes were going on.

00:18:11.000 He had bear spray in his bag or in his coat.

00:18:17.000 And his companion went to him and said, Is it time I want to get the bear spray and potentially use it against some of the officers in the course of this melee?

00:18:29.000 George Tannios responded to his companion: No, no, not yet.

00:18:36.000 On the basis of saying no, no, not yet to his companion who wanted to grab the bear spray, George Tanios faces 60 years for conspiracy to assault an officer.

00:18:48.000 Now, an additional detail, which makes this even more outrageous, is that the whole reason that this bear spray was an issue in the media at all was that an original 1.6 narrative, which Revolver.news exposed, collapsed.

00:19:04.000 And that was the narrative that Officer Sicknick was bludgeoned to death with a fire extinguisher by the MAGA mob.

00:19:12.000 Once that was falsified, largely by the reporting of Revolver.news, also Julie Kelly and others, they shifted the official narrative to he died of bear spray.

00:19:26.000 Revolver.news did a next report doing a very detailed comparative image analysis saying there's no way he died of bear spray.

00:19:34.000 In fact, he wasn't even bear sprayed.

00:19:35.000 The spray that hit him wasn't even bear spray.

00:19:38.000 We later turned out to be correct.

00:19:40.000 So, and now the official story is that SickNick died of natural causes.

00:19:45.000 And so you have this guy, George Tanios, who's facing 60 years for saying no, no, not yet, when his friend wanted to grab bear spray, where the officer that they originally said was basically murdered by the bear spray wasn't even hit by bearspray.

00:20:00.000 So that's an outrage.

00:20:02.000 I think this shock and awe standard prosecution is an outrage.

00:20:06.000 But the reason it's relevant to this argument in the Revolver.news piece is it's saying, why is it the case that somebody like George Tanios is facing 60 years for saying no, no, not yet?

00:20:20.000 And then we have this list of unindicted persons listed in the charging documents whose behaviors and actions seem to be far more egregious than that of George Tannios and many, many others indicted.

00:20:37.000 Why are they being scared indictment?

00:20:40.000 And one explanation for this, and I think a strong explanation of this, is that some of those people, in particular those who occupy senior-level positions within these key militia groups, that some of those people are unindicted as a result of a prior relationship with the federal government as an informant or as an undercover agent.

00:21:08.000 And one last thing before I stop this spiel is the argument that I've seen so many straw men in response to this piece, which the media is just freaking out.

00:21:21.000 One of the strawmen, which is the absolute most ridiculous, is saying just because charging documents refer to someone as person X, person Y, person Z, an individual, that doesn't necessarily mean they're a federal agent.

00:21:35.000 I never claimed that, and of course it doesn't.

00:21:38.000 The point isn't, the argument isn't, oh, they're referred to as person X, therefore they're necessarily an agent.

00:21:44.000 The argument is: how do we explain the double standard between the shock and awe prosecutions of people like George Tanios and the lack of indictment for many of these people listed as persons X, Y, Z who occupy senior positions within these militia groups who are not indicted?

00:22:05.000 So now let's talk about things that we think we know.

00:22:08.000 If this was the case, Darren, and there were 20 people that were potentially undercover that were doing whatever it might be, is this standard operating procedure for federal law enforcement?

00:22:22.000 That when the president speaks, is this standard operating procedure for the FBI to have informants?

00:22:28.000 I'm trying to make the most, let's say, fair question I can, Darren, to try to say, what is the counter to this?

00:22:35.000 Well, the president's speaking, therefore, we might want to try to diffuse threats or keep eyes on them.

00:22:41.000 Is there something to be said, though, that maybe some of those 20 were encouraging or inciting?

00:22:48.000 And do we have any detail about those 20 unindicted co-conspirators that might be on federal government payroll, or maybe they had a prior arrangement, or maybe they were working in tandem or conjunction about them?

00:23:00.000 Do we know anything about these individuals?

00:23:04.000 Yes.

00:23:05.000 So, another great question.

00:23:07.000 And just to clarify, my position, the Revolver.news article's position, is not that we are absolutely sure that every single person who's unindicted who's referenced in the charging documents is a federal agent.

00:23:24.000 That is not the case.

00:23:25.000 Every single person is not a federal agent.

00:23:27.000 The argument isn't anyone who's unindicted who's listing in the documents is a federal agent.

