The Charlie Kirk Show - August 15, 2023


Ivermectin FDA Approved & the Mysterious Die-Off Of Young Americans with Dr. Pierre Kory and Alan Dershowitz


Episode Stats


Length

35 minutes

Words per minute

174.07

Word count

6,130

Sentence count

500

Harmful content

Misogyny

2

sentences flagged

Toxicity

3

sentences flagged

Hate speech

2

sentences flagged


Summary

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

Today on the Charlie Kirk Show, Dr. Pierre Corey joins us about the War on Ivermectin. May we never forget what they did to early treatments. It s evil. And then, Alan Dershowitz joins us to talk about the indictments against Donald Trump and why he s more fired up than ever.

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 on the Charlie Kirk Show, Dr. Pierre Corey joins us about the war on ivermectin.
00:00:05.000 May we never forget what they did to early treatments.
00:00:07.000 It's evil.
00:00:08.000 It's evil.
00:00:10.000 And then Alan Dershowitz joins us.
00:00:11.000 Professor Alan Dershowitz joins us to talk about the indictments against Donald Trump and why he's more fired up than ever.
00:00:20.000 It's a great conversation.
00:00:21.000 Email us your thoughts as always.
00:00:22.000 Freedom at CharlieKirk.com.
00:00:25.000 Get involved with Turning Point USA at tpusa.com.
00:00:28.000 That's tpusa.com.
00:00:30.000 Start a high school or college chapter today.
00:00:33.000 At tpusa.com, tpusa.com.
00:00:38.000 Buckle up, everybody.
00:00:38.000 Here we go.
00:00:40.000 Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
00:00:41.000 Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
00:00:43.000 I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
00:00:47.000 Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
00:00:50.000 I want to thank Charlie.
00:00:51.000 He's an incredible guy.
00:00:52.000 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.
00:01:00.000 We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries.
00:01:05.000 Destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
00:01:09.000 That's why we are here.
00:01:13.000 Brought to you by the Loan Experts iTrust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at AndrewandTod.com.
00:01:22.000 We have joining us momentarily Dr. Pierre Corey, who's the author of The War on Ivermectin.
00:01:28.000 This is a very important topic.
00:01:31.000 And you might say, well, Charlie, you know, the COVID stuff is over.
00:01:35.000 Hold on a second.
00:01:37.000 No, no, no.
00:01:37.000 This was one of the great cover ups of our time.
00:01:42.000 The fraud, the deception, the lying, the authoritarianism, the doublespeak, as if no one is noticing.
00:01:54.000 The CDC, the FDA, was it the CDC or the FDA?
00:01:59.000 The FDA now says ivermectin is perfectly fine for treating COVID.
00:02:03.000 You remember back when they called it horse paste?
00:02:05.000 That we actually lost access to our social media because we even recommended ivermectin?
00:02:11.000 How many millions of lives could have been saved?
00:02:14.000 Not necessarily just domestically, but internationally.
00:02:16.000 How many hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved?
00:02:18.000 We don't know.
00:02:19.000 Pharmacies would not fill prescriptions for ivermectin.
00:02:22.000 I was with a pharmacist last night in Washington.
00:02:25.000 She came up to me at an event.
00:02:26.000 She said, Charlie, I was fired from my job for fulfilling legitimate prescriptions for ivermectin.
00:02:33.000 How many people have gone to jail for this?
00:02:36.000 This is one of the most evil campaigns.
00:02:41.000 That we have seen.
00:02:42.000 To date, no one has been held accountable for it.
00:02:44.000 Anthony Fauci is making more money than ever lecturing at Georgetown University.
00:02:48.000 Play Cut Seven, please.
00:02:50.000 We learned this morning that the FDA is now saying that it's okay to take ivermectin if you have COVID.
00:02:59.000 Marie, you know the doctors I've been dealing with and talking to for years now.
00:03:05.000 They believe that probably hundreds of thousands of Americans lost their lives because they were denied early treatment.
00:03:10.000 And they were denied it because the FDA.
00:03:12.000 Sabotage, for example, ivermectin, and they said, Come on, y'all, you're not a cow, you're not a horse.
00:03:16.000 You know, this is supposedly horse medicine.
00:03:18.000 No, this is a Nobel Prize winning medicine that could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.
00:03:26.000 They needed to demonize early treatments because early treatments then would have prevented panic around the virus, would have prevented lockdowns, prevented vaccine mandates.
00:03:36.000 The cause set in motion was they needed to kill in the crib, and excuse the graphic detail there, the idea of early treatments.
00:03:44.000 Joining us now is a hero.
00:03:46.000 Dr. Pierre Corey, who's been a dog with a bone with this and has been outspoken and clear.
00:03:52.000 Doctor, I hate to say, we knew you were right all along.
00:03:54.000 Your book, everyone should check out The War on Ivermectin.
00:03:57.000 What is your reaction now that the government is repeating what you have been saying for years?
00:04:03.000 Well, Charlie, finally we got him a little bit, right? 0.99
00:04:05.000 So, that court case last week, the FDA lawyer looked like a fool. 0.95
00:04:09.000 I mean, you could see them backtracking. 0.98
00:04:12.000 We knew what they were doing the whole time, and now they have to admit it, right?
00:04:15.000 They're sheepishly admitting that their guidance were just quips.
00:04:20.000 That's literally what they said.
00:04:21.000 Oh, we were just quipping, right?
00:04:23.000 Which is a kind of a humorous phrase or a witty phrase.
00:04:28.000 That's not what we paid the FDA to do.
00:04:30.000 And they clearly were intervening in the practice of medicine, which they have no authority to do.
00:04:36.000 And we also know it's beyond the FDA, it's literally the synchronized coordination of all three agencies to suppress early treatment.
00:04:43.000 And I appreciate what you just said.
00:04:45.000 You described it as evil and millions of lives lost.
00:04:48.000 Those are both true statements.
00:04:51.000 The challenge that I have is the individual people who are part of that, who work in those agencies and are doing those actions, I don't know that they individually understand.
00:05:00.000 What impacts their actions are having.
00:05:04.000 But this is a massive story.
00:05:06.000 I mean, the FDA finally admits something that we already knew, which is that off label prescribing is legal, not only legal, but it's championed by the FDA.
00:05:15.000 They want us to use off label drugs because we know there are a lot of diseases in which already approved drugs are effective, and we should be using those physicians to help our patients.
00:05:24.000 And now the truth comes out after two years of just disinformation and propaganda.
00:05:29.000 It was pure disinformation and propaganda.
00:05:31.000 And some Americans are now just all rolling their eyes, shrugging their shoulders.
00:05:35.000 Uh, whatever, distant memory.
00:05:38.000 We cannot forget this story, everybody.
00:05:41.000 Think about how many kids had to have school lockdowns because the virus was such a big threat.
00:05:46.000 Think about how many kids committed suicide because of the lockdowns.
00:05:49.000 How many students that are still experiencing depression and anxiety, they're on benzos or Xanax or Zoloft or some form of that because of the lockdowns.
00:05:59.000 We are still living with the consequences.
00:06:02.000 If we would have been able to have Dr. Corey early treatments, we would have been a freer society.
00:06:08.000 Is that fair to say?
00:06:10.000 There's no question.
00:06:11.000 I mean, early treatments were a major, major impediment to the pre paying goals of the COVID response, right?
00:06:19.000 Which was this global vaccination campaign.
00:06:22.000 And that's what everyone needs to understand about why these actions were taken against ivermectin and also hydroxychloroquine, right?
00:06:30.000 Is that they were effective early treatments, which would have decimated, first of all, it would have removed the ability to give an emergency use authorization for the vaccines, and it would have absolutely skyrocketed vaccine hesitancy.
00:06:42.000 Come on, all of your listeners, all of my colleagues, everyone that I know in my life would have rather taken one of the safest drugs in history than an experimental gene therapy shot.
00:06:53.000 I mean, it was so important that they destroy the idea that there was an effective early treatment.
00:06:53.000 That's exactly right.
00:07:00.000 And I hope this sad, tragic tale is known by most.
00:07:05.000 And that's really what my book is about.
00:07:06.000 I want people to know what they did, how they did it, so that we can prevent this from happening again.
00:07:12.000 We're not going to fall for these lies.
00:07:15.000 Well, and I just, one of the elements, that still fires me up is when is Joe Rogan going to get his apology?
00:07:21.000 He was very close to losing his Spotify show.
00:07:25.000 Dangerously close.
00:07:27.000 And he's a man of great courage.
00:07:28.000 And, you know, on the conservative right, some people don't like Joe Rogan's politics.
00:07:32.000 I don't care.
00:07:32.000 He stood up when we needed him.
00:07:34.000 And he, and he had a series of interviews.
00:07:37.000 And not to mention, remember his selfie video he did where they changed, by the way, the aesthetic on CNN to make him look greeny, green and sickly?
00:07:47.000 I don't know if people remember that.
00:07:48.000 And Joe Rogan was just asking the question and they said, oh no, no, ivermectin was a horse dewormer.
00:07:53.000 Actively involved in the murder of people is what the media was doing by saying that this drug is a horse dewormer and you're going to die from it and all this.
00:08:02.000 When is Joe Rogan going to get his apology, Dr. Corey?
00:08:06.000 He was just asking questions.
00:08:09.000 This is maddening to me.
00:08:11.000 Charlie, you know this.
00:08:12.000 We're never getting apologies for that.
00:08:14.000 No, of course.
00:08:14.000 I know, but I'm being somewhat.
00:08:17.000 But you're absolutely right.
00:08:18.000 But let me put Joe Rogan's story into context.
00:08:21.000 So there's a chapter in my book which is called the Horse Dewormer PR Campaign.
00:08:26.000 And I literally trace the structure, the rollout, and the sequence, the chronological sequence of what that was.
00:08:33.000 And it was triggered in the middle of August of 2021 when data came out showing that the prescriptions of ivermectin in the United States were hitting 90,000 a week, which was like 20 times pre pandemic levels.
00:08:44.000 The other side got spooked.
00:08:46.000 And you can see in rapid sequence, the CDC sent out a memo to every state department of health, which got to every licensed doctor in that state, warning them that people were getting sick from overdoses of ivermectin, which was totally false.
00:08:59.000 The data that they provided was actually incorrect and overinflated.
00:09:04.000 And after the CDC did that, the FDA followed up within two days with a tweet.
00:09:09.000 Then you started to see a PR campaign.
00:09:12.000 And the way I recognize them, a friend of mine told me this trick, is that he calls them two by fours, which is two weeks, four different media sources hammering, hammering, hammering the same story, synchronized, you know, memo messaging.
00:09:25.000 And you got to see that, right?
00:09:26.000 So, horse de wormer, horse de wormer, horse de wormer, late night talk show host, daytime broadcasters, newspaper headlines.
00:09:33.000 And here's the thing, Charlie, in the middle of it, on like September 3rd or 5th, Joe Rogan gets COVID and admits he took ivermectin.
00:09:42.000 So, one of the things that I've been trying to tell Joe is like, dude, you got COVID in the middle of a global disinformation PR campaign against ivermectin.
00:09:51.000 And that's why he exploded in that issue, is because they were literally making a major move to destroy ivermectin.
00:09:57.000 And he came out.
00:09:59.000 Again, the book is The War on Ivermectin.
00:10:02.000 Here's my take on it, which is the lockdowns were helpful politically.
00:10:06.000 To these tyrants.
00:10:07.000 And early treatments were a threat to tyranny.
00:10:10.000 It's that you could go through the entire.
00:10:12.000 If you have early treatments, then you don't need an mRNA gene altering shot.
00:10:16.000 If you have early treatments, you don't have panic.
00:10:18.000 If you have early treatments, you don't need lockdowns.
00:10:21.000 If you have early treatments, you do not have massive trillions of dollars of bills being spent in Washington, D.C. Early treatments was the cause set in motion.
00:10:30.000 And they did everything they could, Dr. Corey.
00:10:33.000 But I'll say this, and I've said this privately before you were terrific.
00:10:36.000 You saved lives, Dr. Corey.
00:10:38.000 You know that.
00:10:39.000 And I really, you did a moral good for our society.
00:10:43.000 Everyone, check out the book, The War on Ivermectin.
00:10:48.000 Right now, our world is changing in many uncomfortable ways.
00:10:50.000 It's not just natural disasters, political and economic disasters.
00:10:53.000 The bottom line is you must be prepared for anything to happen at a moment's notice.
00:10:58.000 You won't get a warning.
00:10:59.000 This is not a movie.
00:11:00.000 That's why the smartest thing you could do is invest in emergency food from preparewithkirk.com.
00:11:06.000 As I speak, mypatriotsupply.com is offering a deep discount on their popular three month emergency food kit.
00:11:12.000 How does 25% savings sound?
00:11:14.000 It's the biggest discount they offer, and it doesn't come along very often.
00:11:18.000 So act now and grab your 25% discount on each three month food kit you order.
00:11:22.000 Get one kit per person in your family.
00:11:24.000 You are nine meals away from anarchy, so do something about it.
00:11:24.000 You will not regret it.
00:11:28.000 Go to preparewithkirk.com.
00:11:30.000 That is preparewithkirk.com.
00:11:32.000 Save 20% today, 25% today before the sale is over.
00:11:37.000 Go to preparewithkirk.com.
00:11:39.000 That is preparewithkirk.com.
00:11:43.000 You would think that.
00:11:45.000 A suspicious increase in young people dying would have our leaders talking.
00:11:51.000 Is a very powerful piece that Dr. Corey authored, usatoday.com.
00:11:55.000 More young Americans are dying and it's not COVID.
00:11:57.000 Why aren't we searching for answers?
00:12:00.000 Dr. Corey, tell us about the piece and then speculate, if you will, why are so many young people dying?
00:12:07.000 Yeah.
00:12:08.000 So, Charlie, I think you recognize the magnitude of that publication.
00:12:12.000 So, without tooting my own horn, I've written north of 15 op eds in major media outlets throughout COVID.
00:12:22.000 This one was probably the most important one yet.
00:12:25.000 For those of us deeply studied, not only in what you talked about, which is the millions of deaths caused by the suppression of early treatments, but let's now move on to the vaccines.
00:12:35.000 This vaccine escapade will go down in history as a humanitarian catastrophe.
00:12:40.000 And we see it.
00:12:42.000 We saw it in many different data sources, but the most compelling and the most disturbing and the least arguable is the data coming out of the actuarial societies, right?
00:12:54.000 So the life insurance.
00:12:56.000 Their whole business is on data and trends and consistency and rates.
00:13:01.000 And, you know, a year ago at the end of 2021, one of the CEOs of one of the largest life insurance companies spoke, frankly, at this random event.
00:13:10.000 It was an Indiana Chamber of Commerce event, and he just started saying that they're seeing unprecedented deaths of young people.
00:13:17.000 Yeah.
00:13:18.000 You remember that story.
00:13:19.000 And some of us are paying attention, like you, Charlie, recognized it, and we thought it was momentous.
00:13:24.000 Now, radio silence throughout the media sphere and has been like that for a while.
00:13:29.000 The life insurance data keeps accumulating and it is devastating.
00:13:32.000 And myself and an investigative journalist friend of mine, Mary Beth Pfeiffer, it was her idea.
00:13:38.000 She came to me with the idea.
00:13:39.000 She said, Hey, let's publish this op ed.
00:13:41.000 I'd been on that data for a while.
00:13:43.000 And, you know, we basically just put out the data, which is this massive excess mortality in the healthiest people in society with a sudden rise in 2021. 1.00
00:13:55.000 It's not the old people anymore.
00:13:57.000 So, why are young people suddenly dying? 0.96
00:14:00.000 And it's not true.
00:14:01.000 The opioid epidemic started 10 years ago.
00:14:03.000 It didn't start in September of 2021.
00:14:05.000 Lockdowns didn't happen in September of 2021.
00:14:08.000 What happened in September of 21 to lead to these unprecedented rises?
00:14:12.000 And just to go back to what that CEO said, right, is he said that a 10% rise in death claims in any sector that they insure, a 10% rise over year to year is a one in 200 year event.
00:14:26.000 And they were reporting 38% increases.
00:14:30.000 In death claims amongst the healthiest sectors of society.
00:14:34.000 And they were all occurring in the third quarter of 2021.
00:14:38.000 And they were occurring in white collar workers.
00:14:40.000 Charlie, let me just finish that my last point.
00:14:42.000 White collar workers.
00:14:43.000 I'm going to leave you with the question.
00:14:45.000 What happened in the third quarter of 2021 in the white collar workplace in America?
00:14:52.000 Well, a safe and effective gene altering shot was thrust upon able bodied young men and women.
00:14:59.000 But I mean, I'm told that I'm a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist and I lose access to my social media.
00:15:04.000 Is there any other explanation?
00:15:06.000 Let's try to not do confirmation bias.
00:15:08.000 What other explanation could it be?
00:15:10.000 Anything, please.
00:15:12.000 Cannot think of anything with that tight temporal association.
00:15:15.000 So, even if you want to talk about glyphosate or the pesticides or global warming or opiate addiction or lockdowns, there's nothing with temporal association.
00:15:23.000 So, anything that preceded that rise has to be the most likely cause.
00:15:27.000 And I cannot think of any other credible explanation than the sudden proliferation of workplace vaccine mandates and federal mandates.
00:15:34.000 And there's other data showing that the government.
00:15:37.000 Employed Americans died at far greater rates than anyone.
00:15:43.000 And that was exactly at the time when federal employee mandates came out.
00:15:46.000 I mean, Charlie, you and I both know the answer, but it is important to go through the exercise.
00:15:51.000 You don't want to be incorrect in establishing cause.
00:15:54.000 Yeah, and I mean, I have very strong opinions, but I'm just searching for other answers.
00:15:58.000 And does anybody care about finding the truth?
00:16:01.000 That's what's even more disturbing, right?
00:16:03.000 It's like the indifference to even want to look.
00:16:08.000 That's part of the whole thing, though.
00:16:09.000 Of course, they're not interested in the answer because these are the same people, our authorities, those who we entrusted with governing and navigating our public health, literally led us to slaughter.
00:16:20.000 With these vaccines.
00:16:21.000 You think that they want to find out the truth of what they did and then have to admit it and know that they're responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of young, vibrant Americans in the prime of their lives?
00:16:32.000 Never.
00:16:33.000 Charlie, you know that.
00:16:35.000 Dr. Pierre Corey, everybody should check out his book, The War on Ivermectin.
00:16:40.000 If ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine would have been allowed in the hands of the American people, 2020 would have looked a lot different.
00:16:48.000 2021 would have looked a lot different.
00:16:50.000 I think we would have had less social unrest.
00:16:52.000 I really believe that.
00:16:53.000 I think we would have had less suicide.
00:16:54.000 I think we would have had a lot of these things that didn't make sense if we would have allowed to have early treatments.
00:17:01.000 And thank you for asking the question, Dr. Corey, in USA Today.
00:17:03.000 Why are so many young people dying?
00:17:05.000 Well, you've committed the crime of noticing.
00:17:06.000 You're not allowed to do that, Dr. Corey.
00:17:08.000 God bless you.
00:17:08.000 You're welcome back anytime.
00:17:12.000 Hey, everybody.
00:17:13.000 Charlie Kirk here.
00:17:13.000 Don't miss the most inspirational movie of the summer Briarcliffs Entertainment's The Hill, starring Dennis Quaid, in theaters Friday, August 25th.
00:17:20.000 The true life story of professional baseball player Ricky Hill.
00:17:23.000 Growing up poor in small town Texas, young Ricky discovers his extraordinary ability for hitting a baseball.
00:17:28.000 But with leg braces and a degenerative spinal disease, the major leagues were just a dream that could never be.
00:17:33.000 Courageously, he risks it all.
00:17:35.000 Defying his father's wish to follow in his footsteps to become a pastor, Ricky tries out for a major league scout.
00:17:40.000 Pushing hard to overcome his disability, he goes on to become a baseball phenomenon.
00:17:45.000 Some dreams are unbreakable.
00:17:46.000 The Hill starring Dennis Quaid, Colin Ford, and Scott Glenn.
00:17:49.000 This true inspirational story about family, faith, and a baseball miracle.
00:17:54.000 Again, the story is about Ricky, who tries out as a major league scout, pushing hard to overcome the unthinkable.
00:18:01.000 Do not miss The Hill, rated PG in theaters, Friday, August 25th.
00:18:05.000 Get your tickets now.
00:18:06.000 Again, it's called The Hill, rated PG.
00:18:09.000 It's in theaters, Friday, August 25th.
00:18:11.000 Check out The Hill.
00:18:14.000 Get Trump is the book.
00:18:15.000 Everybody buy it and purchase it now.
00:18:17.000 The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law by Alan Dershowitz.
00:18:23.000 One of the most important books out currently.
00:18:26.000 It tells you the whole ballgame.
00:18:28.000 From one of the great legal minds, Amlin Dershowitz.
00:18:30.000 Professor Dershowitz, thank you for joining us.
00:18:33.000 There's been some breaking news.
00:18:35.000 It seems that Donald Trump's about to be indicted in Fulton County.
00:18:38.000 Something got posted briefly on their website that says that Donald Trump and others might be indicted.
00:18:44.000 It's not exactly clear a violation of the Georgia RICO, which is Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
00:18:52.000 I'm a layman here, Professor.
00:18:53.000 Isn't that usually used against mobsters?
00:18:56.000 Of course it is.
00:18:57.000 In fact, I had a client once who was an Italian American.
00:19:01.000 And he humorously said, Hey, how come they call the statue Rico?
00:19:04.000 That's my name, Rico.
00:19:05.000 What do they call it?
00:19:06.000 Morris or Charlie?
00:19:08.000 It's Rico.
00:19:09.000 It was obviously intended to go after the mafia.
00:19:11.000 I predicted this indictment in my book, Get Trump, which you so kindly mentioned.
00:19:16.000 I predicted all four of these indictments, and I now predict that none of them will hold up.
00:19:21.000 None of them will hold up.
00:19:23.000 This indictment is based largely on that telephone call in which he said to Raffensberger, fine, not invent, not concoct, not manufacture.
00:19:33.000 Find me 1,700 votes.
00:19:35.000 Find means they're lost.
00:19:37.000 They're there to be counted.
00:19:38.000 I just want you to look hard and count them.
00:19:40.000 That isn't the basis for a criminal charge.
00:19:43.000 Other than that, it looks like it's a replication of the DC case.
00:19:46.000 Now, remember that the appropriate way of challenging an election, the legally appropriate way is to put up a slate of alternate electors.
00:19:57.000 That's the way it was done in Tilden Hayes.
00:19:59.000 That's the way it was done in the 1960 election and validated by a court in Hawaii.
00:20:07.000 That's the way it was done when I was involved in challenging the election of George Bush.
00:20:14.000 On behalf of Al Gore, I represented the voters of Palm Beach County.
00:20:17.000 And we were planning, obviously, to put up a slate of Florida electors who would represent what we believe, courts ruled against us, but what we honestly believe was the electoral results in Florida.
00:20:30.000 That's the way you challenge elections.
00:20:32.000 You don't get local prosecutors or even special counsel to indict somebody for doing what has been done historically in the way of challenging elections.
00:20:43.000 Or you go back and you read Professor Lawrence Tribes.
00:20:46.000 Memorandum.
00:20:47.000 He was a Democrat who was one of the lawyers for Al Gore.
00:20:50.000 He proposed this way of challenging the election, and now his research assistant has proposed the similar way of challenging the election in 2020.
00:21:00.000 But in one case, they're going after them criminally.
00:21:03.000 That's just wrong.
00:21:05.000 Yes, it is.
00:21:06.000 I want to ask you a technical question here, Professor.
00:21:08.000 So, according to Reuters, the Fulton County posted charges to their docket before the grand jury had finished.
00:21:17.000 Does that mean that?
00:21:18.000 Why not?
00:21:18.000 Of course.
00:21:19.000 Okay.
00:21:19.000 So, you know that a grand jury.
00:21:21.000 Is going to indict.
00:21:22.000 It's just a matter of technicality.
00:21:24.000 A grand jury will indict any sandwich which has Trump on it.
00:21:28.000 You know that, it's for sure.
00:21:29.000 So why not post it early?
00:21:31.000 Let the public get a head start.
00:21:32.000 You know what's going to happen.
00:21:34.000 Grand jurors of 23 chairs sitting around waiting to be moved and manipulated by the prosecution.
00:21:42.000 All you need is 12 of the 23 to indict.
00:21:45.000 They're almost always unanimous because they've heard only one side of the story and they've been told the defendant's guilty.
00:21:51.000 The presumption of guilty.
00:21:53.000 Of innocence disappears in the grand jury room.
00:21:56.000 So, you know, this was one of the honest approaches in law enforcement.
00:22:00.000 Sure, they put up the indictment before it was actually voted.
00:22:03.000 That's the way it actually works in practice.
00:22:05.000 So, just the question there's no chance of saying this is tainted or dismissal based on that.
00:22:05.000 Yeah.
00:22:11.000 It's just kind of a technical thing, then, right?
00:22:14.000 It's a technical thing, but they'll challenge it.
00:22:16.000 They'll say this proves that there was no real process.
00:22:20.000 But remember, too, grand juries are not required in state courts, only in the federal court.
00:22:24.000 The constitutional requirement of grand jury.
00:22:28.000 Only applies to the federal government.
00:22:30.000 So it would not get into the federal courts or up to the Supreme Court, even if the grand jury had been tainted.
00:22:37.000 And it largely becomes a formality, like you said, a hand sandwich, and it's not exactly difficult to get a grand jury to agree to something.
00:22:45.000 And so the book is Get Trump.
00:22:47.000 We're going to see other actors involved here, Professor.
00:22:51.000 Since they're going with Rico, is it they're trying to create a set of circumstances where they want people to rat out Donald Trump?
00:22:59.000 To try to get less prison time or no prison time at all whatsoever.
00:23:02.000 This feels as if they're going after some sort of, I mean, he says here, violation of the Georgia Rico Act, conspiracy to commit false statements and writings, and conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree.
00:23:13.000 Professor, that's a fair amount of charges for a single phone call, unless they're going after other elements of this, if I'm not mistaken, though.
00:23:21.000 Oh, yeah, without a doubt.
00:23:23.000 They're going after the entire process.
00:23:25.000 And, you know, they're claiming that if you exaggerate or lie in politics, And if you're Trump, that you can be indicted.
00:23:35.000 It's perfectly okay to lie on the other side.
00:23:38.000 And we've seen so many lies, so many lies told during the first impeachment when I defended President Trump on the floor of the Senate.
00:23:46.000 The Democrats had so many lies.
00:23:48.000 And, you know, that's politics.
00:23:51.000 But suddenly, when it's Donald Trump, politics becomes a weapon of law enforcement.
00:23:57.000 And people indict others of an opposing party for doing things that their own party has done for years.
00:24:05.000 You know, if you start making lying, Not under oath, but just lying by politicians of crime.
00:24:12.000 Every congressional session will have to be held in Allenwood Prison because half the Congress would be there.
00:24:19.000 That's just not what should be done in politics.
00:24:23.000 If you don't like what one side says, answer them, show a better argument, and vote against them.
00:24:28.000 But don't make it subject to criminal prosecution because they'll be tit for tat.
00:24:32.000 As soon as the Republicans gain control of the Senate and the presidency, they will be going after, and I'll be on the other side.
00:24:40.000 Complaining just as loudly as I'm complaining today because I'm not doing it on a partisan basis.
00:24:46.000 I'm doing it in support and defense of the Constitution.
00:24:48.000 So, Professor, last week we saw Jack Smith ask a court for a January 2nd trial date.
00:24:55.000 And what is your reaction to that?
00:24:58.000 It's so political.
00:25:00.000 I have been doing this 60 years, 60 years.
00:25:04.000 I have never heard of a case of this complexity going to trial within six months of the indictment.
00:25:10.000 It is so political.
00:25:12.000 What Trump's team ought to do is go back.
00:25:14.000 And evaluate every single federal case over the last 10 years and see how much time there was between the indictment and the actual trial, particularly in complex cases like this.
00:25:26.000 And you'll see the average is much closer to a year or even more than this kind of thing.
00:25:33.000 Yeah, it's unbelievably political.
00:25:36.000 So then it doesn't fall on the judge then?
00:25:37.000 Is that correct?
00:25:38.000 So then the Trump team will say we want more time.
00:25:40.000 And does the judge usually split the difference?
00:25:42.000 What is the process then to determine the timeline?
00:25:44.000 Well, here you have judges that are both being.
00:25:47.000 Scrutinize. 0.97
00:25:48.000 Judge Cannon in Florida is being attacked because she was appointed by Trump. 1.00
00:25:52.000 So she is probably going to try to lean over backwards to appear to be fair.
00:25:56.000 And the judge in the District of Columbia, appointed by Obama, with a long history of association with the Boyce Schiller firm, the most conflicted and, in my view, the most corrupt firm in modern history, she's going to try to lean over backwards at the beginning to try to show that they're fair.
00:26:12.000 And then when the trial comes up, we'll see what happens.
00:26:16.000 And so then we have, let me ask you, is there He very well might be standing trial for simultaneous indictments, or usually do the courts allow one trial to end for the other?
00:26:25.000 Because then you have the New York case, you have civil cases.
00:26:28.000 So, well, criminal cases go before civil cases, criminal cases come before civil cases.
00:26:34.000 Generally, federal trials come before state trials.
00:26:37.000 In fact, already D.A. Bragg has said that he will defer to the federal court and put off his incredibly weak case in New York until after the Florida case.
00:26:48.000 Now that there's a D.C. case, which is supposed to come before the Florida case, even though the indictment.
00:26:52.000 Came after, we'll see.
00:26:54.000 Judges have enormous discretion on scheduling trials, but they can't do it for political purposes.
00:27:00.000 And it's clear to me that this effort to try to get this trial scheduled in January is completely political.
00:27:08.000 The goal is to influence the election.
00:27:11.000 And what they expect to do is get a conviction because of the veneer, District of Columbia.
00:27:15.000 Then it'll be reversed on appeal.
00:27:17.000 But by the time it's reversed on appeal, the election will be over.
00:27:20.000 It's crassly political.
00:27:22.000 We've explored this topic before, Professor, but it's worth repeating.
00:27:26.000 For so-called institutionalists that are running the Department of Justice, their indifference to how half the country has zero trust in what the DOJ does now is shocking.
00:27:37.000 They don't care.
00:27:38.000 I want a country where I trust our Department of Justice.
00:27:42.000 Well, the best example is yesterday's decision or the day before, a couple of days ago's decision to appoint a special counsel in direct violation of the words of the applicable resolution, regulation.
00:27:56.000 The regulation says the person appointed must, shall, not may, shall be outside of the government.
00:28:03.000 And Garland appointed somebody who was the U.S. Attorney.
00:28:08.000 Obviously, who serves at the pleasure of the attorney general, that's precisely the opposite of what's supposed to be.
00:28:14.000 And when you're going after and investigating the son of the incumbent president, you better dot every I and cross every T.
00:28:21.000 And to start by appointing somebody who is ineligible under the regulations that are part of what regulates the Justice Department, I just don't understand it.
00:28:33.000 I always had high regard for Garland as a, you know, do it by the books guy, former judge, rule of law.
00:28:40.000 Why would he start?
00:28:42.000 By appointing somebody who is ineligible to be appointed under the very regulation that he's citing.
00:28:48.000 I wish he would explain it, or maybe Congress can ask him to explain it.
00:28:52.000 Yeah, so just really quick, then, Professor, I know it's a simple question.
00:28:55.000 Who could hold the DOJ accountable for breaking the law?
00:28:59.000 Congress.
00:29:00.000 Congress can.
00:29:01.000 They can have hearings and they can call Garland and say, look, here's the statute, Section 603, read it.
00:29:08.000 It says, shall.
00:29:10.000 You understand the meaning of the word shall.
00:29:12.000 Did you?
00:29:13.000 No.
00:29:13.000 Why didn't you?
00:29:15.000 I mean, that kind of question is obvious.
00:29:17.000 And under our system of checks and balances, it's the appropriate role of Congress to ask those hard questions.
00:29:23.000 And Garland cannot refuse to appear and answer those questions.
00:29:27.000 The book is Get Trump.
00:29:28.000 And, Professor, I want to say you're rightfully intense and angry about this stuff today.
00:29:34.000 And because of your love of the Constitution.
00:29:37.000 And I share that anger because this is one unprecedented thing after the other.
00:29:45.000 Of the core document that ties us to the United States Constitution.
00:29:48.000 So the book is Get Trump.
00:29:50.000 Everybody check it out.
00:29:51.000 It's excellent.
00:29:55.000 Professor Dershowitz, you're fired up today for good reason.
00:29:59.000 Are you seeing any indication amongst any of the classical liberals, not leftists, liberals that still speak to you, that they think this is an overreach, that they're a little uncomfortable with how the government is treating Donald Trump?
00:30:12.000 Or is it.
00:30:13.000 Okay, tell us about that.
00:30:14.000 I do see it.
00:30:15.000 I don't see it widespread because most people who claim to be liberals are anything but.
00:30:19.000 Most people who claim to be progressive or woke or anything but.
00:30:23.000 They are Stalinists, many of them, who just want to suppress any free speech or due process that doesn't satisfy their own goals.
00:30:31.000 But there are a handful of classic liberals still left.
00:30:36.000 Jack Goldsmith wrote a piece in the New York Times the other day saying, hmm, although there's an argument that maybe Trump did commit crimes, he shouldn't be prosecuted because he's running for president.
00:30:47.000 Against the incumbent.
00:30:48.000 And you have to be absolutely certain that you have a slam dunk case if you're going to go after that.
00:30:53.000 Otherwise, you're a banana republic.
00:30:54.000 You know, on my podcast, I do a podcast Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday on Rumble.
00:31:00.000 I give out bananas and we're up to two, maybe three bananas on a scale of 10.
00:31:07.000 Ecuador gets 10 for obviously assassinating a presidential candidate.
00:31:11.000 We're not close to that.
00:31:13.000 Hopefully, thank God.
00:31:14.000 But what we're doing now earns at least two or three bananas on the scale of.
00:31:20.000 Banana republics.
00:31:21.000 And that's what worries me.
00:31:22.000 When you're going after the man running for president against the incumbent, you have to lean over backwards to be absolutely fair.
00:31:28.000 You have to make sure you're not stretching the law, stretching the facts, but that you're applying it absolutely fairly in the same way you would apply it to members of your own party.
00:31:38.000 That test has not been satisfied.
00:31:41.000 No.
00:31:41.000 And I'm not sure how we remedy this, Professor.
00:31:47.000 I think it would be a little bit of a blow if Donald Trump is able to defeat these charges in court.
00:31:53.000 Would you agree with that?
00:31:55.000 Would that lessen their intensity for going after political dissidents to humiliating defeat in court?
00:32:02.000 I think so, but he's not going to be defeated at trial in the District of Columbia, which is 95% anti Trump.
00:32:08.000 He's not going to be defeated in front of this judge who has a history and a background that obviously reflects an anti Trump bias.
00:32:15.000 He's not going to be defeated in Fulton County.
00:32:17.000 He might be defeated in Florida.
00:32:19.000 He will be defeated, I predict, on appeal.
00:32:22.000 You know, it was Mark Levin who called me the legal Nostradamus because I have predicted all these things, not because I'm smarter than the other people, but I predicted, for example, that the Hunter Biden deal would not be accepted.
00:32:35.000 Because I make my predictions based on 60 years of experience, not on the basis of wishful thinking.
00:32:40.000 CNN's predictions have been wrong on almost every occasion.
00:32:44.000 I was hoping CNN would put on a show in which they showed their quote experts making predictions and then they showed how none of the predictions came true.
00:32:54.000 I wish they would do that.
00:32:55.000 They won't do that.
00:32:56.000 They won't admit that they're misleading the American public by their false predictions, but they are.
00:33:02.000 And, um, you know, I predict that, uh, these, these verdicts at trial Will go against Trump, many of them, but not on appeal.
00:33:12.000 The courts will not tolerate this kind of abuse of the legal system.
00:33:15.000 Now, do you mean the actual D.C. appeals, or do you mean the Supreme Court of the United States potentially?
00:33:21.000 I think first the Court of Appeals, which is a lot fairer than the jurors will be in this case, but then ultimately the Supreme Court, which has to review cases involving a presidential candidate and a former president.
00:33:35.000 Yes.
00:33:35.000 I think they have to review cases.
00:33:37.000 Former president, future possible president.
00:33:39.000 Yeah.
00:33:40.000 Yeah.
00:33:40.000 They have to take it.
00:33:41.000 Now, would it potentially go through the merits of the case or the procedural, the prosecutorial issues there involved?
00:33:48.000 Both.
00:33:48.000 But let me give you an example.
00:33:50.000 The special prosecutor Smith indicted him under the Ku Klux Klan statute, which talks about hooded and masked men driving formerly enslaved people away from the voting booths.
00:34:03.000 And it says that if two or more people conspire to deny any citizen their constitutional rights, they're guilty of a crime.
00:34:10.000 Well, what if the courts ultimately rule that Smith has denied?
00:34:13.000 Trump's constitutional rights by indicting him for these false charges.
00:34:17.000 Would he be guilty under his own statute?
00:34:20.000 Would he be guilty of lying by leaving out the key words?
00:34:24.000 He tried to describe the speech on January 6th, a speech I disapprove of, but constitutionally protected.
00:34:31.000 But Smith willfully, deliberately, and maliciously left out the words peacefully and patriotically when he purported to describe the speech of January 6th.
00:34:40.000 That's a lie of omission, which under the law can be just as serious as a lie of commission.
00:34:46.000 I haven't heard anyone make that point.
00:34:48.000 That's why Professor Dershowitz is the best in the game.
00:34:51.000 Check out Get Trump.
00:34:52.000 Excellent book, Professor.
00:34:54.000 Really great.
00:34:55.000 Thank you, and you're welcome back anytime.
00:34:59.000 Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
00:35:00.000 Email us your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
00:35:05.000 Thank you so much for listening, and God bless.
00:35:09.000 For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.