The First Day of AmericaFest kicks off in Phoenix, Arizona with Tucker Carlson, Ben Shapiro, and more. Special counsel investigation into the raid on Trump's Mar-A-Lago resort by the FBI continues, and a new grand jury has been opened in Florida.
00:00:56.000The Charlie Kirk Show is proudly sponsored by Preserve Gold, the leading gold and silver experts and the only precious metals company I recommend to my family, friends, and viewers.
00:01:09.000All right, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk Show.
00:02:00.000Chuck Grassley, I know you know Chuck Grassley, Senator Grassley, puts out this memo and basically says the FBI denied that there, at least is there's voices within the FBI asserting that they did not have probable cause to raid Mar-a-Lago.
00:02:14.000Then you got Jack Smith, who goes in for an eight-hour closed-door testimony making his case for why he embarked upon this special counsel political prosecution of President Trump.
00:02:33.000And what is going on behind the scenes with this FBI bombshell from Senator Grassley?
00:02:39.000Well, it's what we've been discussing on this show for over three years, Andrew, and that is that this was a political hit on President Trump in Mar-a-Lago.
00:02:50.000It was a political hit to get back the damning crossfire hurricane records that President Trump declassified via presidential executive order the day before he left office for the first time.
00:03:04.000And they wanted to get back these records because they're so damning.
00:03:08.000They knew these records were going to come out because President Trump sued Hillary Clinton in a civil lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida for Crossfire Hurricane for the Russian delusion hoax when Obama, Biden, Hillary, Brennan Clapper, Comey,
00:03:23.000so many bad actors politicized and weaponized intel agencies to protect Hillary and her corruption when she was Secretary of State and the Clinton Foundation was taking tens of millions of dollars in shady foreign donations.
00:03:39.000We're just learning today that there is evidence of quid pro quo foreign corruption with that that the Biden Justice Department sat on.
00:03:48.000And then with Crossfire Hurricane, they wanted to take out President Trump's campaign.
00:03:53.000So if these damning, if this damning evidence came out of Hillary Clinton's corruption because her server got hacked, that she wanted to be able to point to the Trump campaign and say, you can't believe this is a campaign dirty trick.
00:04:08.000And they the same thing with Hunter Biden's laptop in 2020.
00:04:12.000So the FBI knew they didn't have probable cause to do this raid to get back these crossfire hurricane records.
00:04:19.000You have this U.S. magistrate judge, Bruce Reinhardt, in the Southern District of Florida, who was on the Trump versus Hillary civil case.
00:04:28.000He had to recuse because he had 2017 Facebook posts trashing President Trump.
00:04:34.000So obviously he's not going to be a fair judge.
00:04:36.000Six weeks later, that judicial bias somehow magically disappeared when Jay Bratz from the Biden Justice Department, who went on to work for Jack Smith, went to Bruce Reinhardt and got this unprecedented unlawful home raid on Trump when they knew they didn't have probable cause.
00:04:58.000I've talked about this for a long time.
00:05:01.000They've opened up a new grand jury in Fort Pierce, Florida, in the Southern District of Florida.
00:05:07.000My friend Jason Redding Kiñones is Trump's new U.S. attorney, and I have very publicly called for a grand jury to probe all of this and hold all of these lawfare Democrats and other bad actors accountable for this because this is the biggest scandal in American history.
00:05:25.000So you've got, you know what will never cease to amaze me is that you have these federal judges that just go on Facebook and like, Trump's terrible.
00:05:32.000Like, I mean, like the fact that a judge would feel so, you know, loose to something, to say something political publicly on a social media site, it's just damning.
00:05:47.000I mean, in and of itself, I just find it really crass and low-class, actually.
00:05:53.000I don't know if you're trying to chime in here, but it's just like you, you know, judges, you have this air of impartiality.
00:05:59.000You have an air of being above the fray.
00:06:01.000And then you just go on Facebook and like, Trump sucks.
00:06:20.000Six weeks later, the recusal issue goes away.
00:06:23.000And all of a sudden, Jay Bratt is down in Mor-a-Lago sniffing around and coming up with a pretext to do this raid for presidential records that the president is allowed to have under the Presidential Records Act.
00:06:37.000Did Bruce Reinhardt talk to Jay Bratt about this?
00:06:41.000How did Jay Bratt know that these documents were going to be produced in that civil lawsuit versus Hillary when it was?
00:06:48.000This whole thing needs to be investigated.
00:06:51.000And all of these bad actors need to be investigated, including these judges.
00:06:55.000So you say we need accountability here.
00:06:58.000I would agree, Mike Davis, Article 3 Project.
00:07:06.000What would accountability look like for somebody like Jack Smith?
00:07:10.000The accountability would be what we've been talking about for over three years.
00:07:14.000You open up a criminal probe under 18 USC, Section 241, conspiracy against rights, when you politicize and weaponize intel agencies and law enforcement to go after your political enemies for non-crimes.
00:07:28.000That's the textbook definition of conspiracy against rights.
00:07:32.000Jack Smith is very well aware of this conspiracy against rights crime because it's one of the four charges he made against President Trump for the non-crime of the non-crime of President Trump objecting to a presidential election, which is allowed by the Electoral Count Act of 1887 and the First Amendment.
00:07:50.000Jack Smith can go into that closed-door hearing and say whatever he wants.
00:08:34.000He should have lost his law license after that.
00:08:37.000After you get beat eight to nothing at the Supreme Court, it's very hard to get beat eight to nothing at the Supreme Court, particularly on a criminal case.
00:08:45.000But Jack Smith found the way and they brought him back.
00:08:48.000The Biden regime brought him back to take out Trump at all costs.
00:08:53.000They failed because President Trump hired John Sauer, now the Solicitor General, and John Sauer raised the presidential immunity argument, which stopped the prosecutions in their tracks.
00:09:06.000But if John Sauer didn't do that, President Trump would be sitting in a prison cell right now instead of the White House.
00:09:12.000But it does strike me, isn't that probably the best defense Jack Smith could make?
00:09:41.000Everyone knows a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich, and you have a separate duty as a prosecutor to make sure that you have probable cause, to make sure that there is a good faith legal basis for what you're doing, to make sure that you're not bringing not he remember what Jack Smith did.
00:10:01.000He tried to throw Trump in prison for the non-crime of having presidential records, which is allowed by the Presidential Records Act.
00:10:09.000He tried to throw Trump in prison for the non-crime of objecting to a presidential election, which is allowed by the Electoral Count Act of 1887 and the First Amendment.
00:10:18.000Jack Smith politicized and weaponized intel agencies and law enforcement to take out Trump, along with many, many others.
00:10:25.000And Jack Smith can raise that defense to the jury.
00:10:30.000This is Lane Schoenberger, Chief Investment Officer and Founding Partner of YReFi.
00:10:35.000It has been an honor and a privilege to partner with Turning Point and for Charlie to endorse us.
00:10:40.000His endorsement means the world to us, and we look forward to continuing our partnership with Turning Point for years to come.
00:10:47.000Now, here Charlie, in his own words, tell you about YReFi.
00:10:50.000I'm going to tell you guys about whyRefi.com.
00:11:39.000Mike, you, what have you heard from your sources about this briefing that happened on the Narco boats?
00:11:46.000I mean, even Fetterman's coming out and saying this is all legal.
00:11:49.000They have a three-step process, multi-tier process, and there's lawyers at every step of the way.
00:11:54.000Is there any concern that they're going to have any legal basis to attack Pete Hegseth when he's no longer Secretary of War, for example, or any of the people in the chain of command here?
00:12:04.000President of the United States as the Commander-in-Chief has the constitutional and statutory power and duty to protect our nation, including repelling an invasion.
00:12:18.000And that's exactly what's going on here.
00:12:21.000You have these narco boats bringing in fentanyl that's killing tens of thousands of Americans.
00:12:28.000And the president is well within his constitutional and statutory authority.
00:12:34.000He's well within his constitutional authority as the commander-in-chief under the commander-in-chief clause, even if there's not a declaration of war, because going back to our founding, everyone agrees that the president can repel an invasion into our country.
00:12:48.000And also, under the War Powers Act of 1973, passed by Congress over President Nixon's veto, many presidents do not consider the War Powers Act constitutional because they think it constrains too much of the president's power to fight wars and to defend our country.
00:13:10.000But even if you think that the War Powers Act of 1973 is constitutional, what President Trump is doing is within his statutory powers under the War Powers Act of 1973.
00:13:21.000There's no legal issue here whatsoever.
00:13:24.000And I don't remember these Democrats like Senator Mark Kelly complaining when President Obama ordered extrajudicial drone strikes on American citizens abroad, including a minor.
00:13:38.000So if, and I supported that, if President Obama can drone strike Americans, President Trump can certainly bomb narco boats.
00:13:46.000Are there any limits on what he could choose to bomb, I suppose?
00:13:53.000If you have to show that if the president is bombing things that are not a danger to the United States, then sure, there could be limits on that.
00:14:03.000But the president has very broad discretion.
00:14:07.000He has very broad power and very broad discretion as the chief executive officer and as the commander-in-chief as it relates to controlling our military, protecting our country, protecting shipping lanes, protecting our allies.
00:14:30.000And the founders actually debated that.
00:14:32.000If you go back and look at the Federalist papers, they intentionally changed that language from make war to declare war to give the president more leeway, more running room to protect our country.
00:14:45.000Yeah, I mean, I'm mostly just worried that, you know, if the future elections don't go our way, that they're going to try and throw Secretary Hegseth in the gulag.
00:14:57.000I think there's probably a, I mean, I guess I shouldn't say they won't because there's really no limit to the damage the left might do to the country in a fit of peak.
00:15:06.000But I think historically, at least, there would be a very strong bipartisan hesitancy to have our military leaders be second-guessing actions they take because they're just going to get prosecuted for it.
00:15:17.000You sound like another party at that point.
00:15:18.000Because at that point, if they're going to throw out that, they could do it for probably any other military action as well.
00:15:24.000I think you'd need a more clear-cut unanimity on it being something completely unacceptable, you know, massacre a village in Vietnam where they had evidence that was clear that they were only civilians, for example.
00:15:38.000Mike, we've got only about a minute and a half left in this segment, but I wanted to play this cut from Judge Janine, or I guess U.S. Attorney Janine Pirro, 291.
00:15:47.000There certainly was an effort to misclassify, mischaracterize certain categories of crime.
00:15:54.000And it was an attempt to make crime look lower than it was.
00:15:58.000And the investigation that we conducted over a period of several months based upon the report of the deflation of numbers was very thorough.
00:16:07.000As you indicated, over 6,000 reports were looked at, over 50 witnesses, and those witnesses were rank and file from the top down.
00:16:30.000I guess state level, other states are probably cooking the books on crime stats as well, but at least in D.C., there is some federal control.
00:16:40.000I would open a criminal probe because if you are making false statements to the federal government with your crime statistics in order to get, for example, more grant money, you could be charged for that.
00:17:08.000You know, I've been thinking about how much culture is shaped by what we choose to watch because whether we realize it or not, the stories we invite into our homes shape the way we see the world.
00:17:18.000That's why what Angel Studios is doing matters.
00:17:21.000And right now they're having their biggest sale of the year.
00:17:23.000For a limited time, you can get an Angel Guild membership for as low as $6.99 a month for 12 months, plus two free tickets to see David in theaters.
00:17:32.000Angel Studios is leading a quiet revolution in entertainment.
00:17:36.000They're telling stories that elevate truth, celebrate family, and remind us what courage really looks like.
00:17:44.000When you join the Angel Guild, you don't just stream entertainment.
00:17:48.000You help create it and you help decide what the next generation of stories will look like.
00:17:52.000Take advantage of the lowest price of the year, become a member of the Angel Guild and get your two free tickets to see David in theaters this Christmas.
00:18:14.000There has been a raging debate online, and then I think Mark Wayne Mullen, one of your Senate colleagues, who also comes on the show often, sort of seemed like he was now open to the idea of nuking the filibuster.
00:18:27.000Why would if we don't, you know, you got Mitch McConnell, you got Susan Collins, Murkowski.
00:18:32.000I don't know what you could even get accomplished if you do nuke the filibuster.
00:18:36.000And then you came out with this tweet, 308.
00:18:39.000You say the chronic abuse of the Senate 60-vote cloture standard must come to an end now.
00:18:44.000The Senate GOP must immediately start fighting cloture abuse by, among other things, requiring senators to debate.
00:18:51.000So lay out how this is distinct from just nuking the filibuster.
00:18:57.000Look, these are all ways that we're focused on to try to end filibuster abuse and cloture abuse.
00:19:04.000And first, let me explain what cloture is and what the filibuster is.
00:19:09.000The Senate, from the very beginning of its existence for, you know, nearly two and a half centuries, has had, as a general rule, unlimited debate that you allow as long as any senator wants to debate, debate will continue.
00:19:26.000Now, starting about a century ago, I think it was maybe in 1917, they came up with a means by which they could bring debate to a close.
00:19:36.000Initially, it required a 3-4 supermajority that was later lowered to a two-thirds supermajority.
00:19:41.000It's now a three-fifths supermajority and has been there for about 50 years.
00:19:47.000Meaning in a 100-vote Senate, you've got to have 60 votes from 60 different senators to bring debate to a close.
00:19:55.000Then and only then can you bring debate to a close.
00:19:57.000So the whole point of this cloture rule, it's not to create a de facto 60-vote threshold for passing legislation itself.
00:20:08.000It often has that effect, but really the purpose of it is to extend debate unless we're until you get 60 votes to bring debate to a close.
00:20:15.000Here's what it's metastasized into, though.
00:20:18.000What it's turned into is something very interesting.
00:20:21.000It's turned into people saying, well, I don't want to vote for it.
00:20:48.000If we enforce the cloture rule, we could end cloture abuse and we could end this perpetual tailchasing model in which even when Republicans control the Senate and the House and the White House, as we currently do, we just take all sorts of things off the table.
00:21:11.000There are other ways that break through this.
00:21:13.000You enforce the rules by requiring them to debate.
00:21:16.000And then the minute they stop debating, either because you've physically exhausted them or because they have exhausted their right to continue speaking.
00:21:25.000We have a number of rules about that, including you can only speak twice on the same legislative day on the same discrete legislative matter.
00:21:32.000If they have exhausted either themselves physically or their right to speak, that moment you can call the vote and that vote is cast as simple majority threshold and you can get a lot passed.
00:21:44.000We need to get back into that business.
00:21:46.000Yeah, that's so you're basically, you know, you've seen these, Senator Cruz did the marathon.
00:21:52.000You had Corey Booker do these marathons.
00:21:54.000Is that kind of what, if we change the rules, I have a question about how you would actually change it, but if we actually started enforcing in-person, you know, IRL debate on the floor of the Senate, that's what you would basically start seeing is you'd start seeing 50 senators doing marathon debate to try and outlast their opponent, basically.
00:22:16.000The problem with today's filibuster is that it's not really a filibuster.
00:22:20.000It's not Jimmy Stewart speaking until he collapses on the Senate floor.
00:22:25.000So at no point have Democrats this year, while we've held the Senate and the House and the White House, at no point have Democrats been forced to go down to the floor and talk without stopping to defend their terrible policies until they have to go to the bathroom or get some sleep or until everybody who wants to speak and debate on it have exhausted their ability to do so.
00:22:47.000That is what most Americans justifiably understand the filibuster to be.
00:22:51.000And it's not happening because we're not enforcing our own rules.
00:22:54.000Yeah, I'm seeing this could have the beneficial side effect.
00:22:56.000It might force some earlier retirements by some guys who just say, I'm not up for eight hours.
00:23:02.000You'd start having to elect in the primaries like based on like youth and vigor because we need a guy that can actually like stand on the Senate floor to block.
00:23:32.000So that's the beauty of this thing, Andrew, is that no rules change is required.
00:23:38.000We don't have to do anything to change them because the rules not only already allow this, the rules already contemplate that this is what a filibuster is.
00:23:48.000So remember, Democrats have been able to use just the mere concept of a talking filibuster to grind things from a halt.
00:23:55.000And we've allowed them to do that because we haven't enforced it.
00:23:58.000So yes, if we adopted this standpoint, the majority leader in consultation with whoever is sitting in the presiding officer's chair at the moment decides that we're going to begin enforcing this.
00:24:15.000And the minute they're not there to debate, either because they physically don't want to or because they can't, because they've exhausted their right to do so under our existing rules, then you call the question, meaning you call the vote on that matter.
00:24:29.000And when there's nobody there debating it, the passage, the passage of that legislation is set at a simple majority.
00:24:39.000That is a really, I mean, it does strike me.
00:24:42.000When I saw you tweet this out, Senator, I was like, this is, I mean, you do think of the Senate being the premier legislative body in the world, that you think of all this vigorous debate that happens on the Senate floor, but it's really not like that.
00:24:56.000It's a bunch of grandstanding for clips.
00:24:59.000And so you can post them on social and you can, you know, take cheap shots at your opponents without them answering back.
00:25:26.000There are times when real debate does happen on the Senate floor.
00:25:29.000Sometimes it's in slow motion, but sometimes there's no debate going on at all, which brings us back to how we would do this.
00:25:39.000The only real catch here, what's difficult about this, I don't mean to describe this as easy.
00:25:44.000And I don't mean to suggest that the minute we decided to do this, we could and would immediately pass everything that we wanted without any hitch or without any difficulty.
00:26:04.000The catch is that Republicans would need as the majority party in the Senate would need to show up and spend significant time on the Senate floor.
00:26:13.000The Republican leadership sounds caught in terror.
00:26:56.000And then we deceive the public into thinking that the reason we can't do some of the things that we want to do is because we don't have 60 votes.
00:27:04.000Well, it's been over 100 years since Republicans have had 60 votes in the Senate, that three-fifths supermajority.
00:27:10.000And you can't blame it all on the filibuster.
00:27:18.000But that's, you know, I hadn't even, yeah, I haven't even thought about that, Senator.
00:27:22.000It's been over 100 years since we've had 60 Republican senators.
00:27:25.000hundred years i mean if we think we're ever going so my big thing senator lee is that i want immigration reform That's what I think that I think it is the switch that you could flip that would solve a ton of our problems.
00:27:39.000I think there's a lot of energy for that in the base.
00:27:42.000But we're never going to get there with this Democrat Party.
00:27:46.000But here's my concern: even if we got there, we nuked the filibuster.
00:27:51.000We don't have enough votes to do anything important, anyways.
00:27:53.000So the question is: you know, will Senator Thune, have you pitched this to Senator Thune, Leader Thune, have you pitched this to the president, the White House?
00:28:01.000Is this something that could actually gain momentum and traction and become a thing?
00:28:08.000I've pitched it to Senate Republicans.
00:28:10.000I've pitched it to the White House staff.
00:28:13.000And I have yet to hear anyone identify a reason why it couldn't work.
00:28:19.000Sometimes people will point out correctly what the difficulty could be.
00:28:24.000And the difficulty is exactly what I just described it as, which is that it would require attendance and prolonged attendance at inconvenient hours.
00:28:34.000But nobody has explained any reason why it wouldn't work.
00:28:37.000And while there are some difficulties inherent in that, I think we owe that to the American people.
00:28:44.000At a time when we've had millions upon millions of people coming into our country illegally over the last four years, at a time when our laws are making it very difficult, but is becoming obvious in litigation pending now in the District of Columbia over our ability to deport those individuals who came in unlawfully, given the now huge backlog we have in our immigration courts.
00:29:34.000Christmas is a time of giving, and there's nothing better than knowing that what you give results in saving the life of an innocent baby.
00:29:42.000And for every baby we save, there is a mom who is saved from a lifetime of regret.
00:29:47.000Every Christmas stocking you will look at this month is a blessing in your life.
00:29:50.000Won't you make that possible for another mom today?
00:29:53.000Pre-born provides free ultrasounds to girls and women, and an ultrasound doubles the chance she'll choose life.
00:29:59.000$140 gives five free ultrasounds and saves babies.
00:30:03.000Just $28 a month can save a baby a month for less than a dollar a day.
00:30:07.000And today, thanks to a dollar-for-dollar match, your gift saves twice as many babies.
00:30:11.000And if you're looking for the perfect tax-deductible year-end giving idea, I personally cannot think of a better one than a $15,000 gift providing an ultrasound machine, saving thousands of lives for years to come.
00:30:24.000Join me in saving babies right now and making it a Merry Christmas.
00:30:28.000Call 833-850-2229 or click on the pre-born banner at charliekirk.com.
00:30:36.000We're just, Blake and I were imagining all these octogenarians in the Senate just trying to pull all-nighters and stand up on their own two feet.
00:30:46.000I bet they maybe they pull in, you know, like a chair for some of the oldies.
00:31:17.000So the whole time I was doing that interview with Senator Lee, I was like, Blake's probably sitting here just spinning his twiddling his thumbs, going, why it won't work.
00:31:26.000And that bothered me to feel your energy.
00:31:30.000Appreciate that the senator wants more real debate in the Senate.
00:31:34.000You can read about these great debates in the United States House and in the United States Senate in the 1800s.
00:31:40.000You have this speech on the Senate floor that's so fiery by Charles Sumner that this guy from South Carolina comes in and beats him over the head with a cane in front of everybody because the senators would be there and debate in person.
00:35:31.000It's going to be a phenomenal, phenomenal weekend.
00:35:33.000And I think to some of the themes that we were talking about before, Blake, that I just think the movement is hungry for a moment where we get to see all these disparate voices, these competing viewpoints come together in one big event that's big enough to hold them all.
00:36:28.000And if you want to get tickets and you weren't able to for Amfest this year, go to amfest.com to pre-order your tickets for next year with a discount.
00:36:36.000We will see you tomorrow from the floor of AmericaFest.