00:23:33.000 The argument is there are senior people in the militias who may be mentioned in these charging documents who are not indicted that I have extreme suspicions about, but that's kind of something for a subsequent bombshell report.

00:23:53.000 But as to the point of wouldn't we expect federal agents to be around to have security?

00:24:00.000 Absolutely.

00:24:00.000 This isn't about undercover agents who are in a crowd, who are, especially when the president is present, there's secret service.

00:24:09.000 There are all kinds of people that you expect to be around to provide security.

00:24:14.000 This is about people who belong to the main militia groups in senior positions who have had a long term, who may have had a long-term cooperative relationship with the federal government, either as an undercover agent or as an informant.

00:24:29.000 So this isn't speaking to the necessity for security officials at a big crowd.

00:24:37.000 This is speaking to, given that this term insurrection is really most closely connected with the militia groups, Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, 3%ers,

00:24:51.000 it would be a remarkable thing if senior members of these said militia groups turned out to be federal agents or informants because these are the groups that they're blaming for the insurrection, effectively.

00:25:10.000 And we know that this has been, this has happened before in Bureau history.

00:25:14.000 We know this happened with certain dissident groups.

00:25:17.000 I don't want to call it dissident, but groups that were not viewed favorably, especially free speech groups in the 60s and 70s, Martin Luther King Jr., black nationalist organizations.

00:25:28.000 That is well documented.

00:25:30.000 Absolutely.

00:25:31.000 This would not be, let's just say, uncharted territory.

00:25:37.000 I suppose, and some of the response to these things have been really interesting because Twitter came out and they said, they didn't say Tucker was wrong in response to your story.

00:25:47.000 They said Tucker said, well, it was something like, you can't go to jail for cooperating with a federal agent.

00:25:55.000 No one's arguing that.

00:25:57.000 That's not the point.

00:25:58.000 The point is, to what extent did our own government have information or knowledge, involvement, or potentially, God forbid, encouragement for this sort of activity?

00:26:12.000 Was there some sort of buildup of a pattern of behavior where this could have been stopped short, maybe in the weeks ahead of time?

00:26:20.000 Or was it the opposite?

00:26:21.000 Was there actually federal agents that were raising the temperature of this?

00:26:25.000 This is stuff we don't know.

00:26:27.000 And I want to get to that category now, Darren, which is: wait a second, were federal agents potentially participating, not federal agents or federal agents or federal informants that have cooperative relationships?

00:26:38.000 And they're somewhat indistinguishable, if that makes sense, right?

00:26:43.000 I mean, in the sense that in some ways, were they raising the temperature?

00:26:50.000 Is that a fair question?

00:26:52.000 Right.

00:26:53.000 Raising the temperature or even serving as linchpins of the whole organizational apparatus that constitutes what could remotely be construed as an insurrectionist aspect of 1.6.

00:27:11.000 The only kind of organizational, kind of militia-like element comes from these three groups.

00:27:19.000 And these three groups have been around for a long time.

00:27:22.000 And in fact, this is not breaking, this is just known that the head of the Proud Boys, it's been reported that he has a history of a cooperative relationship with the FBI, which is a very interesting Tario or something.

00:27:39.000 Tario.

00:27:40.000 Enrique Tario, this is, he's not the subject of our piece.

00:27:44.000 This is sort of a side story, but it's been reported that the head of the Proud Boys was actually a federal informant at least at some stage in his life.

00:27:55.000 And it's very curious, just as a side note, that this head of the Proud Boys, who is a federal informant, he gets in, he flies into DC airports, technically in Virginia.

00:28:08.000 And I guess he drives into allegedly, this is from reports, he drives into DC and apparently he's arrested for some kind of weapons charge.

00:28:23.000 And it just makes me think, and a lot of people think this is very convenient to have the head of the Proud Boys off the table right before January 6th.

00:28:35.000 What better excuse to have him say, oh, you know, I'm not able to be around guys.

00:28:40.000 Sorry.

00:28:41.000 You know, it's a very suspicious thing.

00:28:45.000 And it's actually interesting that Stephen DiAntono, the guy I mentioned who was promoted from the Detroit field office to the DC field office, he actually references the arrest of Tario as an example of an intelligence success that, oh, we arrested this guy right leading up to January 6th, when in fact,

00:29:13.000 I think an alternative explanation for this is that this was a way to get him off the table before 1.6, which you could tell his people, okay, this is why I wasn't around.

00:29:31.000 The thing about just speaking generally about people who have an informant role is their job is to get other people to cross the line.

00:29:40.000 Their job is to get other people across the line.

00:29:43.000 And there tends to be a track record of these types getting off completely or getting relatively minor charged where everyone around them gets hit with very serious indictments.

00:29:59.000 Look, can I tell you something that really bothers me?

00:30:01.000 When good people get scheduled for cancellation for no reason, that's what's happening to Mike Lindell.

00:30:07.000 I was just with Mike Lindell with 15,000 of my closest friends in Wisconsin.

00:30:11.000 And Mike Lindell was hosting an entire event and the media went after him like you wouldn't believe.

00:30:15.000 And they're trying to take my pillow out of every single store.

00:30:17.000 Mike Lindell is a good person.

00:30:20.000 And if you need pillows, maybe you're moving in for college or maybe you want to build a pillow palace, go to mypillow.com and always use the promo code Kirk.

00:30:29.000 Remember, they won't go flat.

00:30:31.000 You can wash and dry them as many times as you want and they maintain their shape.

00:30:34.000 They're made in the United States.

00:30:36.000 For a limited time, Mike is offering his premium MyPillows for his lowest price ever.

00:30:40.000 You can get a queen-size premium MyPillow for $29.98, regularly $69.98.

00:30:45.000 So if you love America and you want to support the good guys, go to mypillow.com and click on the Radio Listener Square and use promo code Kirk.

00:30:52.000 You also get deep discounts on all MyPillow products, including Giza Dream Sheets and MyPillow Mattress Topper.

00:30:58.000 MyPillow.com promo code Kirk.

00:31:00.000 If you love America and you want to support the guys that are trying to do everything they can to save it, go to mypillow.com, buy a bunch of stuff, promo code Kirk.

00:31:10.000 So, I have a question, Darren, and I just want to make something very clear for all the smear merchants and the corporate types that don't like to think outside of the framework that we're only allowed to talk about things is that you are not, and you have never said definitively that you think this is a false flag operation.

00:31:28.000 You have never said that.

00:31:29.000 You are just asking questions about foreknowledge the federal government had with these unindicted co-conspirators.

00:31:36.000 So, here's my question, Darren.

00:31:38.000 What was the final point of which you said this right here in this document that has been revealed is the piece that has now said I'm going to go public?

00:31:49.000 Can you just talk about some of the information, the hard information that you saw and your team saw that then compelled you to go public with this series of questions?

00:32:01.000 And was it a charging document that you saw?

00:32:03.000 Was it a Senate report?

00:32:05.000 Was it the Christopher Ray, Amy Klobuchard discussion?

00:32:09.000 What was it precisely?

00:32:11.000 Well, I hate to answer like this, but to give the truthful answer would tip off what our subsequent piece will be.

00:32:19.000 So, I'm not sure.

00:32:21.000 I'm just generally curious.

00:32:22.000 I'm not trying to trip you.

00:32:24.000 No, no, no, no.

00:32:26.000 I have to punt on that for now.

00:32:28.000 But other than the part that I can't fully reveal now, I think, again, this is, I'm not claiming that this is definitive proof, but I think the Michigan case, the fact that nobody had ever talked about the Michigan plot in relation to 1.6 was absolutely remarkable, given the striking parallels.

00:32:50.000 And that in conjunction with this shock and awe standard of prosecution applied to, you know, virtually speaking, you know, that you had people standing around within a radius of the Capitol who are now just languishing in solitary confinement.

00:33:06.000 And then I noticed people who are unindicted who would seem to, by the shock and awe standard, be indicted.

00:33:14.000 And just knowing the history of how these things play out, knowing how Michigan played out, it looked deeply suspicious.

00:33:22.000 And so that definitely increased my confidence level.

00:33:29.000 And the confidence level was extremely robust prior to publication.

00:33:35.000 But if it could get any better, the confidence level is only enhanced by the response that this has received from the media, because I think the objections given are so weak and so hedged and basically set up to say, okay, well, maybe there were some informants in some way, which gets us to another thing you raised is saying, am I claiming this is a false flag or not?

00:34:01.000 I mean, false flag is not, it has no precise definition.

00:34:06.000 Like, what is, what's the definition of a false flag?

00:34:09.000 I'm saying that key people and senior positions of the major militia groups, which both the Pentagon, the Department of Justice, the FBI, our regime media have said these are the organizations that are these militia groups most directly responsible for 1.6.

00:34:29.000 If it turns out that senior people in those groups are actually federal informants or undercover agents, you can call that whatever you want.

00:34:39.000 You can call it a false flag, call it something else.

00:34:42.000 But that's a more precise formulation of the possibility that I'm exploring here.

00:34:49.000 And so I think that's a really important clarification.

00:34:54.000 Didn't mean to put you on the spot.

00:34:55.000 I'm just curious as someone who kind of knows how information flows and kind of turning points.

00:35:00.000 So we'll have you on here.

00:35:02.000 Well put.

00:35:03.000 We'll have you on at a different time to kind of explore that.

00:35:07.000 And so I have a question about what we don't know.

00:35:10.000 What we don't know is to what level or sophistication did all this connect together.

00:35:16.000 The pipe bomb thing is sort of interesting, I think.

00:35:19.000 It's very interesting.

00:35:20.000 Can you talk about that?

00:35:22.000 Well, yes, this is actually an entirely separate thread.

00:35:26.000 I mean, it's certainly connected, but it was a separate investigative thread.

00:35:30.000 And again, it's another thing that people have basically forgotten.

00:35:35.000 There was this so-called pipe bomber who was around the Capitol and they were using this to really gin up the domestic terrorist thing.

00:35:44.000 And the FBI released just incredibly underwhelming footage. 0.53

00:35:50.000 The footage they release is pathetic compared to what they have.

00:35:54.000 And they're saying, oh, we need to catch this guy. 0.95

00:35:56.000 We need the public's help.

00:35:58.000 There's a $100,000 reward.

00:36:00.000 Well, if you're so interested in getting this guy, why don't you release the footage?

00:36:04.000 Which they haven't done.

00:36:05.000 It's extremely bizarre.

00:36:06.000 It's extremely suspicious.

00:36:08.000 And yes, like generally speaking, this fits into the same narrative.

00:36:12.000 Why aren't they interested in finding this person?

00:36:15.000 Well, and also there's a lot of footage they haven't released.

00:36:17.000 And Tucker mentioned this on his program.

00:36:19.000 Can you talk about that?

00:36:20.000 14,000 hours of footage.

00:36:23.000 If you were wrong, then wouldn't they release it?

00:36:25.000 Now their counter argument is, oh, we're waiting for that for charging documents in some of these trials.

00:36:30.000 And I'm not really sure what that has to do with anything, to be honest.

00:36:33.000 That would be like saying we couldn't release the George Floyd video until we charged Derek Chauvin, right?

00:36:38.000 I mean, is that am I seeing that correctly?

00:36:40.000 Yes.

00:36:41.000 I mean, this is this particular issue.

00:36:44.000 I haven't looked into it in extreme depth.

00:36:47.000 And so I can't speak on that with any special expertise, but I can say generally, it's been extremely suspicious how parsimonious the government has been with its footage, given that in many other contexts, they seem to be interested in this like crowdsourced investigation to catch any, you know, MAGA mom that was standing within, you know,

00:37:15.000 a mile and a half of the Capitol on that day and throw her into solitary confinement.

00:37:19.000 So it's really weird that in the case of the pipe bomber, they're not so generous with their footage.

00:37:24.000 And in the case of a lot of stuff going on inside the Capitol, they're not generous, especially given that we've seen footage that looks like they just opened the doors to these people.

00:37:35.000 And that's another, again, this is all part of the same narrative, but how is it that the U.S. Capitol building had uniquely poor security on that very day?

00:37:48.000 That's exactly right.

00:37:49.000 And so just to go through what PolitiFact just published, I don't know if you saw this.

00:37:55.000 They say that, quote, why the new false flag conspiracy theory that the FBI orchestrated the Capitol Tech is wrong.

00:38:01.000 Now, you actually never said they orchestrated it.

00:38:04.000 So that's a very interesting thing.

00:38:06.000 You're just merely asking what was their involvement?

00:38:09.000 Who are these 20 people?

00:38:10.000 And so PolitiFact says, quote, under almost all circumstances, experts say undercover government operatives and informants cannot be described in government filings as unindicted co-conspirators.

00:38:22.000 The main reason, a component of a criminal conspiracy, is the agreement to commit a crime.

00:38:29.000 That isn't what undercover operatives do.

00:38:31.000 What's wrong about that?

00:38:32.000 Well, again, this is what I'm saying is my confidence level increases when I see the weakness of this claim.

00:38:39.000 Let's pretend for a second I can get into the kind of nuance explanation about this, or I can just begin with conceding, what if they're right?

00:38:51.000 What if they're right about this point?

00:38:53.000 What does that mean?

00:38:55.000 All that means is that there's no one in the charging documents who's listed with the specific and exact phrase, unindicted co-conspirator, who is an agent.

00:39:09.000 That doesn't say maybe there's someone listed as person X, person Y, person Z, an individual, someone referenced in the charging documents who occupies a senior position in one of these militias, who is not indicted on the basis of being a federal informant or agent.

00:39:30.000 So they're putting all of their cards onto this technicality that, oh, maybe there were federal agents who were senior positions who are referenced in the charging documents, but they don't happen to be referred to with the exact technical phrase unindicted co-conspirator.

00:39:47.000 Well, why aren't they listed as a conspirator?

00:39:49.000 They're not listed as conspirator because they're federal agent.

00:39:55.000 And that's the thing they're not willing to answer.

00:39:58.000 And so I want to end with this, Darren.

00:40:00.000 A lot of lawmakers listen to this program.

00:40:02.000 We talk to a lot of lawmakers.

00:40:04.000 What's the action item here?

00:40:06.000 Well, I do need to congratulate and acknowledge Paul Gosar, who entered the Revolver.news report into the congressional record, and he's been pressing on this.

00:40:20.000 I also like to acknowledge the great Matt Gates, who has taken the questions from this Revolver.news report and formulated them in a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray demanding answers to these very pointed questions.

00:40:39.000 And so this is a start in the sense that it takes the issue to the congressional level and it creates an opportunity for, for instance, all of your listeners who are disturbed by this, who want answers to this, pressure your representative to sign on to Matt Gates' letter here to get answers.

00:40:59.000 At the very least, that's an important action item to do.

00:41:03.000 There are other action items in the future, perhaps subpoenas.

00:41:07.000 There are a lot of things on the table.

00:41:09.000 But the first step, I think the big step is reformulating the conversation of what's relevant about 1.6.

00:41:18.000 What's relevant about 1.6 now is only one thing.

00:41:21.000 Was this an intelligence failure or is it an intelligence setup?

00:41:25.000 We need to focus like a laser on that question and demand answers from Christopher Wray and other government agencies.

00:41:35.000 And I also want to add to that, Senator Johnson, Ron Johnson, has been very good on this, especially in the solitary confinement and the demanding of footage.

00:41:45.000 He's been really good.

00:41:46.000 And I want to make sure I add that because he's been.

00:41:49.000 And as long as I'm on this program, I would call on Senator Rand Paul to take this up.

00:41:54.000 It seemed like an issue that would be right in his wheelhouse.

00:41:57.000 He's certainly familiar with the historical abuses of these very agencies that we're talking about.

00:42:04.000 And so I would hope that he would do the right thing, what he knows is the right thing, and take this issue up and lend his platform and his imprimatur to the question.

00:42:14.000 I think he will.

00:42:15.000 I think he will, the more momentum that is here.

00:42:17.000 Darren, revolver.news, you are continuing to ask the right questions.

00:42:22.000 There's still a lot of things we do not know.

00:42:25.000 And I think we're going to find out in the next sequence of thing of questions you ask how this whole thing kind of came to be.

00:42:32.000 But as President Trump says, we'll see what happens.

00:42:35.000 Thanks so much.

00:42:35.000 That's exactly what I was going to say.

00:42:38.000 There you go.

00:42:39.000 Thanks so much, Darren.

00:42:40.000 Bye-bye.

00:42:40.000 Bye.

00:42:43.000 Thanks so much for listening, everybody.

00:42:44.000 Email us your questions freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:42:47.000 And again, please consider supporting us at charliekirk.com slash support.

00:42:51.000 God bless you guys.

00:42:56.000 For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.

The Charlie Kirk Show - June 21, 2021

Getting to the Bottom of What REALLY Happened on January 6th with Darren Beattie

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript