The Charlie Kirk Show - Senator Josh Hawley Steps Up

00:00:00.000 Hey, everybody.

00:00:00.000 Today on the Charlie Kirk Show, we dive deep, and I mean deep, into the significance of Senator Josh Hawley pledging that he will object to the Electoral College results in the United States Senate.

00:00:12.000 January 6th is looming.

00:00:14.000 We are heading close to that date.

00:00:16.000 What does it mean?

00:00:17.000 We have the exclusive historical and constitutional analysis here on the Charlie Kirk Show.

00:00:22.000 If you want to support our program and you feel as if the work we are doing is important, and as you listen, hopefully you're learning something and it motivates you to further action.

00:00:31.000 And you ask yourself, how can I get more people to listen to this?

00:00:35.000 Well, if you would like to support us, go to charliekirk.com/slash support.

00:00:40.000 That's charliekirk.com/slash support.

00:00:44.000 Any way you could support us, it helps us out tremendously.

00:00:47.000 And this program, like many others, is brought to you by our friends at ExpressVPN, expressvpn.com/slash Charlie.

00:00:53.000 Protect yourself from big tech and big government by going to expressvpn.com/slash Charlie.

00:00:59.000 Josh Hawley objects.

00:01:00.000 January 6th is here, and Mike Pence might be the most powerful man in America.

00:01:05.000 Buckle up.

00:01:06.000 Here we go.

00:01:08.000 Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.

00:01:09.000 Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.

00:01:12.000 I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.

00:01:15.000 Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.

00:01:18.000 I want to thank Charlie.

00:01:19.000 He's an incredible guy.

00:01:20.000 His spirit, his love of this country.

00:01:22.000 He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.

00:01:27.000 Turning point USA.

00:01:29.000 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.

00:01:37.000 That's why we are here.

00:01:41.000 Look, you guys have heard me talk about Good Ranchers before.

00:01:43.000 Good Ranchers began with the standard of bringing top quality, 100% American-born, raised, and harvested meat to families across America.

00:01:51.000 This vision was instilled into them from their grandparents that owned community grocery stores and believed in trust, charity, and family values.

00:01:58.000 Goodranchers.com partners directly with only American ranches from across the United States to bring the highest quality meat straight to your door.

00:02:05.000 Look, if you guys want to sign up for Good Ranchers, I highly recommend it.

00:02:09.000 It's beefed the way it used to be.

00:02:11.000 Every new subscription gets a Berkshire Hickory honey smoked ham for free.

00:02:15.000 Our Berkshire hams are 100% no antibiotics ever, 100% hormone-free, 100% born and raised in America.

00:02:22.000 And as always, Good Ranchers is 100% American beef and chicken and now pork.

00:02:26.000 Stakes are always USADA choice and higher.

00:02:29.000 Support local farmers and families.

00:02:32.000 Don't waste your money on cheap cuts or overseas beef.

00:02:34.000 Buy American at goodranchers.com.

00:02:37.000 That's goodranchers.com, promo code Charlie.

00:02:39.000 Goodranchers.com, promo code Charlie.

00:02:44.000 I can't wait for 2020 to be over.

00:02:47.000 This year has been not a good one.

00:02:50.000 It's been a pretty awesome year for us in some ways on this program.

00:02:55.000 We've been very blessed, but the country has suffered a lot.

00:02:58.000 We've lost friends.

00:02:59.000 We've lost family members.

00:03:00.000 We have seen the cost of the lockdowns.

00:03:04.000 We saw our entire electoral system compromised in front of us.

00:03:10.000 It has not been a good year overall.

00:03:13.000 But of course, in all years like 2020, there's plenty of things to take away and learn from, and plenty of things that hopefully will never do again.

00:03:26.000 But I want to congratulate somebody.

00:03:29.000 I want to congratulate Senator Josh Hawley.

00:03:34.000 Senator Josh Hawley is now going to officially be more hated than Senator Ted Cruz.

00:03:42.000 It's pretty incredible when you think about it.

00:03:44.000 I think Senator Josh Hawley is about to become the most hated United States senator in America.

00:03:49.000 Now, that really says something because the activist media have gone out of their way to Demagogue and attack Rand Paul and Ted Cruz throughout the years.

00:04:04.000 Today, Senator Josh Hawley has announced that he will object to the Electoral College results on January 6th.

00:04:15.000 Josh Hawley has come out and said that he will put forth an objection, a motion that says he does not believe that the Electoral College results are without flaw.

00:04:28.000 Senator Josh Hawley said the following: quote: Following both the 2004 and 2016 elections, Democrats in Congress objected during the certification of electoral votes in order to raise concerns about election integrity.

00:04:44.000 They were praised by Democratic leadership and the media when they did this, and they were entitled to do so.

00:04:50.000 But now, those of us concerned about the integrity of this election are entitled to do the same.

00:04:58.000 Senator Josh Hawley continues by saying, I cannot vote to certify the Electoral College results on January 6th without raising the fact that some states, in particular Pennsylvania, failed to follow their own state election laws.

00:05:14.000 And I cannot vote to certify without pointing out the unprecedented effort of mega corporations, good for you, including Facebook and Twitter, to interfere in this election in support of Joe Biden.

00:05:26.000 At the very least, Congress should investigate allegations of voter fraud and adopt measures to secure the integrity of our elections.

00:05:36.000 But Congress has so far failed to act.

00:05:40.000 For these reasons, I will follow the same practice Democrat members of Congress have in years passed and to object during the certification process on January 6th to raise these critical issues.

00:05:54.000 Now, this is in direct defiance to Senator Mitch McConnell.

00:05:58.000 This is in direct defiance to Senate leadership.

00:06:02.000 There were many articles published over the last couple of days kind of as warning shots towards Republican senators basically saying, do not do this.

00:06:11.000 Do not go down this path.

00:06:14.000 You're saying, what are you talking about?

00:06:16.000 I thought the election is over.

00:06:17.000 Wasn't that happened in early November?

00:06:19.000 Or some of you are probably saying, isn't that what the Electoral College is for?

00:06:23.000 What does Congress now have to do with this?

00:06:25.000 So let me begin by saying this.

00:06:29.000 This is not an ideal set of circumstances.

00:06:32.000 I don't love the fact that Congress is now getting involved in our elections.

00:06:37.000 I don't.

00:06:38.000 This is not something that I have great delight in.

00:06:40.000 This is not something that should be taken lightly.

00:06:45.000 Because as soon as you give the power of elections to a legislative branch, you almost become a parliamentary system.

00:06:54.000 You lose the idea of a republic and a state-based republic as that.

00:06:59.000 That's a very dangerous road to head on.

00:07:03.000 However, unusual times call for unusual measures.

00:07:08.000 And nothing that is being discussed right now in any way whatsoever is unconstitutional.

00:07:15.000 Some people are going to be laying the criticism that this is an unconstitutional, no, no, no, it's unprecedented outside of the election of 1876, which we'll dive into as a kind of refresher course, as we've talked about here before.

00:07:30.000 It definitely has not been done in the last 150 years, but it's not unconstitutional.

00:07:38.000 Now, there is an argument to be made that Congress does not have this authority.

00:07:44.000 That has not been decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

00:07:47.000 I'm going to do that argument from a devil's advocate standpoint, but let's just go through the process.

00:07:52.000 Just for all of you that are saying, I'm confused.

00:07:55.000 What does a senator from Missouri have to do with election results from Pennsylvania?

00:08:00.000 Fair question.

00:08:01.000 Okay.

00:08:02.000 So when you vote on election day, you're not actually voting for president.

00:08:07.000 You're voting for electors to go vote for president for you.

00:08:13.000 So you go vote for human beings that then go represent you in the Electoral College according to the United States Constitution.

00:08:21.000 Those electors are chosen by state legislatures, but it is the people that directs it.

00:08:30.000 Okay, so the Electoral College met in December.

00:08:33.000 The state certified their results.

00:08:36.000 We know that should not have happened, but it was weak Republicans that were trying to save face.

00:08:44.000 The Electoral College certifies the results.

00:08:46.000 Now, typically in a kind of fourth-grade civics class, that's kind of where the conversation would end.

00:08:55.000 But let's go to the AP level, right?

00:08:57.000 Let's go to the higher graduate course level of American civics.

00:09:01.000 There's one more step that typically is just a procedural step.

00:09:06.000 And it's a very important one.

00:09:09.000 It's in the Constitution.

00:09:10.000 Let me read this word for word.

00:09:12.000 So you have all these electoral college results.

00:09:14.000 And then on January 6th, a bunch of people wearing dark suits carry in the results in boxes, literally.

00:09:23.000 And they follow this protocol.

00:09:26.000 Quote, the president of the Senate.

00:09:28.000 Let's stop there.

00:09:30.000 Who's the president of the Senate?

00:09:33.000 If you just said Mitch McConnell, you're wrong.

00:09:36.000 The president of the Senate is the Vice President of the United States.

00:09:42.000 The President of the Senate is Mike Pence.

00:09:46.000 He is the only member of the executive branch who also has a leadership role in the legislative branch.

00:09:55.000 Dick Cheney made the theory, I believe it's called unitary executive theory, very famous when he used that as an excuse for, I believe, not disclosing financials, something of that sense.

00:10:13.000 Anyway, the president of the Senate is Mike Pence.

00:10:16.000 So for just kind of substitutionary reasons, I'm going to actually just say, Mike Pence shall, in the presence of the Senate and the House, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.

00:10:33.000 The person having the greatest number of votes for president shall be president.

00:10:40.000 So it's majoritarian.

00:10:42.000 Shall the president, if such number of majority of the whole number of electors appointed, and if no person has such a majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers, not exceeding three on the list of those voted as for president, the House shall then choose the president immediately by ballot for president.

00:11:05.000 So there is a lot there.

00:11:08.000 Let's take this piece by piece because there's going to be a lot of conjecture and quite honestly, a lot of bluster in the next couple of days.

00:11:20.000 And I want to make sure you get the information of exactly what's going on here because Senator Josh Hawley objecting is not just some insignificant act of political theater.

00:11:31.000 This is a very big deal.

00:11:33.000 He says, I'm objecting to the results.

00:11:35.000 What?

00:11:36.000 What does that mean?

00:11:38.000 Well, unless you're a seasoned constitutional scholar or you listen to every single second of every single episode of the Charlie Kirk Show podcast, you might be a little confused, and that's okay because I spent a couple hours this morning and last evening diving into the actual constitutional intent, calling around to a couple constitutional scholars that I know that are very, very credible, kind of understanding what was the founder's intent behind all of this.

00:12:06.000 And is this wishful thinking?

00:12:08.000 What is the process here?

00:12:09.000 Okay, so as we just read the entire paragraph from the United States Constitution, the president of the Senate shall basically, in the presence of the House and the Senate, open all the certificates and the vote shall be counted.

00:12:23.000 Person having the most votes becomes president from the Electoral College.

00:12:27.000 Okay, we know how the Electoral College works.

00:12:29.000 That part's kind of completed.

00:12:31.000 Okay.

00:12:33.000 So Senator Josh Hawley is saying, I'm going to object.

00:12:38.000 We already have congressman-elect Madison Cawthorne, who in four days will become the youngest congressman ever elected to the U.S. Congress, who's objecting.

00:12:47.000 Matt Gates, Mo Brooks, and I think Louis Gomert is as well.

00:12:51.000 And so the way that the statute is written, let me be very clear, statute, not law.

00:12:59.000 The statute, which is House rules, it's precedent.

00:13:03.000 If a singular member from the House and a singular member from the Senate objects, then it goes into two hours of debate.

00:13:12.000 Now, according to one constitutional scholar that I spoke to, it's two hours per objection.

00:13:20.000 So if Madison Cawthorne and Matt Gaetz and Mo Brooks and Louis Gomert all object, that would be eight hours of debate.

00:13:30.000 Okay.

00:13:32.000 And other people have said that as well.

00:13:33.000 We've heard that dozens could potentially be joining.

00:13:37.000 If that's true, it could be 130 hours of debate per member, two hours per objection.

00:13:45.000 That remains to be seen.

00:13:47.000 Now, the paragraph that everyone is zeroing in on is admittedly open to interpretation.

00:13:57.000 The only precedent that we have is the election of 1876.

00:14:04.000 The election of, now, a little bit maybe 1960, if you want to stretch it a little bit, but 1876 is probably the best example of this.

00:14:12.000 In 1876, you had Rutherford B. Hayes up by one electoral vote to Samuel Tilden, Democrat, and the House and the House was Democrat, if my memory serves me correctly, and the Senate was Republican, and they were unable to determine a winner.

00:14:32.000 And so it went to the House and the Senate just like it's about to, and they became gridlocked.

00:14:37.000 And that ended up becoming the Great Compromise of 1876, which ended up basically ending Reconstruction in the South, really bad thing, and then ended up being a winner for the Republican President Hayes.

00:14:55.000 And so that compromise was because of the gridlock in Congress.

00:14:59.000 Okay.

00:15:00.000 And so let's read this very, let's read this word by word.

00:15:04.000 Is super important because this is about to be the number one news story.

00:15:07.000 And only here on the Charlie Kirk Shore are we actually diving into this.

00:15:09.000 Okay.

00:15:10.000 The president of the Senate, Mike Pence, shall, in the presence of the Senate and the House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.

00:15:26.000 That sentence is about to be torn apart, dissected, and interpreted by every major cable news constitutional pundit.

00:15:36.000 Because that sentence could go anyway, and the Supreme Court has not really ever ruled on what that sentence actually means.

00:15:45.000 So let's dive into this.

00:15:47.000 In the presence of the Senate and the House, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted.

00:15:57.000 So some establishment Republicans and people that I do have a lot of respect for are saying that the Constitution says we're just supposed to be there and watch.

00:16:09.000 We don't have the constitutional authority to interject or to intercede.

00:16:15.000 But then that asks the question: why would the founders have you there if they didn't want you to have any sort of power?

00:16:23.000 Why would the founders want the Senate and the House to be present if it's nothing more than just a spectator sport?

00:16:31.000 The president of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and the House, open all certificates and votes shall then be counted.

00:16:41.000 So the President of the Senate, the Vice President of the United States, is in charge of accepting the Electoral College results in Congress.

00:16:52.000 Now, by a matter of statute, the members of the House and the Senate have the ability, have the freedom to object.

00:17:02.000 Now, this is not in the U.S. Constitution.

00:17:05.000 That is statute.

00:17:07.000 It has never been litigated up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

00:17:11.000 It has never been challenged.

00:17:13.000 Now, the election of 1876 did show that we have precedent that Congress can be a last line of defense against Electoral College results.

00:17:22.000 Now, let me be very clear.

00:17:24.000 I don't like the idea of a legislative body all of a sudden becoming the determining factor for a presidential election.

00:17:34.000 I don't like that.

00:17:35.000 It is not the system of government that our founders intended.

00:17:40.000 However, alongside of that, the founders put in this fail-safe for extraordinary measures.

00:17:49.000 We have the election of 1800, 1876, and 1960 to show us that Congress can get involved and should get involved.

00:17:59.000 So, the devil's advocate argument, the opposite argument, that certain people in the Republican establishment are going to say, they're going to say this is wholly and completely unconstitutional, is what they're going to say.

00:18:14.000 And to just make their argument For them, they'll say that this paragraph, the president of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and the House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted at hard stop.

00:18:27.000 They're going to say, nowhere does it say about objection, it doesn't say about stopping, it doesn't say about process, none of it.

00:18:34.000 So, right.

00:18:36.000 However, two points of argument here, and then this is the stuff that federal judges and U.S. Supreme Court judges would have to wrestle between the idea of original intent and textualism and, of course, whatever revisionist, Sodomayor, Kagan nonsense that they'll write is this: that if the founders wanted the House and the Senate to be there,

00:19:05.000 did they really want them to be there with no power at all whatsoever?

00:19:10.000 I find that very hard to believe.

00:19:13.000 The only argument as to why the founding fathers and the framers would want the House and the Senate members to be there without any power is just so that they could witness the results and they can go back to the people and say the results were actually counted correctly.

00:19:35.000 They were not counted in a corrupt fashion.

00:19:40.000 However, the power really does rest and lie on the president of the Senate.

00:19:48.000 So the president of the Senate, the vice president, has an incredible amount of power in this regard.

00:19:58.000 In the election of 1960, it was John F. Kennedy versus Richard Nixon, a very famous election for a variety of different reasons.

00:20:10.000 It is most commonly taught in government class and civics class as being the election that was more on television than on radio, especially during the debate of Nixon versus Kennedy.

00:20:24.000 It was the young Catholic Kennedy versus the establishment Richard Nixon, who was actually vice president at the time.

00:20:34.000 It's a very important point.

00:20:37.000 And so the election was very tight in a lot of different states, in particular in New Jersey and in Illinois, but also in Hawaii, the new state of Hawaii at the time.

00:20:51.000 Original election results showed that Richard Nixon, then vice president, had won the state of Hawaii.

00:21:02.000 The governor's signature and the governor of Hawaii actually certified the election results for Richard Nixon, not for JFK.

00:21:13.000 JFK challenged the election results and went to a recount.

00:21:18.000 Nixon was up 141 votes, but after a recount, JFK pulled ahead.

00:21:26.000 Now, this actually happened after the results were sent to Washington.

00:21:34.000 So Nixon was the president of the Senate in 1960.

00:21:39.000 He was the vice president.

00:21:40.000 He was Dwight D. Eisenhower's number two guy.

00:21:44.000 So what did Nixon do?

00:21:47.000 Nixon, being a gentleman, Nixon trying to rise above political infighting while the election was being stolen from him in Chicago and New Jersey by the Mayor Daily Machine, specifically in Illinois.

00:22:01.000 Nixon, In defiance to federal law, ordered that the Democrat candidates certificate gets counted because they also seated Democrat electors and ignore the accompanying Republican certificate.

00:22:19.000 Now, what's the significance of this?

00:22:21.000 A couple things.

00:22:22.000 Number one, while Republicans were playing nice, Democrats were licking their chops for power, and they did get power.

00:22:31.000 But number two, it actually shows the president of the Senate can do whatever he wants.

00:22:38.000 There's really no check and balance against Mike Pence on January 6th.

00:22:42.000 Do I like that?

00:22:44.000 No.

00:22:46.000 Is it the framing of how it is?

00:22:50.000 Yes.

00:22:51.000 Thomas Jefferson in the election of 1800 with highly contested election results in Georgia when he was running up against John Jay and others.

00:23:04.000 Guess what Thomas Jefferson was at the time?

00:23:07.000 You guessed it, vice president.

00:23:09.000 He was the president of the Senate overseeing this process.

00:23:14.000 And the Virginia law records show that Georgia was a hotly contested election.

00:23:20.000 It's kind of funny how this all comes full circle, right?

00:23:24.000 And Thomas Jefferson decided to put Georgia in his category despite the controversy.

00:23:30.000 Thomas Jefferson ended up becoming our third president, executing the Louisiana Purchase, and amongst other things, designing our declaration prior to that, becoming known as one of America's greatest presidents.

00:23:44.000 Same in 1876.

00:23:45.000 So Pence has what is called a plenary power, which is a fancy legal way to say absolute.

00:23:56.000 Nixon basically saw the results from Hawaii and said, I don't like him.

00:24:01.000 I'm giving him the Kennedy.

00:24:03.000 That actually hurt him.

00:24:04.000 He wanted to do the gentleman thing, the honorable thing.

00:24:09.000 Whether or not he was correct in that is up for Nixon historians to come on this program maybe at a different time and debate.

00:24:18.000 However, there was no check and balance against that.

00:24:24.000 And so there's precedent, there's constitutional authority.

00:24:33.000 Mike Pence's power on January 6th will be plenary and unappealable.

00:24:40.000 As president of the Senate, every objection comes directly to him.

00:24:45.000 And he can rule any objection as out of order, accepted, denied, you get more debate.

00:24:53.000 He's kind of king of the Senate.

00:24:55.000 Now, why did the founders design it this way?

00:24:59.000 I'm going to have to dive back into the Federalist Papers to explain that comprehensively.

00:25:05.000 However, the best way that I could do it kind of in real time is that the founders knew that if the process of counting votes was solely a legislative body exercise, then you would have a parliamentary system.

00:25:25.000 The reason that they included a member from the executive to be involved in legislative affairs is to prevent a parliamentary system from ensuing.

00:25:39.000 Now, this is a high threshold.

00:25:43.000 Do I like the idea that one day a Republican might win an election and there might be a Democrat vice president and what they might do?

00:25:54.000 Not really.

00:25:55.000 However, we'd be fooling ourselves to think they wouldn't do this.

00:26:00.000 As if they're only going to do it because we have the courage to stand up against it.

00:26:05.000 And let me be very clear.

00:26:07.000 What we are building out on this program is not some sort of lust for power.

00:26:12.000 It's not some sort of insatiable appetite to get another four years.

00:26:18.000 What we're talking about is an election that is so compromised, so polluted, so poisoned that certain states should not have their election results counted as valid.

00:26:35.000 Now, as objections come up state by state, and again, there's a lot of questions about this.

00:26:41.000 So there's a significant amount of pressure on my friend Mike Pence.

00:26:47.000 A lot.

00:26:49.000 And let me be clear: I do not envy his position here.

00:26:53.000 I don't.

00:26:55.000 Because no matter what he does, he will come under immense criticism.

00:27:02.000 And some of it will be unwarranted because there really is no modern-day political playbook to how to navigate all of this.

00:27:12.000 However, we do know that the president of the Senate will call it to order.

00:27:20.000 And if there is an objection for each state, does that mean that each state gets two hours of debate?

00:27:26.000 Does that mean that the whole point of order gets two hours of debate?

00:27:28.000 Does that mean that every objection gets two hours of debate?

00:27:33.000 It would be my personal opinion that the healthiest way to do this is do it state by state.

00:27:38.000 That's the electoral system. 0.58

00:27:40.000 Take it by Arizona, take it by Georgia, take it by Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan.

00:27:47.000 And I don't think anyone's going to object to Florida's results.

00:27:49.000 I don't.

00:27:50.000 The president of the Senate is the closest thing to ultimate power that we will see when it comes to a presidential election.

00:28:02.000 Nixon showed us you can just decide not to follow federal law and do whatever you want in favor of a Democrat.

00:28:10.000 Same when it came to Jefferson in 1800 and in 1876.

00:28:15.000 And Democrats actually have objected before, despite their moral gallivanning that they're doing right now.

00:28:24.000 Protecting my family is my number one priority, but I want to do it safely.

00:28:28.000 The people at Taser believe that safer self-defense is better self-defense.

00:28:32.000 Taser's line of non-lethal self-protection devices are small and lightweight enough to carry with you or in your glove compartment or purse, yet they're powerful enough to incapacitate an attacker.

00:28:44.000 Guns carry unnecessary risks for you and those around you.

00:28:47.000 And even pepper spray can harm you as much as an attacker.

00:28:50.000 And it's often ineffective.

00:28:52.000 Taser products are safer and easy to use.

00:28:54.000 They use an electrical charge to immobilize attackers for up to 30 seconds, allowing you time to escape and send emergency dispatch to your GPS location.

00:29:03.000 Taser devices come loaded with features like laser-assisted targeting and emergency dispatch, which will send response teams to your GPS location upon firing.

00:29:12.000 More than 237,000 lives have been saved with the Taser network of devices, apps, and personnel.

00:29:18.000 Now you can have your own TASER device, the number one choice of law enforcement agencies.

00:29:22.000 Taser is available without a permit in most U.S. states.

00:29:25.000 Give the Taser Pulse Plus or Taser strike light at taser.com with the promo code Charlie, spelled T-A-S-E-R.com, promo code Charlie.

00:29:35.000 Restrictions apply.

00:29:36.000 See the site for details.

00:29:41.000 So Richard Nixon in 1960, Thomas Jefferson in 1800, and the contested election of 1876 shows us that Congress really is the last line of interpretation and defense when it comes to contested elections.

00:30:01.000 As I've said earlier in this program, this is not something I take lightly.

00:30:07.000 This is not something that I think should become routine.

00:30:12.000 But while we're at it, while we are talking about this, the Democrats are inevitably going to be saying this is unprecedented.

00:30:20.000 This is an assault on the Constitution.

00:30:22.000 This is wrong.

00:30:23.000 This is terrible.

00:30:25.000 How dare you?

00:30:25.000 They're going to be screaming activists in the streets, activist media.

00:30:30.000 And all we have to do is play Cut 29 over and over and over and over and over.

00:30:38.000 Play tape.

00:30:40.000 Our very democracy depends again on the confidence of the American people in the integrity of our electoral system.

00:30:49.000 So my colleagues, please don't talk about this about a conspiracy theory.

00:30:54.000 It's not about that.

00:30:55.000 It's not about conspiracy.

00:30:58.000 It's about the Constitution of the United States.

00:31:02.000 Cut 28, Nancy Pelosi objects to the Ohio electoral votes after the 2004 election.

00:31:10.000 Remember what they say?

00:31:10.000 As Ohio goes, the nation goes.

00:31:13.000 She says people must have every confidence that every vote legally cast will be legally counted and accurately counted.

00:31:19.000 She objected in 2004.

00:31:21.000 Play tape.

00:31:22.000 People must have confidence that every vote legally cast will be legally counted and accurately counted.

00:31:31.000 But constantly shifting vote tallies in Ohio and malfunctioning electronic machines, which may not have paper receipts, have led to additional loss of confidence by the public.

00:31:45.000 As elected officials, we have a solemn responsibility to improve our election system and its administration.

00:31:54.000 We cannot be here again four years from now discussing the failings of the 2008 election.

00:32:02.000 Madison Cawthorne should write down every word she just said and give that exact speech during his floor time when he objects, word for word.

00:32:13.000 Because of ever-changing vote tallies in the state of Pennsylvania and irregularities, people cannot trust.

00:32:20.000 So just to understand the significance of this, Nancy Pelosi, who was the minority leader for the Democrats and was about to become Speaker of the House, in fact, she became Speaker of the House, if my memory serves me correctly, in 2006.

00:32:35.000 That's right.

00:32:35.000 Yeah, when the Democrats took back the House.

00:32:39.000 If those electoral votes would have been withheld from George W. Bush, George W. Bush would have went from 286 electoral votes to 266 electoral votes, and he would not have become president through that certification.

00:32:56.000 Now, it would have went to the House.

00:32:58.000 I don't know who would have been the winner of that.

00:33:02.000 It might have been John Kerry.

00:33:04.000 I don't know who would have won that.

00:33:07.000 However, Pelosi, minority leader, 2004, decided to have a full frontal attack on the reelection of George W. Bush.

00:33:19.000 She said, it's not a conspiracy.

00:33:20.000 It's about the Constitution of the United States.

00:33:22.000 Okay, Nancy, buckle up, because we're about to have a constitutional fight on January 6th.

00:33:27.000 And it seems that Democrats are increasingly nervous about that.

00:33:31.000 Back in 2004, Nancy Pelosi objected to Ohio's electoral votes, saying that people must have every confidence that every vote legally cast will be legally counted and accurately counted.

00:33:43.000 That would have sent the election results into the House of Representatives and not be certified by the U.S. Senate or by the House at the time.

00:33:53.000 But let's go as recently as 2017.

00:33:58.000 You see, Democrats are about to slander Matt Gates, Madison Cawthorne, Josh Hawley, and many others.

00:34:04.000 However, they themselves were speaking out in favor of objecting to President Trump's victory in 2016 and swearing in in 2017.

00:34:16.000 Let's go to cut 30 of Congresswoman Jaya Paul, her objecting to a certificate from Georgia, play cut 30.

00:34:26.000 Mr. President, I object to the certificate from the state of Georgia on the grounds that the electoral votes were.

00:34:31.000 No debate.

00:34:32.000 There's no debate.

00:34:33.000 Section 15 and 17 of Title III of the United States Code require that any objection be presented in writing signed by both a member of the House of Representatives and a senator.

00:34:42.000 Now, the interesting part is that's Joe Biden, who is saying the debate is over on this.

00:34:49.000 Now, one of the main reasons why is because Joe Biden did not have a U.S. Senator that stepped up and objected.

00:35:01.000 Also, the argument that Donald Trump was not the rightful winner in 2017 was so incredibly weak, lacking any sort of facts or data, different than this election cycle.

00:35:16.000 Let's go to Cut 31, Sheila Jackson objecting in 2017.

00:35:20.000 Mrs. President, I object.

00:35:24.000 Under section 37, Mr. President, I object on the massive vote of suppression.

00:35:28.000 Debate is not an order.

00:35:29.000 Counting is not an order.

00:35:31.000 Ballots that were provisional that denied individuals access to polling planes.

00:35:38.000 You see how they call him Mr. President?

00:35:39.000 They're not misspeaking like Joe Biden does.

00:35:41.000 It's because he's the president of the Senate.

00:35:44.000 So as Joe Biden was disallowing debate in 2017, Mike Pence can allow debate in 2020 if a senator signs on to it.

00:35:54.000 How about Raul Javalara referring to votes from Trump from North Dakota?

00:36:00.000 Is that right?

00:36:00.000 Let's play Cut 32.

00:36:02.000 Mr. Brady.

00:36:04.000 Mr. President, the certificate of electoral vote of the state of North Dakota seems to be regular, in full, and authentic.

00:36:09.000 It appears therefrom that Donald Day Trump of the state of New York received three votes for president and Michael R. Pence of the state of Indiana received three votes for vice president.

00:36:18.000 Oh, there's one objecting to election results.

00:36:23.000 Now, Bernie Sanders is going to be someone that speaks out about how this is an assault on democracy.

00:36:28.000 What was he saying in 2004 when he was objecting to George W. Bush's election results?

00:36:35.000 What was his stance back in 04?

00:36:39.000 Play cut 38.

00:36:40.000 That I agree with millions of American citizens that no American should have to wait four hours to cast the vote.

00:36:49.000 I agree with tens of millions of Americans who are very worried that when they cast the ballot on an electronic voting machine, that there is no paper trail to record that vote in the event of a recount.

00:37:06.000 Sounds so familiar to what Republicans are about to say.

00:37:09.000 And the clips continue because Democrats did object to these results back in 2004, back in 2016, and back in 2017.

00:37:19.000 The president of the Senate, the Vice President of the United States, holds the power in this process.

00:37:27.000 It's not Mitch McConnell.

00:37:29.000 It's not Nancy Pelosi.

00:37:31.000 Mike Pence and Vice President Pence is the one that calls the shots here.

00:37:37.000 As Nancy Pelosi said back in 2004, quote, please don't talk about this as a conspiracy theory.

00:37:43.000 It's not a conspiracy.

00:37:43.000 It's not about that.

00:37:45.000 It's the Constitution of the United States. 1.00

00:37:47.000 Let's go to Cut 39 if Maxine Waters objecting.

00:37:50.000 I do not wish to debate.

00:37:52.000 I wish to ask: is there one United States senator who will join me in this letter?

00:37:57.000 There's no debate.

00:37:59.000 There's no debate. 1.00

00:38:00.000 The gentlewoman will suspend.

00:38:03.000 Well, we have a senator now.

00:38:06.000 His name is Josh Hawley.

00:38:07.000 I don't think he's going to be agreeing with Maxine Waters.

00:38:10.000 But as you can see, the Democrat radicals baselessly trying to prevent Donald Trump from getting sworn in as Maxine Waters was begging, is there anyone that will join me?

00:38:21.000 Nope, not even Bernie Sanders or Pocahontas will join you.

00:38:26.000 We actually see now that there is a senator that is willing to join. 0.95

00:38:29.000 Now, that opens a completely different process.

00:38:34.000 But the point of playing all that tape is to show that Democrats, they've been the ones that have been objecting.

00:38:41.000 And so any Republican that now objects is perfectly within legislative and congressional precedent.

00:38:51.000 What is unprecedented and what might be unprecedented, but not necessarily unconstitutional, is Mike Pence saying, you know what?

00:39:01.000 I've heard the arguments.

00:39:03.000 I've seen all this.

00:39:05.000 We're going to put Georgia's votes aside.

00:39:08.000 We're going to put Arizona's votes aside.

00:39:11.000 We're going to put Pennsylvania's votes aside.

00:39:13.000 Now, mind you, the ultimate unconstitutional measure here is the fact that Georgia changed their election law unconstitutionally without consent of the state legislature.

00:39:26.000 That's the true issue here.

00:39:28.000 Now, there is a playbook very clearly of what happens when someone does not hit the 270 vote threshold.

00:39:36.000 It goes to the House of Representatives.

00:39:38.000 Now, you might say, well, Charlie, that doesn't do anything.

00:39:41.000 It doesn't mean anything.

00:39:42.000 It actually is very significant because every single state gets one vote.

00:39:47.000 And if they were all to vote the way that we would anticipate them to vote, Donald Trump would serve four more years.

00:39:52.000 Now, there's a lot of work that has to get to that point.

00:39:57.000 The country would metaphorically and literally explode.

00:40:00.000 But it's pretty much, this is how it's going to work.

00:40:04.000 Mike Pence says, I've heard the arguments in regards to voter fraud and irregularities in Arizona.

00:40:11.000 We are going to temporarily suspend the counting of those electors.

00:40:14.000 Not even count them for Trump, by the way.

00:40:17.000 Just not count them in the process because, as it says very clearly in the United States Constitution, it's the president of the Senate shall open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.

00:40:35.000 As we saw in 1963, Richard Nixon, the president of the Senate can do basically whatever he wants.

00:40:41.000 Now, I'm not saying that that should be taken lightly.

00:40:45.000 I'm not saying that Mike Pence should all of a sudden just impart his own opinion.

00:40:51.000 What I am saying, though, when you have fraud, when you have irregularities, when you have the accusations and the affidavits, maybe take a pause before you count, Georgia?

00:41:02.000 Maybe open up for more debate.

00:41:04.000 January 6th deadline is important, but all of a sudden, if you get debate after debate, maybe we can actually get to the correct conclusion.

00:41:13.000 We just got a great question here that we just had emailed, freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:41:18.000 Hey, Charlie, what happens after the debates?

00:41:20.000 Do both chambers need to vote against certification or for it or not at all?

00:41:24.000 Would you need a 51-vote majority or 60?

00:41:27.000 It's a phenomenal question.

00:41:29.000 And the answer is we really don't know.

00:41:32.000 We don't know because we're all just kind of playing in Mike Pence's world here.

00:41:37.000 There is some precedent from the 1876 election as to how the House and the Senate can't quite agree on a victor, and then they came to some compromise.

00:41:50.000 However, there might be some parliamentary precedent that I am unaware of, and I'll stand corrected if that's the case.

00:41:58.000 But I think Mitch McConnell is kind of irrelevant in this equation.

00:42:07.000 The president of the Senate should oversee all the rules, all of the process.

00:42:12.000 It says it very clear in the U.S. Constitution that it's the president of the Senate that is overseeing the vote counting and tabulation process.

00:42:21.000 So if you want to get specific about it, it says the president of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and the House, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.

00:42:33.000 So it's really his program.

00:42:37.000 So it's the president of the Senate.

00:42:38.000 All the power is on him.

00:42:41.000 Does he then all of a sudden say, I'm only going to count them if we get 61 votes now?

00:42:45.000 Mind you, a lot of this would probably be instantaneously litigated if they were not happy with the way that Mike Pence handled this.

00:42:54.000 However, the question is a good one.

00:42:58.000 Would it take 51 votes?

00:42:59.000 Would it take 60 votes?

00:43:01.000 Can he just unilaterally decide to do something?

00:43:04.000 We do know, based on precedent from the 1960 election with Richard Nixon, that you can throw out certain electoral votes that you are not necessarily convinced that has the correct and certain outcome.

00:43:20.000 So the question is a very good one.

00:43:22.000 So Josh Hawley has said today, in case you missed the breaking news, that he is going to object to the Electoral College results on January 6th.

00:43:31.000 This is going to send both chambers, we know this much, both chambers into debate for at least two hours per objection.

00:43:39.000 I would not be surprised if more senators start to sign on in the coming hours and the coming days.

00:43:45.000 Let's go to Cut 35, where Mo Brooks has said that dozens of House members back the effort.

00:43:52.000 Cut 35.

00:43:54.000 Notwithstanding that, there are dozens in the House of Representatives who have reached that conclusion, as I have.

00:43:59.000 We're going to sponsor and co-sponsor objections to the Electoral College vote returns of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, and maybe more.

00:44:09.000 And so we know, as Mo Brooks said, we are going to sponsor and co-sponsor objections to the Electoral College vote returns, as you heard right there.

00:44:17.000 Again, Nancy Pelosi back in 2004 was leading the charge of this.

00:44:23.000 We played this earlier.

00:44:24.000 I want to play this again.

00:44:26.000 Cut 28, Nancy Pelosi objecting to the election results of Ohio, which would have made the House of Representatives have to decide the Electoral College winner.

00:44:36.000 Cut 28.

00:44:37.000 People must have confidence that every vote legally cast will be legally counted and accurately counted.

00:44:46.000 But constantly shifting vote tallies in Ohio and malfunctioning electronic machines, which may not have paper receipts, have led to additional loss of confidence by the public.

00:45:01.000 As elected officials, we have a solemn responsibility to improve our election system and its administration.

00:45:09.000 We cannot be here again four years from now discussing the failings of the 2008 election.

00:45:16.000 Sounds awfully familiar.

00:45:17.000 And what did Nancy Pelosi say when people called her a conspiracy theorist?

00:45:21.000 Play Cut 29.

00:45:23.000 Our very democracy depends again on the confidence of the American people in the integrity of our electoral system.

00:45:31.000 So, my colleagues, please don't talk about this about a conspiracy theory.

00:45:36.000 It's not about that.

00:45:38.000 It's not about conspiracy.

00:45:40.000 It's about the Constitution of the United States.

00:45:45.000 So, I want to get into the congressional precedent here as a lot of questions are pouring in at freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:45:51.000 As you heard there, Nancy Pelosi thinks it's perfectly okay to do this.

00:45:55.000 It says, upon such reading of any such certification or paper, the president of the Senate, the vice president, shall call for objections.

00:46:01.000 If any, every objection shall be made in writing and shall state clearly and concisely and without argument the ground thereof and shall be signed by at least one senator and one member of the House before the same shall be received.

00:46:15.000 When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a state shall have been received and read.

00:46:24.000 49% of Americans say their top New Year's resolution is to save money in the next year.

00:46:28.000 I agree.

00:46:29.000 Well, let's get that handled right now.

00:46:31.000 When your family switches to PeerTalk from AT ⁇ T, Verizon, or T-Mobile, you could save over $800 a year.

00:46:39.000 That's real money every single month right back in your pocket.

00:46:42.000 And you don't have to sacrifice coverage.

00:46:44.000 PeerTalk is on the same network as one of those big carriers, but they charge you half.

00:46:49.000 That's right.

00:46:49.000 No gimmicks, no fluff added to your bills, which is why PeerTalk is the top-rated wireless company by Consumer Affairs.

00:46:56.000 Right now, get unlimited talk, text, and two gigs of data for just 20 bucks a month.

00:47:01.000 And if you go over on data usage, they don't charge you for it.

00:47:04.000 Grab your mobile phone and dial pound 250 and say Charlie Kirk.

00:47:07.000 When you do, you'll save 50% off your first month.

00:47:10.000 Again, dial pound250 and say keyword Charlie Kirk.

00:47:13.000 PeerTalk is simply smarter, wireless.

00:47:19.000 So we're not allowed to talk about voter fraud or else YouTube magically is going to make our entire live stream disappear.

00:47:27.000 However, I saw a story this morning from the DC report and raw story.

00:47:35.000 It's a mildly left-wing outlet that says, quote, voting machine company behind so many surprise wins this year raises some questions with a picture of Susan Collins.

00:47:48.000 After initially focusing on the surprisingly lopsided results of the senatorial election in Kentucky, DC Report broadened our scope to look at the electronic vote counting software and electronic voting systems that we rely on to tally our votes.

00:48:02.000 Hold on a second.

00:48:03.000 Time out.

00:48:04.000 Time out.

00:48:05.000 Is this a left-wing investigative outlet that's looking into voting machines?

00:48:10.000 I thought we're not allowed to talk about Dominion voting systems, Hammer scorecard.

00:48:14.000 All of these are triggers by the tech companies and by anyone in polite society saying you're not allowed to say that.

00:48:20.000 Here's an entire story all about how voting machines might be corrupted in Republican states.

00:48:27.000 By the way, you might be right.

00:48:28.000 I'm all for it.

00:48:29.000 Look into all the machines.

00:48:31.000 However, isn't it interesting that you have this very thorough investigation, by the way, this is a long, long piece, into this thing called Electronic Systems and Software, America's largest voting machine company.

00:48:44.000 What we found was a revolving door, this is them, between government officials and ES and S. Voting results in three states that saw surprising majorities vulnerable to incumbent senators, Maine, North Carolina, and South Carolina, were almost all tabulated by ESNS.

00:49:02.000 It says here, this is just so funny.

00:49:03.000 Rudy Giuliani and Sydney Powell have been making such bold and naked claims against ESNS competitors like Dominion Voting Systems without any substance or evidence.

00:49:16.000 Team Trump has been so vigorous in going after Dominion that it prompted us to look into how ESNS operates.

00:49:25.000 Owned by a private equity firm, ESNS has been elusive about identifying the people in its ownership.

00:49:32.000 A number of ESNS executives and lobbyists have ties to top GOP election officials and politicians.

00:49:38.000 Interestingly enough, Minnesota and Arizona, two states that we thought Trump would do very well in, use ESNS.

00:49:45.000 You know what other state uses you ESNS?

00:49:48.000 Pennsylvania.

00:49:50.000 So by the left's own logic, this is a flawed election based on this story.

00:49:58.000 It goes deeper into saying when requesting details about ESNS, the lawmakers specifically noted that, quote, we are concerned about the secretive and trouble-plagued companies.

00:50:08.000 DC Report placed numerous calls and emails to ESNS at its headquarters on John Galt Boulevard in Omaha.

00:50:16.000 It says, understanding the software.

00:50:20.000 This is really fascinating that all of a sudden the left is super interested in voter irregularity machine fraud.

00:50:26.000 But we're not even going to talk about it when it comes to how ESNS or Dominion voting systems might be used in states that Joe Biden won.

00:50:35.000 Someone here didn't quite get the memo.

00:50:38.000 It says here, our democracy now relies on private companies, which build proprietary electronic systems to reliably count our votes.

00:50:46.000 It seems reasonable, if not crucial, to understand who is behind these companies as a standard to ensure election integrity.

00:50:53.000 Without such knowledge, we run the risk that zealots or investors with financial stake in who wins elections or those susceptible to bribery have an incentive to use subtle software programming techniques to deliberately miscount votes to guarantee an outcome.

00:51:07.000 Can I just give a round of applause for Ross's story?

00:51:09.000 I completely agree.

00:51:11.000 That's been a massive focal point for us the last month and a half.

00:51:16.000 Yet you and your publication, and not just you, but all of the allies that you have, have been suppressing any sort of investigation and discussion around this topic in particular.

00:51:28.000 One of the major concerns is providing junkets and gratuities to election officials, as uncovered in 2018 by McClatchy.

00:51:35.000 For at least 11 years, the voting equipment and software companies curried favor with election officials by paying for trips to Las Vegas tickets, shows, and gifts.

00:51:44.000 It goes on to say that ESNS, and by the way, I think that they actually did some good work here.

00:51:49.000 I think that they did some good work looking into this.

00:51:52.000 I'm all for the idea that Republicans might be, establishment Republicans might be trying to game the system, just as if Joe Biden did in certain states and establishment Democrats did.

00:52:04.000 I'm not saying that in any way whatsoever, that none of this is out of the ordinary.

00:52:11.000 What I am saying is that all of a sudden, the media is allowing vibrant discussion around voting machines, but only those that don't benefit their political agenda.

00:52:24.000 Interestingly enough, it links to a story in The New Yorker by Sue Halprin, quote, how voting machine lobbyists undermine the democratic process.

00:52:32.000 Georgia's 2018 election result is noteworthy because it was overseen by Brian Kemp.

00:52:38.000 Interestingly.

00:52:39.000 Interesting.

00:52:40.000 It goes into how Brian Kemp is corrupted by this.

00:52:45.000 This is about a 2,000-word piece, and it says this at the end.

00:52:50.000 This is by a left-wing blogosphere.

00:52:52.000 We think the issue of who counts our votes, how they are counted, and what ties the companies to selling these systems have to politicians deserve more attention.

00:53:01.000 We agree.

00:53:03.000 Politicians who must win elections in order to wield power must not be able to exert influence on the companies who rely to tally our votes.

00:53:10.000 We need serious scrutiny over our elections so we can be assured that they represent the will of the people, not the politicians themselves and the companies they hire to process our ballots.

00:53:24.000 The integrity of voting systems and the especially the ability to audit vote counts has been the subject of public debate for more than four decades.

00:53:32.000 But most of the recent attention has been focused only on Dominion voting systems because of Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell.

00:53:39.000 But it's simply a distraction.

00:53:41.000 So there's nothing to see there with Dominion, but with ESNS, because we don't like the results, totally corrupt.

00:53:47.000 Can't wait for the activist media to call everyone that talks about this conspiracy theorists, but something tells me they're going to be elevated into looking into voting machines that sometimes give them results that they don't like.

00:54:01.000 And by the way, there might be merit to their inquiry.

00:54:03.000 That's the point.

00:54:05.000 I'm open-minded to any of that.

00:54:07.000 Remember when Joe Biden said he wanted paper ballots?

00:54:11.000 Let's go to cut 33, where Joe Biden says that we need a federal law to have a paper trail for voting machines for every federal election.

00:54:19.000 Cut 33.

00:54:20.000 How are you going to keep it from us being able to be in a position where you can manipulate the machines, manipulate the records?

00:54:27.000 The one way to do that is I think we should pass a federal law mandating that the same machines with paper trails be mandatory for every federal election.

00:54:37.000 Let's go to cut 34, where he says we can't mandate state elections, but we can do it federally, so we should with a standard machine and ballot.

00:54:45.000 We can't mandate, as you know, state elections.

00:54:47.000 We can't tell the state of Delaware or Ohio or Texas what machines and what method they use to vote in their state election, but we can do it federally.

00:54:57.000 So in a nutshell, I think we should be mandating, mandating that we have a paper ballot with a standardized machine, a standardized requirement.

00:55:07.000 Mandating the paper ballot.

00:55:10.000 Going into the House rules and the joint session rules, when it comes to the joint session of the Senate and the House, it says, quote, the joint session does not act on any objections that are made.

00:55:20.000 Instead, the joint session is suspended.

00:55:22.000 This is January 6th.

00:55:23.000 While each House meets separately to debate the objection and vote whether, based on the objection, to count the vote or votes in question.

00:55:31.000 Both houses must vote separately to agree to the objection.

00:55:35.000 Otherwise, the objection fails and the votes or votes are counted.

00:55:39.000 These procedures have been invoked twice since the enactment of the 1887 law.

00:55:44.000 The first was an instance of what has been called the faithless elector problem.

00:55:48.000 In 1969, Representative James O'Hare of Michigan and Senator Ed Muskie of Maine objected in writing the counting the vote of an elector from North Carolina who has been expected to cast his vote for Richard Nixon and Spear Agnew, then instead cast his vote for George Wallace.

00:56:04.000 Both chambers met and voted separately to reject the objection.

00:56:08.000 So when the joint session resumed, the challenge electoral vote had counted as cast.

00:56:12.000 In that instance, the elector whose vote was challenged from a state that did not by its law bind its electors to vote for the candidates to whom they pledged.

00:56:22.000 Preceding it, it says this: upon the reading of any such certificate or paper, the president of the Senate shall call for objections.

00:56:29.000 Every objection shall be made in writing and shall state clearly and concisely and without argument the ground thereof and shall be signed by at least one senator and one member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received.

00:56:43.000 When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a state shall have been received and read, the Senate shall therefore withdraw and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision.

00:56:54.000 And the Speaker of the House shall in like manner submit any objections to the House of Representatives for its decision.

00:57:01.000 The President of the Senate is overseeing all of this, the Vice President of the United States.

00:57:07.000 And the more we look into this, the more that we dive into the facts and the irregularities, we find that any objections that existed in prior elections in 2004 pale in comparison to the fraud claims that we now see here in 2020,

00:57:24.000 where we see clearly what exactly happened, where Bernie Sanders in 2004 said, I agree with tens of millions of Americans who are worried when they cast a ballot, there is no paper record to record it.

00:57:38.000 Nancy Pelosi says she wanted to object to the state of Ohio certifying the results.

00:57:44.000 Richard Nixon himself, as the president of the Senate, discarded the governor-certified results in his own favor and put them in JFK's favor.

00:57:54.000 That was 1960.

00:57:56.000 Similar action in the 1876 election and even 1800 election.

00:58:01.000 Congress will be meeting on January 6th, overseen by the Vice President of the United States, Mike Pence.

00:58:07.000 Whatever Mike Pence does, I'm sure will be in coordination and approval from the President of the United States, President Trump.

00:58:15.000 We have gone through, I think, very thoroughly exactly what this process entails.

00:58:21.000 But even through all of the letter of the law, all of the statute, basically, the best reading that I could take away is this.

00:58:31.000 It's up through Mike Pence to decide.

00:58:33.000 There is so much power given, plenary power, to the vice president in this case, that it's really on him.

00:58:42.000 And whatever he does, whatever he decides in coordination with President Trump will be the right decision.

00:58:48.000 There are a lot of options.

00:58:49.000 I want to do our final segment here on a story that has really been bothering me and irritating me.

00:58:57.000 Let's start with Mark Stein explaining what happened to this high school girl, Cut 25, and this story that was popularized by the New York Times in the last couple of days.

00:59:09.000 Just an inconceivable story, and it really sums up a cultural rot we have in our country that must be addressed and removed.

00:59:17.000 Cut 25.

00:59:18.000 One of her classmates waited for her to be accepted by a university before publicly releasing a four-year-old social media video in which she used a racial slur.

00:59:31.000 The video went viral and destroyed her life.

00:59:33.000 She was forced to withdraw from her college and was kicked off a cheer team.

00:59:39.000 She was publicly humiliated on the internet and by the press.

00:59:43.000 So if you haven't heard of this story, it's stunning. 0.78

00:59:48.000 So there's this young lady, I'm going to get her name.

00:59:50.000 I can't remember her name.

00:59:52.000 15 years old does a three-minute impersonation of a rap song, which, by the way, every upper-middle-class suburban kid in the country sings along to a rap song when they're 15 or 16 years old.

01:00:06.000 It's not exactly like it's a breaking news item that some 15 and 16 year old kid that grew up in upper middle class suburban America is going to be singing along to Kanye West or Jay-Z or whatever.

01:00:19.000 That's not exactly breaking news.

01:00:21.000 So I believe she was singing alongside.

01:00:24.000 Her name is Mimi Groves, singing alongside this song.

01:00:32.000 And this activist, the other kid that videotaped it, was held onto it for years, by the way, right after George Floyd posts it to destroy her life.

01:00:47.000 So Mimi Groves has to explain why she was singing rap lyrics when she was 15 years old.

01:00:55.000 The University of Tennessee comes in and cancels her slot on the cheerleading roster for something that every single upper middle class suburban kid has done in their life, which is sing along to rap music where they think they're cool and they're doing what they're 15 years old.

01:01:15.000 Who cares?

01:01:16.000 If they were 19 years old, it wouldn't make any difference. 1.00

01:01:19.000 So, this Jimmy Gallagher, this black kid who came out and decided to ruin her life, publicizes it and almost enjoys it. 0.99

01:01:29.000 This kid, this punk is what he is, Jimmy Gallagher, says, I'm going to remind myself, you started something. 1.00

01:01:37.000 You taught someone a lesson.

01:01:39.000 You see how good of a person he thinks he is?

01:01:42.000 Because he got Mimi Groves removed from college on the cheerleading roster, a national news story.

01:01:50.000 Now, all of this is just a story because the New York Times wrote a long piece about this, basically glorifying assassination culture.

01:02:01.000 Don't call it cancel culture.

01:02:02.000 I hate that term.

01:02:03.000 It's assassination culture. 1.00

01:02:05.000 It is completely irrelevant what Mimi did when she was 15 years old. 1.00

01:02:10.000 That's what 15-year-olds do: stupid things. 1.00

01:02:13.000 You grow up, you mature, you learn from it. 1.00

01:02:16.000 So she now has to spend the rest of her life explaining that she's more than a three-second video.

01:02:21.000 Of course, she is.

01:02:21.000 Where this punk, Jimmy Gallagher, acts as if he's a good person because he shares a three-year-old video to destroy this young lady's life.

01:02:34.000 This Jimmy Gallagher kid should be kicked out of college for doing this.

01:02:38.000 Instead, the New York Times platforms him.

01:02:41.000 Do you know how many young people's lives are now being ruined by texts they didn't mean to send, by clips of things that were taken out of context? 0.99

01:02:51.000 The New York Times said, quote, it revealed a complex portrait of behavior that for generations has gone unchecked in schools in our nation's wealthiest counties, where black students have said they've been subject to ridicule, garbage. 0.99

01:03:03.000 That is nonsense, race-baiting crap from the New York Times. 0.98

01:03:09.000 So to Mimi Groves, I hope to meet you one day, and I'd love to help you in any way whatsoever because you are the closest thing to an actual victim that I have seen in this entire nonsensical BLM incorporated crap since June or July. 0.97

01:03:24.000 And we need to stand up against this wherever it comes. 0.80

01:03:27.000 And this punk, Jimmy Gallagher, I hope he learns his lesson.

01:03:35.000 And if you are associated with the University of Tennessee, divest all of your money. 1.00

01:03:39.000 They are an immoral, cowardly institution. 0.64

01:03:42.000 And that's what we're doing at Turning Point USA through Divest You. 0.97

01:03:47.000 Thank you guys for listening.

01:03:48.000 If you want to email us your questions, you can do that at freedom at charliekirk.com.

01:03:53.000 Please check out charliekirk.com for the latest news and information.

01:03:57.000 And if you want to get involved with Turning Point USA, go to tpusa.com.

01:04:02.000 That's tpusa.com, where we play offense with a sense of urgency to win America's culture war.

01:04:09.000 Get engaged, get involved with the work we are doing on high school and college campuses across the country at tpusa.com.

01:04:16.000 Thank you guys so much for listening.

01:04:18.000 God bless.

01:04:19.000 Speak to you soon.

The Charlie Kirk Show - December 31, 2020

Senator Josh Hawley Steps Up

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript