The Charlie Kirk Show - September 02, 2026


Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing: The Judge's Decision


Episode Stats


Length

1 hour and 48 minutes

Words per minute

174.45

Word count

18,843

Sentence count

1,235


Transcript

Transcripts from "The Charlie Kirk Show" are sourced from the Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool. Explore them interactively here.
00:00:03.000 My name is Charlie Kirk.
00:00:05.000 I run the largest pro American student organization in the country fighting for the future of our republic.
00:00:11.000 My call is to fight evil and to proclaim truth.
00:00:14.000 If the most important thing for you is just feeling good, you're going to end up miserable.
00:00:19.000 But if the most important thing is doing good, you will end up purposeful.
00:00:24.000 College is a scam, everybody.
00:00:26.000 You've got to stop sending your kids to college.
00:00:27.000 You should get married as young as possible and have as many kids as possible.
00:00:31.000 Go start a Turning Point USA college chapter.
00:00:33.000 Go start a Turning Point USA High School chapter.
00:00:35.000 Go find out how your church can get involved.
00:00:37.000 Sign up and become an activist.
00:00:39.000 I gave my life to the Lord in fifth grade.
00:00:41.000 Most important decision I ever made in my life.
00:00:43.000 And I encourage you to do the same.
00:00:45.000 Here I am.
00:00:46.000 Lord, use me.
00:00:48.000 Buckle up, everybody.
00:00:49.000 Here we go.
00:00:56.000 Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of The Charlie Kirk Show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals.
00:01:06.000 Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at Noble Gold Investments.com.
00:01:13.000 That is Noble Gold Investments.com.
00:01:17.000 All right.
00:01:18.000 We're now in, I think, the final recess of the day, about one hour.
00:01:24.000 While Judge Graff says he has 24 pages of notes to compile, take in.
00:01:32.000 He says he genuinely wanted to hear what both sides had to say in their oral arguments before rendering his final decision.
00:01:38.000 But he does say.
00:01:40.000 That decision will be coming today.
00:01:43.000 And so he's dismissed for a final recess.
00:01:46.000 He's going to assess all that.
00:01:47.000 We will reconvene and he will issue his bind over ruling.
00:01:51.000 Now, things that could happen, I think overwhelmingly likely he's going to agree, bind over for trial.
00:02:00.000 Open questions, though, are will he throw out any of the lower charges?
00:02:04.000 They took a lot of aim at witness tampering, at the endangerment of minors, or committing violence in front of minors, I should say, and especially the defense.
00:02:13.000 Took aim at the enhancers that they used to make Tyler Robinson eligible for the death penalty.
00:02:21.000 So he could, in theory, issue a ruling striking those down right here.
00:02:27.000 If he doesn't do that, then we would proceed to bind over and having an arraignment.
00:02:33.000 I don't think it's likely we'll enter a plea today.
00:02:35.000 I think he'll probably schedule that for someday in the near future.
00:02:41.000 But that remains to be seen.
00:02:42.000 I wanted to, because we had a donation message right before we went back to the.
00:02:47.000 The hearing earlier from Indian conservative that said Tyler deserves the death penalty.
00:02:53.000 I still remember the day Charlie was shot.
00:02:55.000 It still sticks with me.
00:02:56.000 I want to see him face the consequences of his actions.
00:02:58.000 So thank you for your support.
00:03:01.000 Thank you for following us on this tragic, painful journey.
00:03:07.000 But we have an hour to talk about here.
00:03:10.000 We're going to see Andrews was in the chambers throughout this afternoon.
00:03:14.000 So we're hoping that he'll get his phone back during this extended recess.
00:03:19.000 Maybe be able to join us because we want to talk more about what I think is by far the most uh viral, the most attention getting moment of this hearing, which is what we were talking about during the last recess the kind of out of nowhere bit where the defense team it doesn't even seem to help their client, but the defense team just starts saying Charlie Kirk is a hateful person,
00:03:46.000 it is true that he was hateful, and I'm not even sure what they were setting up for it.
00:03:50.000 We should uh we should replay.
00:03:52.000 That clip.
00:03:53.000 What's the number for it?
00:03:55.000 There is no evidence of Mr. Robinson having heard or seen anything specific from Mr. Kirk or having expressed anything about Mr. Kirk until the statement which basically says some hatred can't be negotiated out.
00:04:15.000 So what is it?
00:04:17.000 Is it political expression?
00:04:19.000 Which political expression?
00:04:23.000 It is.
00:04:26.000 True that Mr. Kirk spoke hatefully of certain groups of people.
00:04:33.000 He spoke hatefully of people who don't have traditional, norm conforming gender identities.
00:04:43.000 He spoke hatefully of people who are not strictly heterosexual.
00:04:48.000 He spoke hatefully of people who have sexual relationships out of marriage.
00:04:53.000 And yes, it is true that.
00:04:56.000 The evidence from Mr. Twiggs is that he identified in a non gender conforming way to his friends and that he was in a romantic relationship with Mr. Robinson.
00:05:10.000 But that doesn't mean that those personal choices by Mr. Twiggs and by Mr. Robinson equate with the hate that at least Mr. Robinson says he had toward Mr. Kirk.
00:05:29.000 So we don't know what that is.
00:05:32.000 A completely outlandish thing.
00:05:34.000 Obviously outlandish.
00:05:35.000 But we decided to go and dig up some clips from Charlie's actual debates.
00:05:40.000 And we found one that I think speaks greatly to the real nature of how Charlie debated on stuff like the trans issue.
00:05:51.000 So we found this one.
00:05:52.000 Do you remember what campus this was at, Danny?
00:05:53.000 I think this was Washington State.
00:05:55.000 Okay.
00:05:55.000 So Washington State.
00:05:56.000 And there was a, I believe, a female to male.
00:05:59.000 Transgender person came up and began speaking to Charlie, and this was the actual exchange.
00:06:03.000 So keep in mind that the defense attorney, Richard Novak, said that Charlie, it's a fact, it is true that he was hateful towards people.
00:06:11.000 He spoke hatefully.
00:06:13.000 Let's play clip 13.
00:06:15.000 I just want to say I'm a transgender male.
00:06:18.000 What age should kids be able to get things like hormone therapy?
00:06:22.000 Because I don't know what's true, what's not.
00:06:24.000 Tell me, are you comfortable telling me your story?
00:06:26.000 I've known that since like third grade, and I'm currently 19, almost 20, I've known.
00:06:33.000 Basically, since then, I didn't start going by like a different name until seventh and eighth grade.
00:06:40.000 I just don't know, like, with the whole medical stuff, like what's true, what's not, what's helpful, because I've heard so many different opinions.
00:06:47.000 First of all, thank you so much for that.
00:06:49.000 Yeah, of course.
00:06:50.000 So I'm going to have an opinion that very few people will ever tell you, which is I want you to be very cautious putting drugs into your system in the pursuit of changing your body.
00:07:01.000 I instead encourage you to work on what's going on in your brain first.
00:07:06.000 I think what you need first and foremost is just a diagnosis.
00:07:09.000 Just someone that is going to listen to what you've gone through, listen to what else is going on.
00:07:14.000 My prayer for you, and again, very few people will say this, I actually want to see you be comfortable in how you were born.
00:07:21.000 I know that you might not feel that way, but I think that is something that you can achieve.
00:07:25.000 I think that with the right team and the right people, you don't have to wage war on your body.
00:07:30.000 You can learn to love your body.
00:07:32.000 So that's what Charlie actually had to say.
00:07:36.000 And that's what they were describing as hateful.
00:07:38.000 And that's at least in the most.
00:07:40.000 Fringe extreme thing, which is actual transgenderism.
00:07:43.000 He also said Charlie was hateful towards people who had sex outside of marriage.
00:07:49.000 And I don't have any idea what that's in reference to.
00:07:53.000 I only ever remember Charlie being pretty mild.
00:07:56.000 He basically expressed that almost as just, he basically would just say, Your relationships and marriage will be better if you don't do that.
00:08:02.000 That's what I always remember him saying.
00:08:04.000 Hateful.
00:08:06.000 What is this guy counting as hate?
00:08:10.000 He's counting disagreement as hate.
00:08:11.000 Yes.
00:08:12.000 And disagree.
00:08:13.000 I guess.
00:08:14.000 And so very outlandish.
00:08:18.000 And I was very glad the prosecution pushed back on that.
00:08:22.000 I believe that they were.
00:08:27.000 I'm just, I'm very glad they did it.
00:08:28.000 And I'll be very interested once we are able to speak to Andrew.
00:08:31.000 How did that go over in the courtroom?
00:08:33.000 Were those, were the people there who were there for Tyler Robinson?
00:08:36.000 Were they snickering when that happened?
00:08:37.000 I can't wait to learn more about that.
00:08:39.000 But Andrew hasn't been able to rejoin us yet.
00:08:41.000 I don't know that he has his phone back.
00:08:44.000 So for now, I believe we have, is Joe Bob calling in?
00:08:49.000 I know he's been watching the events today.
00:08:51.000 We're still testing with him already.
00:08:53.000 Clip 14 is the prosecution calling out.
00:08:56.000 The defense.
00:08:57.000 All right, we'll play that while we wait for that to come in.
00:09:00.000 And so let's set this up.
00:09:02.000 Let's play clip 14.
00:09:04.000 This is the defense or the prosecution putting back.
00:09:10.000 The state takes great exception with Mr. Novak attributing all of this hate to Mr. Kirk during his argument today.
00:09:21.000 None of that was presented during the preliminary hearing, that he is hateful towards this group or hateful towards that group.
00:09:28.000 He had an opinion that he would express on politics and religion.
00:09:32.000 That doesn't make it hate.
00:09:34.000 But the fact that Mr. Novak even considered it as hate makes the case for the state.
00:09:42.000 In his client's own words, he hated what Mr. Kirk stood for.
00:09:48.000 On the shell casing that was found in the 30 odd six, the defendant's gun, grandpa's gun, the murder weapon, quote, hey, fascist catch, close quote.
00:09:58.000 He's calling him a fascist.
00:10:03.000 And of course, in the text, which has been talked about twice already today, states exhibit 16.1, when the defendant texted Mr. Twiggs, I had enough of his hatred, some hate can't be negotiated out.
00:10:19.000 He hated Charlie Kirk.
00:10:21.000 He hated what he stood for.
00:10:24.000 So, very glad they pushed back on that.
00:10:26.000 All right, so now we do have Joe Bob with us.
00:10:29.000 Joe Bob, you were also following the day's proceedings.
00:10:34.000 What do you make of what we just witnessed, which is this the defense team?
00:10:39.000 It feels bizarre.
00:10:40.000 We're debating this, we're trying to figure out what the strategy is because I don't see how it's useful for Tyler Robinson, the defendant, for his attorneys to be saying, by the way, Charlie Kirk really was a hateful person who said all this hateful stuff.
00:10:55.000 I, yeah, I can't put my, I don't know what that is either.
00:10:58.000 Like, I don't quite understand.
00:11:00.000 You know, I kind of remember back to earlier in the day when they were kind of talking about what the schedule.
00:11:05.000 Was going to look like, and uh, the prosecutor said, Hey, we're going to take you know this much time, you know, give or take a little bit, and then the defense said, Oh, we're going to take about an hour.
00:11:14.000 And I kind of like, What are you going to talk about in the hour?
00:11:17.000 And and apparently, that was it.
00:11:19.000 Now, that was a lot of it because I don't know how that uh, one helped anything, he was saying, and two, I actually think it hurt more.
00:11:27.000 Like you saw the prosecution there, uh, literally just there say, Yeah, this this kind of in a roundabout way kind of helps the case that we're trying to make that Tyler Robinson and apparently this attorney.
00:11:40.000 Yeah, thought again, their own subjective opinion what Charlie was saying was hateful.
00:11:45.000 Obviously, it wasn't.
00:11:46.000 Charlie was very cordial with everybody across the political spectrum.
00:11:50.000 But then to make that as, I don't even know if that was an argument.
00:11:54.000 I'm not entirely sure what they were trying to do there.
00:11:57.000 But in any regard, I think it was good that the prosecution then said, this kind of helps illuminate what we're trying to paint, that there was a motive there, and that Tyler Robinson and Lance Twiggs hated the type of rhetoric, regardless of whether or not you think it was hateful.
00:12:14.000 I obviously don't think it was.
00:12:16.000 And nobody who watched Charlie.
00:12:19.000 In full context, thought it was, but they did.
00:12:23.000 I don't know.
00:12:24.000 I don't know if that's a great answer.
00:12:25.000 That's just, I'm confused as it just like most people I'm talking to seem to be with what was the point of any of that.
00:12:34.000 Yep.
00:12:35.000 My only thinking on it was that they basically said that as a distraction.
00:12:40.000 So people are focusing on that instead of like the actual case or what's going on.
00:12:45.000 Maybe, but they're only trying to.
00:12:48.000 This is the preliminary hearing.
00:12:49.000 They're only trying to.
00:12:51.000 They have to appeal to the judge.
00:12:53.000 The judge is the one who makes this ruling.
00:12:54.000 And does Judge Graff like hearing that sort of thing?
00:13:00.000 I couldn't make out what the point of that would be other than to somehow potentially make the focus turn to that, where now everybody's talking about that.
00:13:10.000 It's so genuinely strange because we all agree Tyler Robinson has the right to a defense, he has the right to a vigorous defense.
00:13:17.000 He has the right to have them object to every single thing.
00:13:20.000 We were talking earlier, Joe Bob, how they.
00:13:22.000 At one point, they objected to the sound that camera tripods might make while being rattled around to argue if you have too many cameras, it will cause distraction and undercut his for trial.
00:13:33.000 He has the right to all of that.
00:13:34.000 He has the right for them to make the most fringe objections imaginable.
00:13:38.000 But twice in the proceedings so far, this incident here, and then at the end of the preliminary hearing last July, we've had a defense attorney go off on this bizarre tangent in the case, in this case saying, By the way, Charlie was hateful and hated all these people.
00:13:56.000 And then last July, saying Erica Kirk, she throws herself into this case.
00:14:01.000 She acts like the prosecutors are just her personal attorneys and just really blasting the literal widow of the murder victim in this case.
00:14:12.000 And it really just, I can't figure, I genuinely can't figure it out.
00:14:18.000 They themselves have like mass disdain for Charlie.
00:14:21.000 I don't understand why they would be throwing that in there for really no reason at all.
00:14:25.000 It might be.
00:14:25.000 We've talked about, Andrews mentioned this, that.
00:14:28.000 These attorneys, they've been associated with pretty high profile defense litigation in the past.
00:14:33.000 These are not just randoms.
00:14:36.000 They are not just career defense attorneys in this county.
00:14:39.000 They are people brought in for this high profile case.
00:14:44.000 Maybe they are just radical ideologues.
00:14:46.000 And that is one of the things that makes them decide they want to commit their lives to this case for the next year.
00:14:52.000 You know, I wonder, and again, layman looking in at this is more of a commentator as opposed to like, you know, an actual attorney.
00:14:59.000 But is there any.
00:15:01.000 Is there any reason why they want to delay more?
00:15:03.000 I mean, the goal that Judge Braff had said in the morning was hey, we're going to come to a conclusion today, or I'm going to come to a conclusion today.
00:15:10.000 But given the fact that they took as long as they did, and again, in the length of time that they took, detoured to just kind of weird, subjective opinions about Charlie, is there any advantage to them like delaying this anymore?
00:15:28.000 And if so, what happens then?
00:15:30.000 Again, I don't know.
00:15:31.000 I'm speaking not as an attorney, but as a guy who's been watching this.
00:15:35.000 Intently and trying to figure out, yeah, I don't know.
00:15:38.000 I don't know.
00:15:38.000 That doesn't necessarily help the conversation, but I seriously don't know what any advantage was gained from that.
00:15:46.000 It's all just baffling.
00:15:48.000 I mean, it might just be the case.
00:15:49.000 We have one of our commenters just says it's because the attorneys do not have moral law.
00:15:54.000 They may just be not guided by the rules of morality.
00:16:03.000 Gosh, it really is.
00:16:05.000 It's just disheartening because most of today was basically kind of boring.
00:16:09.000 It took.
00:16:10.000 Two hours of litigating, camera tripods, and all of that.
00:16:14.000 And then the prosecution is presenting their stuff in a very workmanlike manner.
00:16:18.000 And then the defense, okay, they're fussing over witness tampering and all of that.
00:16:23.000 And we don't know necessarily all of the precedents that they're citing and how strong is their legal case.
00:16:31.000 We're not even sure.
00:16:32.000 But then this just comes out of nowhere and reminds you that we are dealing with some very grave evil.
00:16:38.000 And a lot of evil is fixated on this case.
00:16:40.000 That's why so much is fixated on Charlie.
00:16:44.000 If you, Joe Bob, if you got the chance during the prosecution's presentation, did you think that was a breath of fresh air in terms of we finally shorn of tons of endless interruptions for objections and litigating over can the camera show this particular screenshot?
00:17:02.000 We did get the prosecution finally just took 40 minutes where their attorney is speaking and basically lays out here is why it is extremely obvious that Tyler Robinson is the person who killed Charlie.
00:17:14.000 Do you think they did a good job at that?
00:17:16.000 No, I do think they did.
00:17:18.000 I think it was very sober in the approach of it.
00:17:22.000 And I think, obviously, that was the intent of it.
00:17:25.000 I think, you know, back to your earlier point when you're talking about the back and forth of all of the, hey, we have a standing objection.
00:17:32.000 We have this.
00:17:33.000 You know, there's a part of me that does think that's annoying, is probably not the correct term to use here, but it's kind of like, all right, let's actually get to what we're here to discuss.
00:17:43.000 But at the same time, there's an appreciation for Judge Braff in trying to.
00:17:48.000 Make sure that everything is as concrete and solid as possible, including allowing the defense to issue all of these objections and say, ah, this and that, and then rankling over that.
00:18:01.000 And I think that's hopefully going to go a long way to shore up the validity of the conclusions that are going to be come to, not only in the pretrial, but in the trial itself.
00:18:16.000 As far as the prosecution goes, yeah, it's such an odd situation.
00:18:22.000 Thing to say, I think they did a good job, but they did.
00:18:24.000 They did a thorough, decisive job at laying out everything I think they needed to lay out to make the case.
00:18:33.000 And also, too, all of the evidence they have kind of makes that as like, well, they just laid out the evidence as it was, and they did it in a good job.
00:18:44.000 They did it in a good fashion.
00:18:48.000 And I don't know.
00:18:49.000 It's tough to not get a little bit worked up.
00:18:53.000 Listening to all of this.
00:18:54.000 And I know I'm preaching to the choir on that, but the overwhelming amount of evidence that the state has, even hearing that laid out, it just strikes an emotional chord, even though obviously the goal is justice.
00:19:12.000 There's that small thing, that intangible thing inside me that just is tough to hear.
00:19:18.000 And again, I know that everybody listening that was close to Charlie and knew Charlie and loved Charlie is feeling the same thing, but it's just, it feels like it's worth saying.
00:19:28.000 Given kind of how this is playing out.
00:19:32.000 And I think it's worth noting also, since we are talking about the prosecution versus the defense, these defense guys are highly experienced.
00:19:40.000 The prosecutors mostly are just the career prosecutors of that area.
00:19:45.000 So they are going up against highly experienced, heavy hitters.
00:19:48.000 They're in what will be by far the most famous case of their careers.
00:19:53.000 And we're glad that they're being methodical, we're glad that they're being deliberate.
00:20:00.000 The word overwhelming was, in fact, used during today's.
00:20:03.000 It's been One of those phrases, words that's been thrown back and forth, but it really is the word you want to apply to the evidence in this case.
00:20:12.000 When I've been debating this with people online, I sometimes like to ask them Is there another murder case that you can name that ended in conviction where you think the evidence was actually more wide, like more far reaching, more all encompassing than in this case, short of the person literally being caught in the act or like being caught at the scene?
00:20:37.000 Because We have the combination of weapon, we have confession, we have video footage, we have testimony from the roommate, we have phone ping.
00:20:48.000 I don't know that any murder committed before the year 2000 could have more evidence than we have in this case because of all the additional technology we have.
00:20:56.000 We're checking this, and confession, multiple types of confession.
00:20:58.000 Multiple times, yeah.
00:21:02.000 And it's really worth it for this to be trotted out because there have been people, whether they're just filling the void, Of uncertainty in this case because it's taken so long, or if they're people who are just motivated by their own obsessions, there are a lot of people who want to undercut this narrative.
00:21:20.000 They wanted to act like there's a ton of uncertainty.
00:21:23.000 And I think today was a welcome reminder no, there is not really any uncertainty in this case.
00:21:30.000 The sheer scale of evidence available is, well, that's the word people go to.
00:21:36.000 It is overwhelming.
00:21:37.000 And it stands out, Joe Bob, I'm sure you'll agree.
00:21:40.000 The defense spoke for an hour and a half.
00:21:42.000 Did they ever?
00:21:44.000 Contest footage that it showed Tyler Robinson?
00:21:48.000 Did they ever contest that?
00:21:51.000 Did they ever suggest there was any alibi for where his location was that day?
00:21:55.000 Did they ever suggest that that rifle was not actually one owned by the Robinson family?
00:22:00.000 I don't think they ever did.
00:22:03.000 No, I don't think they've contested really any of that stuff at any point.
00:22:08.000 And they, yeah, what the defense said, in my opinion, just watching it, was really just.
00:22:18.000 Again, it seemed like a delay.
00:22:20.000 I'm not an attorney.
00:22:21.000 I'm not in litigation really ever in terms of watching it and seeing it play out.
00:22:28.000 But as a layman, as a commentator, it just kind of looked like, hey, we're going to try and kind of stall for time because they're not trying to really do anything, again, argumentatively speaking, other than slander Charlie's approach to discussions, which again, I thought was horrible and disgusting.
00:22:47.000 And I am curious too, Blake, you brought up earlier whether or not.
00:22:53.000 This is some sort of tactic or like a deeper game being played by the defense, or if they're just like pure ideologues.
00:23:01.000 And if they are pure ideologues, what does that mean going forward?
00:23:06.000 Like, what does that mean in the trial?
00:23:08.000 And not to try and dissect that way too early, but if that is the case and it ends up being that they just have this ideological perspective that leads them to believe all of the stuff that they were saying, I'm not sure the specific attorney speaking his name because it's.
00:23:26.000 Seeing everybody's back of their head.
00:23:28.000 But what does that mean going forward if that is the case, that there isn't really any tactical strategy?
00:23:34.000 There isn't any real reason for that other than just hate driven ideology.
00:23:42.000 And I'm sure that's going to be a discussion that we'll have going forward until the actual trial, if that happens to be the case.
00:23:50.000 I'm not entirely sure how we would know that specifically, short of just asking the guy.
00:23:55.000 But given that that's not going to happen, it's going to be an open question, I think, for a long time in my head.
00:24:01.000 Just as we watch the defense and kind of the different tactics that they try and use, not only now, but obviously in the trial as well.
00:24:09.000 Well, my gut feeling is even though it confuses us, there must be a strategic purpose to this.
00:24:14.000 This is an elite team as far as defense attorneys go in capital cases.
00:24:21.000 They've been involved in other infamous cases.
00:24:24.000 I know we're going to have Jack Pasopic on again in just a minute here, and I know he has a theory about this that everything they do, however outlandish, is designed for a strategic purpose.
00:24:34.000 And it might be in this case, Yeah, it looks horrible to us, but we're not on the jury.
00:24:39.000 The only thing that matters is who are going to be the 12 people on a jury that has to decide is Tyler Robinson guilty?
00:24:46.000 Should Tyler Robinson get the death penalty?
00:24:49.000 And you need unanimity for both of those things.
00:24:51.000 So if you're laying out the seed by saying Charlie Kirk was hateful, you're planting a seed for someone who might say, you know what, I'm going to take a stand against hate and I'm just not going to vote for a conviction on this under any circumstances.
00:25:04.000 Or I'm not going, I'm sympathetic to Tyler Robinson.
00:25:07.000 That person was a hater.
00:25:08.000 I don't think someone should get the death penalty for killing him.
00:25:11.000 I think they're likely, they could be laying the groundwork for that sort of thing.
00:25:18.000 But, Joe Bob, I know that you didn't have infinite time, so I'm very glad that you took the time to join us.
00:25:23.000 If you have any final thoughts, now speak your piece.
00:25:30.000 No, I appreciate having me.
00:25:34.000 And, yeah, I think I've mentioned this a number of times across many platforms.
00:25:39.000 Uh, this is there's so many emotional directions being pulled.
00:25:43.000 Um, one, you know, obviously we want justice, um, but also just the pain that this stuff invokes.
00:25:49.000 It's it's kind of a it's a today's a good reminder that of all of the evidence that is out there, overwhelming evidence, and also it is a painful reminder of the reality that we're in.
00:26:00.000 And it's just those two emotions back and forth, uh, and dealing with it.
00:26:05.000 And I'm though I can't see a future where those go away.
00:26:08.000 All right.
00:26:09.000 Well, thank you again, Joe Bob.
00:26:11.000 Um, Thanks for following us on this journey.
00:26:14.000 If anyone's got questions, send them in.
00:26:16.000 We're filling the time until Judge Graff comes back and issues his ruling.
00:26:20.000 We'll probably talk even more after that.
00:26:22.000 We're doing the full marathon today.
00:26:24.000 But, Joe Bob, thanks for joining us.
00:26:26.000 All right.
00:26:26.000 I think we're going to be having Poso join us in a sec.
00:26:30.000 Let me know if he's available.
00:26:32.000 We might also be able to get him.
00:26:33.000 We got him?
00:26:34.000 Oh, he's not ready yet?
00:26:36.000 Not yet.
00:26:36.000 Okay.
00:26:37.000 Well, we'll get there in a second.
00:26:39.000 We're still waiting on Andrew.
00:26:42.000 Who is there to call in potentially?
00:26:45.000 I mean, has he?
00:26:46.000 He's probably still.
00:26:46.000 We might be getting him after the entire hearing is over with, and we'll definitely want to talk to him about all of that.
00:26:53.000 Let's see if there's any questions coming in.
00:27:05.000 We got an email.
00:27:06.000 Someone says they dated a Canadian for a while.
00:27:08.000 Well, that's unrelated, but I suppose dating a Canadian is better than dating a furry, I suppose.
00:27:14.000 Yeah, I guess you're right.
00:27:16.000 Um,.
00:27:17.000 Not much difference, though.
00:27:19.000 Dennis says, I hope when the judge comes back, he has listened to the state's arguments.
00:27:23.000 Robinson's defense is weak, and we know he is guilty.
00:27:26.000 I think we all know that.
00:27:29.000 I know we've had a lot of frustration with Judge Graff because he's been moving slowly on things.
00:27:34.000 But as we've all pointed out, I think by far the number one priority for Judge Graff and all the prosecutors in this case is don't commit some avoidable error that will cause this to be a mistrial later, that will cause some appeals court judge, some left wing appeals court judge, to just go flick this away and say, oh, that conviction's thrown out, that sentence is thrown out.
00:27:59.000 We know a lot of the left celebrates Charlie's death, and yeah, they might not do it now, but he's the sort of guy who 10 years from now, 15 years from now, he could be a cause celeb.
00:28:09.000 They could say we should let this guy out early.
00:28:11.000 He deserves an early release, and we don't want to give them any grounds for that.
00:28:15.000 I'm told Jack is able to rejoin with us.
00:28:19.000 Jack, we were saying you have a theory.
00:28:21.000 What's your theory for what Richard Novak was doing when he went out there in front of the court and trashed Charlie Kirk as a hater?
00:28:33.000 If you think wireless companies are all the same, you might need to take a look at our friends over at Patriot Mobile.
00:28:39.000 Patriot Mobile isn't just different because of its mission, it's actually built to outperform the other carriers.
00:28:44.000 They offer premium, priority, nationwide service on any of the three major US networks, helping you get the best possible coverage wherever life takes you.
00:28:53.000 With Patriot Mobile, you can even have two separate networks on a single device, eliminating the need to carry multiple phones and giving you peace of mind you just can't get with other carriers.
00:29:03.000 Need internet on the go?
00:29:04.000 Patriot Mobile Wi Fi hotspots connect to multiple networks to keep you connected while traveling or working remotely.
00:29:11.000 They also offer international roaming and enterprise solutions for businesses that need dependable connectivity and US based customer support.
00:29:19.000 Keep your number, keep your phone or upgrade, switch from your home or office.
00:29:23.000 It just takes a few minutes.
00:29:24.000 And when you call Patriot Mobile, you'll talk to real people right here in the United States.
00:29:28.000 Superior coverage, superior product, superior customer support.
00:29:32.000 That's Patriot Mobile.
00:29:33.000 Go to patriotmobile.comslash Charlie or call 972 Patriot.
00:29:37.000 Use promo code Charlie for a free month of service.
00:29:40.000 That's patriotmobile.comslash Charlie or call 972 Patriot today.
00:29:47.000 Well, I do.
00:29:48.000 And of course, we've been chatting and texting a little bit here back and forth.
00:29:52.000 And I just have to say that, you know, it goes without saying that it's incredibly admirable to see both you and Day being up here, being willing to go through all of this and do what you're doing because.
00:30:08.000 This isn't an academic debate to you guys.
00:30:11.000 You guys were both standing right there.
00:30:13.000 So these questions of if his aim was off or if he had jerked the trigger or something, you guys very well may not have made it back that day if these things happened.
00:30:25.000 So this isn't like some dry courtroom debate.
00:30:28.000 And I just wanted to say how much I appreciate it.
00:30:30.000 And I think everybody appreciates you guys doing what you're doing, even in the face of obviously what's a very emotional discussion.
00:30:38.000 And it's not the same as any other case, obviously.
00:30:41.000 Well, thank you.
00:30:42.000 Thank you.
00:30:42.000 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
00:30:43.000 No, I just, it has to be said.
00:30:46.000 And in addition, look, Richard Novak, he's a very, very capable lawyer.
00:30:53.000 He's very, very smart.
00:30:55.000 He is not going to do something without a, he's a chess player, right?
00:31:00.000 He's not going to do something without strategy.
00:31:02.000 He's not going to walk up there and make a gaff on an open mic.
00:31:05.000 He is not going to walk out and, you know, commit an oops.
00:31:09.000 He always does things with effect.
00:31:11.000 And if you look up his background, what is he known for?
00:31:13.000 He's specifically known for fighting against the death penalty and being involved in cases where a high profile client, Michael Byrd as well, for example, has been charged with something where the death penalty could apply.
00:31:27.000 And what I think is going on here is that all of this actually has to do with the death penalty and has to do with that phase in the trial.
00:31:36.000 Because for folks who don't realize this, there's actually two phases to a death penalty trial, three phases, because, of course, the trial itself hasn't actually started.
00:31:44.000 Formal trial.
00:31:45.000 First is guilty or not guilty, right?
00:31:49.000 And I think that we're, you know, the judges, the lawyers, the legal teams on both sides kind of realize that we're going to pass that bar.
00:31:58.000 That's why you hear things like them referring to, well, this was Tyler's text message or this was that.
00:32:04.000 They very casually kind of admit that he sent the text and they're kind of making the same point about the targets as well, that they were, in fact, his targets.
00:32:14.000 But what I think that he's doing here is that he knows.
00:32:19.000 His audience isn't necessarily the judge right now.
00:32:21.000 His audience is that future jury.
00:32:23.000 And I think what we might be getting is a look at the cards of what he's going to say, what the defense team is going to say when we do get to that sentencing phase.
00:32:33.000 That it's going to be a question of well, is this a mitigating factor?
00:32:38.000 Is it a mitigating factor because Tyler Robinson was in love with Twigs and Charlie Kirk was a hater of homosexuals?
00:32:49.000 What did he say?
00:32:49.000 Non gender conforming, non strict heterosexuals, I think was the phrase he specifically used.
00:32:54.000 And that they have to reach forward through time to that one juror who might be on the box or maybe in the future to some appellate judge or even up to the Supreme Court by saying that they actually do want to make this about trans issues.
00:33:11.000 They just know that they can't really yet.
00:33:13.000 They've been waiting.
00:33:14.000 That's why they waited right up all the way until this very final moment of the preliminary hearing.
00:33:22.000 To drop this bombshell because they do want to bring up trans issues and they want to be able to use it not to get him off of a conviction or out of criminal culpability, like, of course, is going on with the Lindsey Clancy situation and postpartum.
00:33:37.000 They want to use it as a mitigating factor to try to get Tyler Robinson out of the death penalty.
00:33:45.000 All right.
00:33:45.000 We haven't gotten a chance to talk to Will Chamberlain yet today, so we're having him try to join up, Jack.
00:33:51.000 And I'm told, for technical reasons, Danny, you and I need to talk.
00:33:54.000 Jack, you can't talk while they're having him join up, so hopefully he's going to call in.
00:33:58.000 We'll have all of you guys in together in a second.
00:34:03.000 What do you think of Jack's theory?
00:34:05.000 Do you think this is strategic?
00:34:07.000 Do you think they're just pandering to that one juror?
00:34:10.000 I mean, they could be pandering to the one juror.
00:34:11.000 That might be their only solution at this point with how much evidence there is.
00:34:17.000 I don't know what other ways they have of going about this other than hoping that some crazy cultist gets on the jury and can somehow.
00:34:27.000 Get him off.
00:34:28.000 So I think, Jack, you might be right.
00:34:30.000 I don't know.
00:34:31.000 All right.
00:34:32.000 All righty.
00:34:32.000 Well, we've got Will as well.
00:34:34.000 He's been very generous, waiting throughout the day.
00:34:37.000 So, Will, thanks for joining us.
00:34:39.000 We're here with Danny here in the studio, and then Jack's also with us.
00:34:43.000 But we're waiting for Judge Graff to issue his ruling.
00:34:48.000 What's your big picture assessment of what went on today?
00:34:51.000 Well, I actually, I mean, I wasn't watching it closely, but what I said to Jack was everything today is pro forma.
00:34:56.000 The fact that He announced that he was going to issue a ruling beforehand, which means he wasn't going to pay much attention at all to the actual arguments that were made in court, which is perfectly reasonable because there's been briefing.
00:35:08.000 He already had the five days of actual preliminary hearing to make up his mind whether there was probable cause.
00:35:14.000 So, all this just goes to show that, you know, if he knew he was going to issue a ruling, then he just was letting people talk and it didn't really matter what they were going to say.
00:35:22.000 And so, I expect a pretty straightforward ruling that there's probable cause here and that he's going to bind over the charges and we're going to have a trial.
00:35:31.000 If you got a chance to see this, we had, we've just been discussing that Richard Novak, the defense attorney, he basically went and he.
00:35:41.000 Trashed Charlie, called him, said he was hateful.
00:35:45.000 He said hateful things about people who weren't heterosexual, hateful things about people based on their gender identity, hateful things about this and that and all of that.
00:35:55.000 And Jack's point of view is they're clearly making the bid that they know eventually this will face a jury for conviction.
00:36:04.000 This will face a jury for is this the death penalty?
00:36:08.000 And they're just planting the seeds for someone to.
00:36:12.000 Decide because we have our glorious jury system that they're going to just put their personal biases into this and say, you know what, he's right.
00:36:21.000 Charlie was a hater.
00:36:22.000 Charlie was a bad right wing extremist.
00:36:25.000 Do I really feel that bad that he got murdered?
00:36:28.000 Do you think that's what's going on here?
00:36:30.000 I think that's very plausible.
00:36:31.000 I mean, I think that if you're, you know, if you're realizing, I mean, obviously, I guess this was all, if this is public, right?
00:36:36.000 I mean, they had cameras in the courtroom.
00:36:39.000 And if you're giving one of these speeches, effectively, you're wasting your time if you're speaking to the judge.
00:36:43.000 Right.
00:36:43.000 As if the judge already said he's going to announce a ruling, then you're speaking to a guy who's made up his mind and isn't going to change his mind based on whatever you say.
00:36:50.000 And you've also had the opportunity to say substantively, legally, whatever you wanted to say in your briefing.
00:36:54.000 So he's not, he's going to be particularly annoyed if you're trying to make new substantive legal points in oral argument that you didn't put in your brief.
00:37:02.000 So I think the way that they look at it is they're, you know, they're not speaking to the judge, they're speaking to the public and potential jurors.
00:37:09.000 And so that sort of frames how you would think about what their message is here, what they're trying to communicate.
00:37:15.000 And in this case, it would be maybe he had it coming.
00:37:18.000 So they wouldn't say that so explicitly, obviously, but maybe that's the sort of underlying message.
00:37:24.000 I wouldn't be surprised to see more of that, more sort of subtle slander of Charlie coming from the defense team, trying to capture and hope that maybe one of the jurors is going to fight for a mistrial or more based on the fact that they sympathize with Tyler Robinson's actions.
00:37:41.000 Jack, I think this inevitably gets us thinking about a distinctive feature of our system.
00:37:46.000 That we have this Anglo Saxon 12 person jury trial.
00:37:50.000 You need unanimity to convict.
00:37:52.000 You need unanimity to impose the death penalty.
00:37:56.000 It's a long tradition.
00:37:58.000 I think all of us would be sad to see it go.
00:38:02.000 But when you do see this kind of strategic pandering, or when we see the other famous trial going on right now, the Lindsey Clancy case, people were watching for a verdict there all day.
00:38:12.000 Judge sent them home again.
00:38:13.000 They're apparently deadlocked.
00:38:15.000 Seems quite plausible we will get a mistrial in that case.
00:38:20.000 Jack, how should we feel about our jury system as we see these two cases unfolding?
00:38:24.000 Is this just the nature of it?
00:38:27.000 Is there some sort of change that's been brought about because of social media and mass media?
00:38:33.000 Floor is yours.
00:38:36.000 You know, it's interesting.
00:38:39.000 Poland is kind of all over social media lately.
00:38:44.000 And I was reading a book in my spare time, because why not, about legal practice in Poland.
00:38:50.000 And Poland, like most of continental Europe, Does not use the jury system, does not use the same jury system that we do.
00:38:58.000 They have a system that's much closer to, at this stage, what they call the first instance of a trial, it goes to a judge or sometimes a judge with members of the public who are appointed as lay judges, like one or two.
00:39:14.000 They do not have this 12 person jury trial.
00:39:17.000 So it's really just something.
00:39:18.000 And I remember when my wife and I were watching the Derek Chauvin trial, Tanya Tay was saying, wow, I've never realized that America had trials like this.
00:39:28.000 It's not what we do in Europe.
00:39:31.000 And, you know, it really goes to show you that the way things have changed in America, whereby in the idea was that a jury would have, you know, good faith, would be operating in good faith.
00:39:42.000 But of course, where do we pull our juries from these days?
00:39:45.000 We pull them from the voter rolls, which we know are a complete joke in many of these jurisdictions.
00:39:50.000 I'm not, you know, talking about Provo.
00:39:52.000 I'm just saying in general in America, we know there's huge problems.
00:39:55.000 That's why the SAVE Act was such a fight, and the Senate wouldn't pass it.
00:40:01.000 Mass migration in this country, mass migration of people who have come with wholly different ideas of how things should be.
00:40:10.000 We also have multiculturalism.
00:40:12.000 And unfortunately, multiculturalism, which is something that Lee Kuan Yew actually spoke about, is terrible when it comes to juries.
00:40:19.000 Because, for example, one of those multicultures that you could talk about, for example, is the LGBTQ community.
00:40:28.000 And so if you're a member of that community and you find yourself on the jury, then perhaps, just perhaps, The reason that Novak said what he just said over there is that because you might think that, in fact, I am a member of a community that Charlie Kirk was against.
00:40:43.000 If Charlie Kirk was against my community, then I should be for the person who was against Charlie Kirk.
00:40:47.000 And so this is where that system kind of breaks down because if you have a multicultural system, you are going to see those types of culture clashes inside the jury box.
00:41:00.000 Of course, we're seeing that with Lindsey Clancy right now and most famously with OJ Simpson back, was it 92 or 93?
00:41:07.000 when that decision came out.
00:41:09.000 And so, and you had jurors, by the way, after the OJ case saying that they unequivocally thought that OJ was guilty, but they voted not guilty because they were mad about Rodney King or things like that.
00:41:20.000 And this is obviously a complete short circuit of the way the system is supposed to work, which is, of course, weighing the facts and evidence and then coming back with a good faith response.
00:41:32.000 You know, the reasonableness standard, which is applied to so many of these statutes as Will Is very familiar with, you know, it kind of flies out the window if you can't agree on what's reasonable and what's not.
00:41:46.000 And unfortunately, that's what we're seeing now in society.
00:41:49.000 And yes, obviously, social media, TikTok, Instagram, all of these things are adding to these major, major fissures in our society.
00:41:57.000 All right.
00:41:58.000 Will, what do you feel about the future of our jury system as we sweat the outcome of this case and the other infamous cases going on in the US at this moment?
00:42:10.000 Yeah, no, I posted something about this today that you could see a world where this gets so bad that eventually a right wing movement takes power, takes aim at the jury trial, and says the jury trial doesn't work for us anymore.
00:42:21.000 It's leading to far too many acquittals of people who've committed extraordinarily serious crimes when the evidence is overwhelming.
00:42:28.000 And I mean, you bring up Lee Kuan Yew, right?
00:42:30.000 I'd recommend everybody, if you have the time, it's a lot, but Lee Kuan Yew's autobiography, in particular, the first part of his autobiography where he talks about his early life coming into power.
00:42:40.000 Lee Kuan Yew was a criminal defense lawyer.
00:42:44.000 While the English were in charge, he managed to, he defended a guy who he thought and he said was totally guilty, but he appealed to the tribal prejudices of the ethnic prejudices of the jury in front of him and managed to persuade them to let him off.
00:43:00.000 And after that, you know, that act of having gotten this criminal off of a very serious charge made him permanently very skeptical of juries.
00:43:09.000 And so that's why Singapore has bench trials, even though it's an English common law country and many other English common law countries still retain trial by jury, which is ultimately an English tradition.
00:43:19.000 So, there's, you know, if we're going to turn, this is, I think, one of the better arguments against mass immigration is that, you know, our system, as Jack said, was built not on multiculturalism.
00:43:29.000 It was not.
00:43:31.000 And it was built on this sort of common cultural continuity.
00:43:35.000 And without that, the jury trial system breaks down because you need a common understanding of values, a common understanding of justice.
00:43:42.000 You know, we're the weird ones.
00:43:45.000 And I think Jack talked about this earlier today on his show as well, which was, you know, in other societies, it would be extremely strange.
00:43:51.000 For the parents of Tyler Robinson to have turned Tyler Robinson in, that would have been seen as weird and disloyal to your family.
00:43:58.000 In the West, we have a particular appreciation for individualism and impartial justice and a rejection of nepotism that is not present in every part of the world.
00:44:09.000 And the more you import people from parts of the world where the moral fabric, essentially the moral sentiment of people, runs towards protecting your being loyal to your clan rather than impartial justice.
00:44:24.000 The more and more the jury system will break down over time.
00:44:27.000 Yeah.
00:44:28.000 I mean, an example that also happened within the last year the Henry Novak case in the UK, where a guy stabs someone to death in the street.
00:44:38.000 And what immediately happens?
00:44:39.000 His brother helps cover for him, his mother helps cover for him.
00:44:43.000 It is an entire community comes together to help him cover up, try to escape justice for this crime.
00:44:50.000 And we were fortunate that this failed and he was convicted anyway.
00:44:54.000 But we may see more and more cases like that.
00:44:59.000 I feel the entire nature of jury trials relies on a jury being a community of not just shared values, but the sense that everyone is part of the same community.
00:45:11.000 When any criminal trial can start having this aspect of is the defendant in my tribe or in a different tribe as a key part of it, you're going to end up in cases where it's very, it's far more difficult than it should be to get the right verdict in a case, whether it's in the Clancy case.
00:45:32.000 Where it suddenly is a battle of the sexes incident, or if it's in racial stuff, this person's part of my group, and so I will just not trust any indictment against such a person, or even politics.
00:45:46.000 One of the things we've discussed is is it going to matter in this case that it's at least being tried in Orem, Utah, which is a red Trump county, and it's also filled with Mormons who are pretty law abiding, straight arrow individuals, whereas.
00:46:03.000 What if Charlie got shot in Boulder, Colorado?
00:46:06.000 What if Charlie got shot in the Bay Area, somewhere really blue?
00:46:11.000 We'd have to worry a lot more that just someone says, I want to get on that trial.
00:46:15.000 I want to get on that jury and make sure that the person who killed Charlie gets away with it.
00:46:20.000 And, Blake, just to bolster your point, by the way, we've already seen Luigi Maggioni, who's on video committing murder in New York City.
00:46:28.000 And there, the judges have already taken the death penalty off the table, even before it's gone to trial.
00:46:34.000 Yeah, exactly.
00:46:35.000 And.
00:46:37.000 I mean, luckily, I believe he ended up pleading guilty in that case, I believe.
00:46:41.000 Yeah, so that fortunately.
00:46:43.000 I think he pled.
00:46:45.000 Will, remind me if I'm wrong, but I think he pled on the federal, but he still has the state.
00:46:50.000 It's one of the two.
00:46:51.000 I know, I think the basic strategic decision there was they thought they managed to knock out the death penalty in that case by ruling of the judge.
00:47:00.000 And then they decided to plead guilty there in order to avoid, to make double jeopardy come into play for the other case where I guess the death penalty was still a live option.
00:47:10.000 So that was their strategic decision.
00:47:12.000 Mindset.
00:47:12.000 I wonder, though, you know, it's the free thing.
00:47:15.000 I did have it right.
00:47:16.000 He pled guilty.
00:47:17.000 He pled guilty on the federal side after they had knocked the.
00:47:20.000 Actually, I believe they didn't have the death penalty even on the federal side.
00:47:26.000 And then so he still got the state case, but they're going to push for this double jeopardy trap and say, you know, he's already pled out.
00:47:37.000 We don't need to go too far down that rabbit hole.
00:47:40.000 Just to remind everyone, we're waiting.
00:47:42.000 Probably about 10 minutes out from Judge Graff's ruling.
00:47:45.000 We'll, of course, carry that live and then come back and we'll have Andrew join us and so on.
00:47:50.000 We're getting a few emails.
00:47:52.000 Mick asks This is, I think, unlikely, but maybe you guys have thoughts on this.
00:47:57.000 Is it possible that Mr. Novak's comment was used so that the defense team would have later grounds for appeal on grounds of ineffective counsel?
00:48:08.000 As in, was the lawyer making an argument so bad deliberately so that.
00:48:13.000 Tyler can later claim my lawyers were inept.
00:48:16.000 I don't think.
00:48:19.000 As crazy as it sounds in public, I think it's strategic.
00:48:23.000 I really do.
00:48:25.000 I think that Novak is a very, very capable defense lawyer.
00:48:29.000 He's got a huge background in terms of this.
00:48:32.000 Obviously, anyone can claim that later.
00:48:35.000 Brian Koberger, for example, after pleading guilty, is now claiming that to try to get his guilty plea overturned.
00:48:42.000 We'll see if that happens or not.
00:48:43.000 But I just personally, having.
00:48:46.000 Viewed and met Mr. Novak, and having viewed him up close and personal for a week, like I did originally, it really doesn't seem like something that he would just do off the cuff like that.
00:49:00.000 I think that he's probably got a strategy in mind.
00:49:02.000 Yeah, I wouldn't say ineffective assistance of counsel would even make sense at this point in the trial.
00:49:08.000 You've already made all your arguments in your briefing, and it's a judge decision.
00:49:12.000 So it's not the kind of thing where you're failing to object to some important piece of evidence that's been admitted.
00:49:19.000 It's so liberal at this point that I don't think that would ever be a strategy.
00:49:22.000 Moreover, a strategy like that is not the kind of thing any lawyer himself wants to engage in because it doesn't really get you out of anything.
00:49:29.000 It means you just go back to trial again.
00:49:30.000 And it's not like even if, you know, Tyler Robinson eventually on appeal were to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel motion, that doesn't mean he goes free.
00:49:39.000 That means he gets a new trial and we're back exactly where we started.
00:49:42.000 And he's not going to be free pending bond.
00:49:45.000 Like, they're not going to bond him out after that.
00:49:47.000 He's still the guy who murdered Charlie Kirk.
00:49:49.000 Yeah.
00:49:51.000 I mean, it's just.
00:49:52.000 I think we're all wildly speculating because it was just such a demented thing to say.
00:49:59.000 And it felt like it came very out of nowhere.
00:50:01.000 Out of nowhere and didn't help his case really at all.
00:50:03.000 It doesn't immediately help.
00:50:05.000 And so it's just.
00:50:06.000 Well, here's one other.
00:50:07.000 I'll ask Will this.
00:50:09.000 One other possibility is that, so if I remember correctly, one of the aggravating factors is the political targeting.
00:50:15.000 Is that correct?
00:50:16.000 Yes.
00:50:18.000 Or at least it's a secondary one.
00:50:19.000 It's a secondary possibility, at least for sure.
00:50:22.000 Yeah, secondary after.
00:50:25.000 After the aggravating factor of potentially targeting others, which includes, of course, both of you guys.
00:50:31.000 And, Will, I guess my question is: Could he be making this argument that hate speech is not considered political?
00:50:43.000 That it is, in fact, that doesn't qualify because it wasn't a hard Republican versus Democrat kind of thing?
00:50:53.000 I don't think that's going to be particularly germane.
00:50:55.000 If I remember correctly, I think I reviewed the statute on the sort of political aspect of it, and it was all about the sort of identity of who you shot.
00:51:03.000 Whether they were like an office holder of some sort, you know, a senator or a congressman, a state legislator, a sheriff.
00:51:09.000 And Charlie.
00:51:10.000 Or a prominent political activist.
00:51:12.000 A prominent political activist does make it have political valence, but the statute kind of enumerated specific categories of people who would qualify as being targeting them would qualify as aggravated murder.
00:51:22.000 And I don't think, I think the only way to get there with Charlie was based on his like board membership on one of the like, you know, blue ribbon commissions that the executive branch has that he was a member of.
00:51:32.000 Like I think it was like the board of directors of the Air Force Academy or something like that.
00:51:35.000 He was, yeah, he was the Air Force Academy.
00:51:37.000 And in fact, He was, if I remember correctly, Blake, you'd, you'd, and you got, you guys would probably know, but I think he was planning to visit there, uh, not long after this Utah stop.
00:51:46.000 I believe that's correct.
00:51:47.000 In a few weeks, right.
00:51:48.000 So I think, I don't, I guess my broader point is the sort of going for this interesting, if anything, you know, you'd be ramping up the political valence here by bringing up the sort of what Charlie had done if this were a live issue.
00:52:00.000 So I think that actually would be a strange strategy for the defense if I think they're, they're only doing this sort of thing because they're pretty confident that there isn't a live issue on the political side.
00:52:12.000 Or maybe they think it's just a reach.
00:52:15.000 And, you know, that's my suspicion.
00:52:17.000 I don't think they're trying to sort of undermine that particular aggravating factor on the death penalty.
00:52:22.000 I think that's a little far afield.
00:52:25.000 No, I know.
00:52:26.000 That's just one.
00:52:28.000 Well, basically, this is what made me think about it is because it's one of those things when you talk to the left where they'll say that's not a political issue.
00:52:37.000 They'll say that's not because they don't believe anything in progressivism is politics.
00:52:42.000 They say because they're true believers, they actually believe that.
00:52:47.000 For example, that a trans kid is actually a trans kid, that they're born that way.
00:52:51.000 There's nothing they can do to change it.
00:52:54.000 And they have to undergo these, again, this is their view, not mine, but they have to undergo surgeries and hormone replacement and all the rest because this will conform with their affirmed view.
00:53:08.000 And of course, this is something that the defense lawyer brought up right there when he was talking about twigs.
00:53:13.000 I noticed that he did talk about it in the past tense.
00:53:16.000 I don't know if I'm reading too much into that.
00:53:17.000 But I know there was some speculation as to whether or not Twiggs is still affirming to that other gender, the fluidity.
00:53:26.000 He looked a little less affirmative in his testimony.
00:53:30.000 Is that the right word?
00:53:30.000 Less affirmative?
00:53:34.000 Yeah, he flowed back.
00:53:36.000 He flowed in the reverse direction, perhaps.
00:53:39.000 I don't know.
00:53:41.000 But yeah, it's just something where you know that progressives always say this.
00:53:44.000 They say that's not political, that's just moral, that's just being a.
00:53:48.000 A darn good person and not being a darn bad person.
00:53:53.000 Exactly, exactly.
00:53:55.000 I think we're about five minutes out from Judge Graff reconvening the court.
00:54:01.000 Will, you first, just any final thoughts about this before we close?
00:54:07.000 Let's hope we're closing phase one of what has already been a quite exhausting journey.
00:54:14.000 Yeah, I think it really is remarkable how long this takes, and it kind of makes me appreciate the federal system a little bit in the sense.
00:54:21.000 We get the benefit of a public preliminary hearing.
00:54:24.000 So we are in this unique circumstance where all these crazy conspiracy theories about Kirk's death.
00:54:29.000 And so it's nice to be able to have all this evidence laid out in public much earlier than it would have been otherwise.
00:54:35.000 But at the same time, it does make the overall process much more grueling in federal court, for example.
00:54:40.000 What would have happened here is very simply by the time we even had this announced, there would have been a grand jury indictment, and we would have already been well into the pretrial process at this point.
00:54:50.000 Now we're just about to start it, which is kind of crazy.
00:54:52.000 I know I said we're summing up, but actually, there's something I totally should have asked both of you guys earlier.
00:54:56.000 We were discussing earlier today with J Town, it came up at the start of today's hearing back and forth.
00:55:04.000 The defense was bringing up that there is a polymarket account on whether Tyler Robinson will be convicted by the end of July next year.
00:55:11.000 And they said it introduces bias because it can go up or down and that can suggest it can impute guilt to him.
00:55:19.000 But we were just thinking all the other ways that could interfere with the case that a juror, a defense attorney, a prosecutor, a judge, it could induce ways to introduce corruption.
00:55:30.000 It makes it easier to be corrupt.
00:55:31.000 So we were saying, should we ban this?
00:55:33.000 Should we ban markets for criminal cases?
00:55:36.000 Yeah, I mean, I could potentially see.
00:55:41.000 I'm personally on the very social conservative side on a lot of these questions.
00:55:46.000 I think a lot of this public and prolific digital gambling is very bad and very corrosive to all of society, as a matter of fact.
00:55:55.000 But I was going to say that when Will Chamberlain was on Human Events Daily earlier today, we spoke at length about this very question.
00:56:03.000 I talked about the case when it was the Green Beret. who had put money on whether or not Maduro would be raided and arrested.
00:56:11.000 And then, of course, he got in big, big trouble for that.
00:56:14.000 Although I do say he didn't actually leak that.
00:56:17.000 He just put money on it.
00:56:19.000 But yes, he had insider knowledge.
00:56:20.000 Or Trump's, I think, teleprompter operator got in trouble recently.
00:56:26.000 He had to pay some fine.
00:56:28.000 And at the same time, though, and I'll throw it to Will because I know we talked about this earlier, but whether or not you have jury tampering, if there is a juror, who is perhaps trying to manipulate the case or simply manipulate their own standing on Polymarket by placing bets, by placing different options on Polymarket or Kalshi or any of these things by their own standing in the case, you're going to get caught.
00:56:57.000 Jury tampering is not something new.
00:56:58.000 It's actually something quite old in our system.
00:57:01.000 And you're definitely going to get caught because the judge and the bailiffs can go in there and say, hey, give us your phone.
00:57:07.000 Or they can issue subpoenas for your phone or issue a subpoena to make you speak to them.
00:57:13.000 And if you don't, you're going to get booted or potentially even worse because you are sworn in as a juror.
00:57:19.000 So that means you have to swear to not do such things as this.
00:57:23.000 And if you do so, it's a crime.
00:57:25.000 Will, what do you make of the polymarket question?
00:57:28.000 Yeah, I mean, there's a good argument to ban it.
00:57:30.000 I think, though, that the judge has a lot of tools to deal with it.
00:57:33.000 As Jack said, you can deal with it post hoc, where you're sort of subpoenaing people and demanding their phones, right?
00:57:38.000 Obviously, that word will probably get around because this person behaving.
00:57:41.000 Uniquely, weirdly, in the jury room, will get around.
00:57:44.000 There's also things you can do pre trial, which is like, you know, while you're swearing them in or doing voidir, you can actually, my suspicion is a judge could easily just make them attest under oath and, you know, ask them questions like, do you have a Polymarket or CalShe account?
00:57:59.000 If you do, please specify what that account, your account information, to make it particularly easy to catch you in the future if this ever really becomes a problem.
00:58:08.000 But yeah, I mean, you know, it's a speculative argument from the defense.
00:58:12.000 There's the courts have an enormous number of tools to actually make sure that people behave in court and don't break the law, don't do things corruptly.
00:58:20.000 I think people underestimate that.
00:58:21.000 You know, often I remember I've counseled clients at the time in the past about, you know, they've suggested, well, why don't we just defy this court order?
00:58:28.000 And I have to explain, like, trust me, you don't even want to start down that road.
00:58:32.000 The court has enormous coercive power when it wants to force you to comply with its orders.
00:58:38.000 And in this case, you know, being a juror, like, if it wants to use the coercive power it has to force you to behave, it will.
00:58:45.000 All right.
00:58:46.000 Well, I think we're now really just a few minutes out from the court coming back.
00:58:51.000 So, Jack, I have to duck out.
00:58:53.000 I apologize.
00:58:53.000 And yes.
00:58:54.000 All right.
00:58:54.000 Well, thank you very much for joining us, Will.
00:58:56.000 And I'm sure we'll see you in the near future.
00:58:59.000 Thank you for coming on.
00:59:00.000 And Jack, you as well.
00:59:03.000 Thank you.
00:59:04.000 I think we'll want to be getting back to our stations to see this verdict.
00:59:08.000 And then when it's done, we'll be getting out here again.
00:59:10.000 We'll definitely talk to Andrew, who is in the room all day.
00:59:14.000 So, Jack, thanks for joining us.
00:59:17.000 Blake, if I have a real quick final word on the viral clip that we're talking about, is my gosh, really sounds like the defense lawyer there is saying that this.
00:59:29.000 Certainly was a big part of the motive for Tyler Robinson.
00:59:32.000 And I know there have been a lot of questions as to who the shooter was and what the motive was.
00:59:37.000 And it seems like Tyler Robinson's defense lawyer is giving it a lot of attention right there.
00:59:43.000 Well, he certainly didn't give any attention at all to any alibi, any debunking of the core parts of the case, as we've pointed out.
00:59:52.000 And if there was a strong argument there, I think they would have tried to spare their client a year in jail.
00:59:58.000 So just saying.
01:00:00.000 Exactly.
01:00:01.000 So thank you again, Jack, for joining us.
01:00:04.000 And we're going to keep our vigil watching the court.
01:00:07.000 I believe he'll be back any minute now.
01:00:09.000 So stay tuned.
01:00:10.000 We'll be back with all of you as soon as this hearing is over.
01:00:15.000 I had the honor of a lifetime to call Charlie a friend.
01:00:20.000 And what I remember most wasn't just what people saw on stage, it was what was behind the scenes.
01:00:26.000 That was an unwavering commitment to his faith, his love for his family, and his genuine desire to encourage others to live with courage and conviction.
01:00:35.000 Charlie believed that following Christ wasn't something you compartmentalize.
01:00:39.000 He didn't put it in a box, he lived it out loud.
01:00:42.000 It shaped how he lived, how he served, how he treated people every single day.
01:00:46.000 Charlie Kirk, American Martyr, captures that heart.
01:00:49.000 This documentary isn't just simply about remembering Charlie, it's an invitation for each of us to ask what kind of legacy we're building and whether we're willing to stand firm in our own faith when it's tested.
01:01:01.000 I hope that you'll watch it with your family and have those conversations together.
01:01:05.000 Go to angel.comslash Kirk.
01:01:07.000 That's angel.com slash Kirk.
01:01:10.000 Become an Angel Guild member.
01:01:11.000 Watch Charlie Kirk, American Martyr, and help bring more stories of faith, courage, and conviction to audiences around the world.
01:01:21.000 All right, welcome back.
01:01:23.000 It was, as we feared, a marathon day.
01:01:26.000 It took until they started at about 10 a.m. local time and they ended only at 6 30 p.m. local time.
01:01:34.000 There were, how many?
01:01:36.000 Three total recesses throughout the day.
01:01:38.000 Took quite a while.
01:01:41.000 Uh, so thank you to everyone who's been enduring this with us.
01:01:45.000 In the end, though, we got mostly the result we wanted.
01:01:49.000 We got Judge Graff, he uh took about a half hour to read the whole thing, but he issued his ruling binding over Tyler Robinson on all charges.
01:02:01.000 Uh, that includes aggravated murder, which means that Tyler Robinson remains eligible for the death penalty, pending, of course, a trial verdict.
01:02:11.000 We also got A plea from Mr. Robinson.
01:02:14.000 He entered pleas of not guilty on all charges.
01:02:19.000 And then finally, at the end, we had discussion of when they will have their pretrial conference where they will likely set a future trial date.
01:02:28.000 The prosecution said, let's just do this within two weeks.
01:02:32.000 The defense said, we would like at least a month.
01:02:35.000 And then they revealed, actually, I guess it turns out we can't do this until October 23rd, nearly two months away.
01:02:43.000 Hopefully, that date will hold.
01:02:45.000 And when they confer, we will actually get a trial date.
01:02:50.000 We don't know when that will be, of course, but it does fit our pattern of everything about this taking as long as possible.
01:02:56.000 But we did at least avoid any travesty where they decide, where if the judge decided to wait and release his ruling over the holiday or after the holiday, we didn't get any bonus delay just so that we could have a plea be entered by Mr. Robinson.
01:03:13.000 We have gotten over the hump of the pre trial, the pre indictment period.
01:03:19.000 We have an indicted defendant, Tyler Robinson.
01:03:23.000 For the murder of Charlie Kirk.
01:03:25.000 Now, they're still cycling out of the courtroom right now, but Andrew was there all day.
01:03:31.000 Hopefully, he will get his phone back and call into us.
01:03:36.000 What did you think of that, Danny, other than the fact that it was, like everything else in this trial, very long?
01:03:42.000 Yeah, very long.
01:03:43.000 The ending of scheduling the next hearing seemed like the judge was bending the knee to the defense there.
01:03:49.000 I don't understand if one of the lawyers can't make it, why that's our problem and why that means we have to push it out a month later.
01:03:58.000 If you can't make it for your own client, that's your problem, not ours.
01:04:01.000 That is just baffling to me why we have to push it out even longer.
01:04:07.000 So I don't understand that.
01:04:08.000 He also didn't commit to that October date as even setting the court date.
01:04:12.000 We don't even know if he will set the court date at that date.
01:04:15.000 It might be a discussion and then they'll need final arguments.
01:04:17.000 Yeah, another nine hour day of discussion, then nothing happens.
01:04:21.000 Yeah, I mean, this is at some point here, they got to speed it up.
01:04:26.000 It really was exhausting.
01:04:28.000 We joked with each other.
01:04:30.000 As we were listening to the judge read it, that really he probably could have just released the text of it and saved everyone a half hour of time of just very ponderous reading.
01:04:42.000 But nevertheless, he did deign to read the whole thing.
01:04:45.000 So for those who missed it, we may as well show the moment we were semi waiting for.
01:04:52.000 This is Judge Graff reaching his decision on whether to let count one aggravated murder be bound over.
01:04:59.000 Let's play it.
01:05:00.000 Play 15.
01:05:01.000 The court's determination does not rest on crowd size alone or an assumption, assumed probability of wind, ricochet, overpenetration, or bullet deflection.
01:05:13.000 It rests on the evidence concerning the location and manner of the shot, the documented position of several individuals in and around the canopy area, defendant's opportunity to observe those circumstances, and the preliminary hearing requirement that reasonable inferences be drawn in the state's favor.
01:05:32.000 Whether the state can prove the aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt remains for trial.
01:05:39.000 Count one is bound over for trial.
01:05:43.000 So that's what we needed.
01:05:44.000 All the other counts, they're there.
01:05:47.000 Maybe they play some role in their ability to aggravate it.
01:05:50.000 It's an aggravating factor that kids were there, it's an aggravating factor if he was engaged in witness tampering.
01:05:55.000 All of those play a role in the bigger thing.
01:05:58.000 But the most important bit was is aggravated murder still there?
01:06:03.000 As a charge, and he ruled that it was.
01:06:05.000 He talked at length about that.
01:06:07.000 There was a lot of discussion of how many people were near Charlie when the shooting happened, how close were they?
01:06:15.000 And he says, yeah, there's other court cases that talk about people firing multiple shots, how specifically close people need to be, but those are only, they're guideposts.
01:06:26.000 They aren't absolute limits to what it is.
01:06:29.000 And it's as the prosecution said, there's not that many cases of assassination like this in general.
01:06:35.000 And so every instance is sort of its own case.
01:06:39.000 And so we got all of those defense arguments, but the judge said, that is up for a jury, that is up for a trial to determine it.
01:06:49.000 And he pushed ahead.
01:06:50.000 And so we are finally, like we said, at the end of phase one of the process.
01:06:56.000 We think back, we had how many?
01:07:00.000 We had a few digital only hearings.
01:07:03.000 We had a few in person hearings back in the spring.
01:07:07.000 We had stuff that was in May, and then that got delayed until July.
01:07:10.000 And then the July hearing went for a week, and then he decided, let's do the closing arguments two months from now instead of right now.
01:07:16.000 Finally done with that.
01:07:18.000 Finally, we have the decision.
01:07:20.000 Now we can look ahead to an actual trial, which is what all of us.
01:07:23.000 Well, we still don't know when the trial is.
01:07:25.000 So, really, we can't even look ahead to an actual trial because we're now looking ahead to late October.
01:07:31.000 Just for a hearing.
01:07:31.000 Just for them to have the pretrial conference, which hopefully will be where that day they set the trial.
01:07:39.000 And will that be?
01:07:40.000 I think it'll be.
01:07:42.000 My guess is we'll see what we saw here, which the prosecution will say, we're happy to do this four months from now, and the defense will say, we're going to need a year.
01:07:50.000 And the judge will, somehow it'll end up that we'll do it a year and a half later.
01:07:55.000 They'll just combine the two amounts that they have and there we'll go.
01:07:59.000 Yeah, we just went from a negotiation of two weeks to six.
01:08:02.000 Yeah, it was two weeks.
01:08:04.000 One wanted two weeks, the other wanted four weeks.
01:08:06.000 And so naturally we got seven weeks.
01:08:10.000 So that's the way some of the stuff has been going.
01:08:13.000 And nevertheless, as long as we got the outcome that we've been looking for, I think we can accept.
01:08:20.000 Some delays.
01:08:21.000 I will accept any amount of delay as long as we get actual justice in this case.
01:08:25.000 I think we can all agree.
01:08:27.000 We have a statement from Erica right here.
01:08:29.000 Yes, let's read that actually as we wait.
01:08:32.000 We're still hoping, hopefully, we'll get someone who is at the scene to join us.
01:08:36.000 But yes, Erica, this was posted on X shortly after Judge Graff's ruling on this statement on behalf of the Kirk family.
01:08:46.000 Today's decision, which comes nearly one year since Charlie was taken from us.
01:08:51.000 Marks an important step in our family's pursuit of justice for him.
01:08:55.000 Every step in this process carries the weight of all that Charlie's murder has taken from his family, especially his children who will grow up without their father.
01:09:03.000 We are grateful to all who have continued to pray for us, support us, and stand with us through a year of unimaginable grief.
01:09:11.000 As the next phase of the judicial process begins, our family remains united in our love for Charlie, our commitment to the pursuit of justice, and our prayer for a transparent and timely.
01:09:22.000 Process.
01:09:23.000 I think the word timely is carrying a lot there.
01:09:27.000 This is, I mean, this is stressful for us.
01:09:30.000 It's stressful for Turning Point and the show team, but it's especially stressful for Erica and her family.
01:09:39.000 They want to know that Charlie's killer is held accountable, that justice is found for that.
01:09:46.000 And I think the longer this goes on, it means more days where they have to travel to Utah.
01:09:53.000 It means more people pushing insane stuff on the internet, more personal attacks on her and other members of their family, and just means more uncertainty, more of that worry, as we were discussing with Jack and Will Chamberlain, more worry that the defense is going to successfully plant these seeds where they're attacking Charlie, where they're leaving the way open for some sort of jury nullification, rogue juror intervention.
01:10:19.000 It's more stuff that can go wrong, the longer the process drags out, stretches out.
01:10:24.000 There's just more complications that come into play.
01:10:26.000 So.
01:10:27.000 I think it's very understandable that they want a timely process.
01:10:31.000 They want, I don't want to say move on, but they want this to reach a resolution.
01:10:37.000 Yeah.
01:10:38.000 We want justice for Charlie.
01:10:41.000 Anything else?
01:10:41.000 I'm seeing people asking why he pled not guilty.
01:10:46.000 I mean, if we're not taking the death penalty off the table, there's really no reason for him not to plead not guilty at that point.
01:10:51.000 So it's pretty cut and dry.
01:10:54.000 If you go game theory, I suppose, there's no incentives for it that.
01:10:58.000 The main reason anyone pleads guilty is to get a lower sentence.
01:11:02.000 Usually you'll see that because the prosecution, they want to save time and they say, we'll take the death penalty off the table if you plead guilty.
01:11:09.000 It seems prosecutors have not offered that so far.
01:11:13.000 So no incentive, especially.
01:11:15.000 You can change to a guilty plea basically at any time.
01:11:18.000 So they can hold out.
01:11:20.000 They can try to drag this process out, among other things.
01:11:22.000 They can try to throw more of their Hail Mary motions to try to get various pieces of evidence struck.
01:11:30.000 We'll continue to see that.
01:11:31.000 They'll try to.
01:11:32.000 They'll do a new attack on the testimony from Lance Twiggs.
01:11:36.000 They'll try to get any of the location data from the phone disqualified.
01:11:41.000 They've already made a bunch of attacks on the DNA evidence.
01:11:45.000 And some of it appears, as far as I can tell, to just be well, they say it's, you know, one in eight octillion chance that it's not that.
01:11:51.000 So they're saying there's a chance.
01:11:52.000 Like they, that was basically part of their argument that it doesn't prove it, it just shows likelihood.
01:11:58.000 And we're going to just see more of that the longer this process drags on.
01:12:04.000 We're still waiting to see if we can get Andrew.
01:12:05.000 Does anyone have anything?
01:12:06.000 Questions, if you do send them questions or comments, you can email us freedom at charliekirk.com or I'm scanning the Rumble chat right now.
01:12:15.000 I may as well check the YouTube chat.
01:12:17.000 I think they just, Andrew just left the courtroom, so hopefully he'll be calling in shortly.
01:12:21.000 Hopefully, hopefully we'll be able to get that.
01:12:24.000 But man, what an exhausting day, Danny.
01:12:26.000 I mean, we came in and.
01:12:28.000 Yeah, since 9 a.m. We were speculating, oh, maybe this will just all get done by noon.
01:12:33.000 How naive of us.
01:12:34.000 How naive.
01:12:35.000 We had Jay Town said, you know, hope they'll only go.
01:12:38.000 20 minutes, the prosecution will probably use all their time with the defense.
01:12:41.000 So we thought, okay, two hours and 10 minutes, get this done by lunch, have the ruling when we get back from lunch.
01:12:46.000 Oh, how naive.
01:12:48.000 Yeah, instead, we didn't even get arguments until after the lunch.
01:12:51.000 It makes you wonder how long will the actual trial go, is what's making me wonder where they can go absolutely all out for every single witness, every single video.
01:13:06.000 They can do their maximal objections on every single aspect of it.
01:13:10.000 And you wonder, are we going to get a trial that goes on for three weeks, a month, longer?
01:13:16.000 I've never seen anything like it, but there aren't any questions.
01:13:18.000 I mean, I can't quite explain.
01:13:19.000 How much money is the taxpayers of Provo there going to have to foot the bill for these lawyers?
01:13:24.000 Because the taxpayers of Provo are the ones that are paying the defense lawyers.
01:13:27.000 First, it was supposed to be a million dollars.
01:13:28.000 Now they're saying it's going to end up being around $10 million.
01:13:31.000 $10 million?
01:13:32.000 According to the New York Post, $10 million the local taxpayers of Utah are paying for the defense team.
01:13:37.000 So if this keeps going, they're going to be paying probably more than that.
01:13:41.000 So they should be just as furious.
01:13:43.000 It's their money.
01:13:44.000 And this trial just keeps getting pushed further and further down the line.
01:13:49.000 Unreal. Unreal.
01:13:52.000 Let's see.
01:13:56.000 We've got a few people emailing in.
01:13:59.000 Again, the big highlight today, other than the decision from Judge Graff, was Richard Novak just lobbed that attack at Charlie, called him a hater.
01:14:11.000 Lucas emailed in and he said Could Novak just have been trying to get a rise out of Erica or anyone else pro Charlie in the courtroom?
01:14:21.000 To cause a disturbance, potentially creating a cause for mistrial.
01:14:26.000 I think that's unlikely.
01:14:28.000 I think it's the most likely thing is what Jack speculated on when he was with us, which is planting the seeds well in advance to start tearing down the character of Charlie for the reason you create that space for one juror who decides, ooh, Charlie seemed like a mean guy, he seemed like an extremist.
01:14:51.000 We know who the real Charlie was, but a lot of people didn't know him that well.
01:14:54.000 They just know he was a guy who debated people on campus.
01:14:58.000 And they might try to exploit that ignorance from a lot of people to make someone's brain fill in the blanks and go, oh, this is probably some big firebrand who was constantly saying stuff to rile people up.
01:15:10.000 Maybe he got what was coming to him.
01:15:12.000 And it's disgusting.
01:15:14.000 But the defense was basically trying to plant those seeds already.
01:15:17.000 Yeah.
01:15:19.000 I think we saw the evidence of that.
01:15:24.000 Yeah, jury nullification scares me too, in addition to poly market stuff, all the things we talked about earlier today.
01:15:31.000 We've covered it on the show just in general, but the jury nullification, how these leftists will try to purposely get on a jury and vote not guilty.
01:15:41.000 And they're literally trained to do this.
01:15:42.000 We've covered it.
01:15:43.000 And so you have to worry about a leftist getting on and just purposely voting not guilty because they hate Charlie.
01:15:51.000 Great.
01:15:51.000 We got an email from Mick who says, Not the only case these lawyers or this court are dealing with, and that's why we must make a conscious effort at the state and federal level to speed up trials.
01:16:03.000 I agree.
01:16:03.000 I think about what I've taken from this process meaningful takeaways.
01:16:08.000 We were discussing maybe we should ban these prediction markets about these criminal cases because that's introducing bad incentives.
01:16:15.000 But if I had another takeaway from this, I might just say we should be spending a few billion dollars extra on our court system to just have more courthouses.
01:16:25.000 More judges, more bailiffs, more people involved.
01:16:29.000 And then the only reason to do this is to have more cases.
01:16:33.000 We're building a wider pipe so that you can force more justice through the pipe system.
01:16:39.000 Because it seems ever since COVID happened, I think everything's slowed down in America.
01:16:45.000 Every criminal justice proceeding is just that glacial pace, and it's what's making people feel frustrated with the system.
01:16:56.000 Onto a debate stage or behind a microphone, Charlie understood something really important that if you want to lead, you first have to learn.
01:17:04.000 Charlie believed that ideas shape character, conviction, and courage.
01:17:08.000 That's why he spent years studying the classics, the American founding, and the Bible through Hillsdale College's free online courses.
01:17:14.000 He would rave about these courses all the time.
01:17:16.000 These free online courses are taught by Hillsdale College professors and draw from the same great books and enduring ideas studied on Hillsdale's campus.
01:17:25.000 Hillsdale's newest free online course is the Iliad, where Professor Stephen Smith Guides students through Homer's great epic of honor, courage, friendship, leadership, and the pursuit of true greatness.
01:17:36.000 For nearly 3,000 years, the Iliad has shaped the Western imagination.
01:17:39.000 It tells the story of Achilles as he confronts injustice, rage, grief, responsibility, and the terrible costs of war.
01:17:46.000 But Homer's epic is more than a story of ancient battles.
01:17:49.000 It raises enduring questions about courage, duty, leadership, sacrifice, and self command.
01:17:55.000 Achilles is the greatest warrior among the Greeks, but Homer asks whether strength alone is enough to make a man truly great.
01:18:01.000 In this new free online course, you'll follow Achilles through the defining trials of his life and discover why one of the greatest works of Western literature still speaks to the permanent questions of human life.
01:18:12.000 Charlie understood that learning isn't just about gaining knowledge, it's about forming the mind and character needed to face the challenges of life.
01:18:19.000 With wisdom and courage, you can enroll today completely free and take this class or their 40 plus other free online courses.
01:18:26.000 Just visit charlieforhillsdale.com to start learning today.
01:18:29.000 That's charlieforhillsdale.com.
01:18:32.000 Learn deeply, think clearly, lead boldly, and carry it forward just like Charlie.
01:18:39.000 All right, I am being told we finally have Andrew.
01:18:44.000 Andrew was there for all of eight plus hours of the hearing today, he was in the room for all the stuff we've been discussing.
01:18:53.000 Andrew, welcome to the program.
01:18:56.000 First things first, what happened?
01:18:59.000 What was going on there with Richard Novak?
01:19:02.000 He went up there and he began calling Charlie a hater, said he hated people who were not straight, hated people who were different gender identities, just lashed out.
01:19:14.000 It caught us all off guard here.
01:19:16.000 And that was by far the most standout part of the hearing today, probably even more so than Judge Graff's ruling.
01:19:23.000 Yeah, no, it was.
01:19:25.000 You know, it's interesting because when you get into the courtroom, you know, Judge Graff gives you, everybody in the courtroom, instructions not to shake your head, not to nod.
01:19:36.000 They basically just sit there and be still.
01:19:39.000 And it was the one moment today where when that came out of Novak's mouth, that we just, nobody could help themselves.
01:19:47.000 It was just a complete reaction of just disgust, disbelief.
01:19:53.000 I mean, we just simply couldn't.
01:19:56.000 Fathom that this guy would basically spit on Charlie's grave like that, right?
01:20:02.000 You know, on national television, everybody's watching all over.
01:20:06.000 And to just have the utter disregard for not only the victim in this case, but his widow that's sitting in the courtroom, Paul doesn't even come close to what I was thinking.
01:20:20.000 But then I quickly realized that he's making the state's case for them.
01:20:28.000 He's basically saying, well, we have no idea that Tyler Robbins would even consider Charlie Kirk or didn't know anything about it.
01:20:35.000 But yeah, that he's hateful.
01:20:38.000 But yeah, he was hateful.
01:20:41.000 So it was almost like this mask off moment where you're seeing the quality of the man or something.
01:20:47.000 I mean, what he truly believes, what truly motivates this attorney, it's just, I don't want to speculate what his motives were for saying that.
01:20:57.000 But I mean, I think his words speak for itself.
01:21:00.000 It was absolutely shocking.
01:21:03.000 But I can tell you, just everybody was applauding and so grateful for Jeff Nyman when he went up there and he said, just so succinctly, that believing in traditional values, espousing your political beliefs is not hate.
01:21:20.000 Shooting an innocent man who is exercising his rights and his political expression is hate.
01:21:30.000 And he just said it so succinctly.
01:21:32.000 That it was, it was just, I think, a really powerful moment.
01:21:35.000 And I know for all of us who were with the Kirk side there, we were quietly just so relieved to hear somebody speak something sensible.
01:21:46.000 And yeah, we're grateful for Jeff's wisdom in that moment, it was much needed.
01:21:52.000 Yeah, we've been debating it out here.
01:21:54.000 As you said, we also hit that realization it feels like they're making the prosecution's case.
01:21:59.000 What could the motivation be?
01:22:00.000 We had Jack on, we were discussing one potential motive could be they're just planting these little seeds in the ground.
01:22:08.000 For way out, when we finally get to a jury trial, they want to lay the groundwork where you could have one holdout juror who decides Charlie, not a very likable guy, was an extremist, maybe had it coming, and they're going to make it.
01:22:23.000 They might vote to acquit, they might vote to withhold the death penalty, especially.
01:22:28.000 That's what we were speculating on about it.
01:22:30.000 But let's again, you were in the room that day.
01:22:33.000 We were, since you're not aware, we were just watching it.
01:22:36.000 We basically had a camera that was just permanently fixed on.
01:22:39.000 The back of the head of whoever was talking at any time.
01:22:42.000 We didn't hear or see really anything else in the room.
01:22:46.000 Were there any moments throughout the day, besides Mr. Novak's bizarre tangent, that got a strong reaction from the Peanut Gallery?
01:22:58.000 And especially, we know there were several people who are overtly Tyler Robinson supporters.
01:23:03.000 They waited out front.
01:23:05.000 Did his side digression get any reaction from them a certain way, or did anything else get a reaction from them?
01:23:12.000 No, I mean, you know, people in that courtroom are pretty, I would say, reserved in general.
01:23:19.000 Obviously, the other big moment was, you know, hearing that, you know, the state's asking for two weeks to come back together at the end there.
01:23:28.000 And then the defense is saying, how about 30 days?
01:23:32.000 And then to see Judge Graf go, how about October 23rd?
01:23:35.000 And there was kind of another moment of just, I think, frustration, you know, and you could feel it within the, Those of us that were watching inside, it was like, wait, I could have seen two weeks, four weeks, let's spit the baby and do it in three weeks.
01:23:55.000 Or, hey, let's do a virtual in three weeks and we'll do it in between both times.
01:24:00.000 No, none of that.
01:24:00.000 He didn't go for any of that.
01:24:02.000 It was like, oh, I have this opening in the courtroom apparently October 23rd.
01:24:08.000 So that was extraordinarily frustrating.
01:24:11.000 And once again, Jeff Nyman was sort of the voice of reason saying, okay, but if you're going to push it this far, We need a trial date set when we do that.
01:24:21.000 So I can't, again, presume to understand what's inside the mind of Judge Graff, but like that moment was another head scratcher.
01:24:30.000 I will tell you early on when they were debating this EMC, which is the electronic media, I guess, you know, kind of back and forth, you know, could you have cameras or whatever?
01:24:41.000 And the representative for the news media came up and said a few words and then, Nestor, the defense attorney, came up and basically just lambasted him, said, You know, I don't know what the hell he's talking about, basically.
01:24:56.000 And when she walked back, I mean, she shot daggers at that media representative.
01:25:02.000 I mean, just the stare was something I noticed early on.
01:25:08.000 And it was really, really noticeable for me.
01:25:11.000 And, you know, and there's just kind of a lot of this body language from Novak, from Mr. Burt, that just seems kind of exasperated, kind of.
01:25:22.000 You know, they're putting a lot of that out there, I will say, that kind of energy, which I was not aware of when I was just watching it on television.
01:25:31.000 But when you're in the room, you can feel their emotions that they're putting out there.
01:25:35.000 You know, they do, I would say, a passable job of remaining professional, but you just can feel it oozing off of them, the contempt that they have sometimes for an argument or for something the state says, and vice versa.
01:25:50.000 You know, the state is, you know, I think you can feel the energy from them that this case, there's such a mountain of evidence against Tyler Robinson being the one that pulled the trigger that they are, Equally as flummox that they're trying to scrape together some sort of defense.
01:26:05.000 You can feel them kind of going, You got to be kidding me half the time, right?
01:26:10.000 And so you kind of perceive that energy off of them in the way they sit up from their chair and the stand up from their chair and the way they approach the podium.
01:26:20.000 Like these are things that I wasn't perceiving online or watching over television that you could feel.
01:26:26.000 I mean, they feel very confident about their case.
01:26:29.000 You can feel it in the way that they present it, the way that they talk about it, and the way they counter the defense's arguments.
01:26:37.000 So I genuinely kind of was sitting there going, I can't imagine being the defense and trying to come up with some semblance of a defense for this guy.
01:26:46.000 I just, you know, they have a really tough job.
01:26:48.000 I think we have to all acknowledge, like, you know, they're looking at technicalities.
01:26:52.000 They're looking at, you know, maybe a slight of a constitutional right here or there.
01:27:00.000 They're trying to piece together some sort of way to get these aggravating factors off.
01:27:04.000 And that's really what I've learned about these guys they're all crusaders against.
01:27:08.000 Death penalty cases.
01:27:09.000 This is why lawyers like this travel around the country and they take high profile cases like this because they disagree ideologically or politically with the death penalty in general.
01:27:21.000 And so they're there just to kind of figure out how to get him off death row.
01:27:25.000 Yeah.
01:27:26.000 Andrew, did it surprise you that they spent more time trying to dismiss the witness tampering charges than they did actually the murder charge itself?
01:27:34.000 Yeah, no, it didn't really surprise me because, again, what I know about these.
01:27:39.000 These lawyers, these defense lawyers, is they, I mean, I, you know, again, I don't know.
01:27:45.000 I haven't talked to them, but when I'm just kind of reading between the lines here, it feels like, hey, we're conceding a lot here, but we don't think this should be aggravating.
01:27:55.000 I mean, they seem to be throwing the best use of their time, the most minutes, the most ink, all about trying to dismiss these aggravating factors or at least to weaken the state's position.
01:28:09.000 But again, The evidence is, I mean, what do you say about, you know, some hate just can't be negotiated out?
01:28:16.000 And to my knowledge, they haven't even contested the veracity of the confessions or the Discord chats or the text messages.
01:28:23.000 They haven't contested any of that.
01:28:25.000 But that's where this most damning evidence for Tyler Robinson exists in these text messages and in these Discord chats.
01:28:33.000 And then, you know, candidly about the expressions that he put on the bullet casings, right?
01:28:39.000 I mean, these are things that.
01:28:41.000 That provide a lot of evidence that Charlie was targeted because of his political expression, and it was a politically motivated assassination.
01:28:49.000 So, I don't know, again, how they're going to try and weasel their way out of those things because the evidence is hard.
01:28:56.000 It hasn't been contested.
01:28:59.000 So, we know it's premeditated as well.
01:29:02.000 So, all of these things, again, I don't know how they're going to get out of it.
01:29:06.000 They're really talented lawyers, and they're going to use every trick in the book.
01:29:09.000 We can see that.
01:29:10.000 But, Yeah, I don't know where they go from here.
01:29:14.000 And what was the body language of the judge when they went after Charlie like that, or just when they've been really nasty in general?
01:29:23.000 You know, I didn't perceive any change in the judge's body language in that moment, but candidly, I was so, I just couldn't believe what I was hearing that I think I turned to my right and then to my left, and I was looking around.
01:29:38.000 And I remember I shot a look over to the media where the media is sitting in the jury box, and they were, you could even tell that they realized something big had just happened, something sort of newsworthy, and they were kind of, Moving around, their bodies moving around.
01:29:55.000 And so I actually kind of didn't look at Judge Graff, but I remember being sort of wondering is he going to say, hey, that's out of line?
01:30:03.000 Or, you know, like I'm not a lawyer.
01:30:05.000 I don't even play one on TV like Blake does.
01:30:07.000 So I didn't, I don't know if that lawyer stepped out of line or broke some sort of protocol or if the judge could have brought him to heel a little bit in that moment.
01:30:17.000 But that was the next thing I was looking for, and he didn't.
01:30:21.000 And so I was, you know, really glad when we got back from break that the state said we take great exception.
01:30:27.000 To you describing Charlie's political views as hateful?
01:30:30.000 Because in that moment, I mean, you know, Henry Novak exposed himself as somebody that is obviously of a liberal persuasion that does not agree with traditional values or Christian morality.
01:30:42.000 So the bias was dripping off of him.
01:30:46.000 I was glad the state countered.
01:30:47.000 I was glad that Jeff did.
01:30:49.000 But I really don't know what the judge did.
01:30:51.000 Yeah, we're also glad that Jeff countered because we didn't know from our point of view if Jeff went and talked to the state and that's what made them go up or if they actually did this on their own.
01:31:02.000 So, in those breaks, what was happening during those breaks?
01:31:06.000 You know, if Jeff talked to him, I didn't see it.
01:31:10.000 You know, they kind of shuttle us back into these holding rooms.
01:31:13.000 And, you know, the only one that's kind of able to maneuver about is Jeff.
01:31:18.000 So it's possible, but, you know, he certainly didn't communicate that to me if he did.
01:31:22.000 But I think it was kind of the biggie on the eye chart.
01:31:25.000 This was an obvious call.
01:31:26.000 Like, as soon as he said, you know, Charlie said hateful things and all this stuff, I mean, everybody's jaw dropped.
01:31:33.000 And, I could see that the state was already queuing in on that.
01:31:39.000 And I think the state made the obvious connection that the rest of us did that, hey, this guy's making our case for us, even if he's being a jerk.
01:31:47.000 And, you know, I think that they came in prepared to sort of address that.
01:31:52.000 You know, this is, you know, Utah is a conservative state, but this is the conservative part of Utah where we're at, where this courthouse is, right?
01:32:01.000 It's, you know, I would venture to guess probably 10 to 15 points.
01:32:05.000 More to the right in an election than Salt Lake City, for example, or even the suburbs of Salt Lake City, because we're well to the south of Salt Lake City.
01:32:17.000 And locals kind of talk about Salt Lake as being that liberal hellhole, even here, even though Salt Lake's probably relatively moderate for most big cities.
01:32:25.000 But where we're at is pretty conservative.
01:32:28.000 So I can only imagine that the prosecution kind of keyed in on that all on their own.
01:32:34.000 It's an exhausting day.
01:32:36.000 I had, if you imagine, it was even more exhausting for you guys.
01:32:40.000 Big picture, Andrew, you've been through all this with us.
01:32:43.000 Just how does it feel?
01:32:45.000 We've completed phase one.
01:32:47.000 It's taken 51 weeks for us to get to this point.
01:32:54.000 We have an actual indictment, we have a criminal charge, we will be going to a trial.
01:33:01.000 We don't know when that will be yet, unfortunately, but we've at least gotten over that first phase, as it were.
01:33:08.000 Yeah, so I will say, like, a couple things being in the courtroom.
01:33:12.000 One, I mean, when you first walk in there, the first thing that I sort of noticed was just there's Tyler Robinson sitting there and he's like ghost white.
01:33:25.000 When I first sat down, he was like looking at one of his lawyers and he kind of had a smirk and they were kind of, I think it was Novak actually, and they were kind of smirking, laughing back and forth.
01:33:36.000 And that really bothered me, actually.
01:33:38.000 I was like the first thing I noticed.
01:33:41.000 It was just weird being like, In the room with him.
01:33:45.000 And it bothered me a lot.
01:33:47.000 And I was instantly filled with kind of a lot of rage.
01:33:50.000 And that's the thing I don't think people watching online fully understand.
01:33:54.000 When you're in the courtroom, it's way more emotional.
01:33:58.000 Like you can feel the energy of the room.
01:34:03.000 It's just so much more palpable.
01:34:06.000 I don't know how to explain that any better.
01:34:07.000 It's just so much more real.
01:34:10.000 And seeing him there, it's like it all comes flooding back.
01:34:14.000 It all feels very real.
01:34:16.000 It's like the weight of it.
01:34:17.000 Feels very real.
01:34:18.000 The formalities of it feel, make it feel very real.
01:34:22.000 And, you know, the other thing that really kind of, and I felt so terrible for Erica because, you know, when he's reading that like huge long ruling at the end, which, by the way, just took forever and all the like legal references and like, I mean, it was, you know, I get that they have to record it for the record, but it's like, man, it just took, it takes a long time.
01:34:47.000 But they keep saying like, and, you know, The assassination of Charlie, or when he killed him, or when he was pronounced dead, or like, and every time they say that, it's like a dagger, man.
01:34:59.000 It just hurts when you're hearing it in person.
01:35:02.000 And then, you know, you just know that Erica's sitting there listening to it time and time again.
01:35:07.000 And it's just extraordinarily unfair.
01:35:10.000 Like, to us, I mean, you know, I don't want to even put myself in the same realm as what Erica's going through, but, you know, Charlie was my dear friend too.
01:35:21.000 And to hear it every time, it's just hard.
01:35:24.000 And it's very human, you know, like just kind of, you know, we all have jobs, we all have things to do, but when you're in there, you're just like, you're just at mercy to the moment.
01:35:35.000 And it just sucks to hear them say it so many times in one day.
01:35:39.000 Trying to be still is tough.
01:35:43.000 It is.
01:35:43.000 It is.
01:35:45.000 To loop you into another discussion point that we had going throughout the day, you were there early on.
01:35:54.000 Hour long back and forth over whether to redact a name of a website or not in the discussion in the course proceedings.
01:36:01.000 And the website name that they were talking about was Polymarket.
01:36:04.000 They argued that there's a market out there for Will Tyler Robinson be convicted by next July?
01:36:11.000 It turns out.
01:36:11.000 So it's actually only at 43% precisely because this case is expected to go on for so long.
01:36:17.000 And that caused a lot of discussion here about the potential for making.
01:36:24.000 Corrupt behavior easier that you could have a juror, a defense attorney, a prosecutor, a judge, any number of people.
01:36:31.000 Yeah, they can see that market, and there's potential to manipulate it or to try to manipulate it in any number of ways.
01:36:39.000 You could have the defense go and buy shares that he's not guilty, and then some juror looks at that and goes, Oh, the people think the case is mixed or whatever.
01:36:48.000 We were just throwing that out there.
01:36:50.000 Do you think that we've never had to really consider something like this before?
01:36:54.000 This feels like the first.
01:36:55.000 Really high profile case for us.
01:36:57.000 Should we ban this stuff?
01:36:59.000 Yeah, yeah.
01:37:00.000 We absolutely need to ban predictive markets from criminal proceedings.
01:37:05.000 I mean, I'm not alleging Judge Graff of this at all.
01:37:07.000 Let me be expressly clear.
01:37:09.000 But say somebody like Judge Graff was in a position and he's looking at the prediction markets and it's saying, we'll be convicted by such and such a date.
01:37:17.000 Well, he easily could, you know, change the date and he could push the proceedings back.
01:37:24.000 I mean, we saw that at the end today where he's kind of like looking at the calendar and, you know, he could just pick a different date.
01:37:30.000 I mean, that's a small way to be corrupt, but, you know, who knows who could benefit from that?
01:37:37.000 I absolutely agree.
01:37:38.000 And calling on our Congress to pass a law immediately as first opportunity, banning prediction markets from any of these like criminal proceedings and then working out from there.
01:37:50.000 I'm sure there's a dozen other use cases in which it would be helpful to the country and for our institutions to ban this crap because it can be gamed, it can be manipulated, it could be the tool of corrupt magistrates in this case or jurors even to game it.
01:38:09.000 For their ends and corrupt ends.
01:38:11.000 And I think it needs to be handled soon.
01:38:14.000 100%.
01:38:15.000 100%.
01:38:16.000 We've been discussing throughout the day because there's been so many breaks.
01:38:19.000 So, what are our takeaways?
01:38:20.000 And I feel that's a big one.
01:38:22.000 I can't really see what the value add is at all for society to have betting markets on a murder trial.
01:38:30.000 And similarly, I feel the duration that this has taken, where these guys are saying, yeah, well, I've got another case.
01:38:38.000 So, you want two weeks, we want four weeks, let's compromise at seven weeks.
01:38:43.000 Before we have a discussion of when the next trial would be, I think a good argument to be made.
01:38:48.000 Let's blow a few billion dollars on our criminal justice thing, build some extra courtrooms, hire a few extra judges, hire extra lawyers, prosecutors, get more going through the system.
01:39:00.000 I want the next time we have a case like this, we should be able to have a verdict within.
01:39:06.000 We should be getting the verdict at this point.
01:39:08.000 We should be getting a sentence at this point.
01:39:10.000 We should not be getting an indictment 51 weeks after Charlie died.
01:39:14.000 No, and here's the thing it was almost like you could see.
01:39:17.000 Kathy Nestor's wheels turning in her head when they're talking about when to schedule the next hearing to come up with a court date.
01:39:23.000 She's like, well, we might have to litigate this and we might file this motion and we might challenge this.
01:39:28.000 And it's like, dear God, like, I mean, this, this, I mean, they, I mean, these people are professionals, right?
01:39:35.000 They get paid lots of money.
01:39:36.000 You know, these are not public defenders.
01:39:38.000 Let's remind everybody of that.
01:39:39.000 There's this rumor going around these guys are just like public defenders.
01:39:42.000 No, these are high caliber, high profile, very experienced.
01:39:48.000 Criminal defendant lawyers.
01:39:50.000 And they are absolutely very skilled at prolonging this stuff and throwing wrenches into the gears.
01:39:57.000 And yes, Tyler Robinson deserves a fair trial.
01:40:00.000 Absolutely.
01:40:01.000 He deserves that as an American, like we all do if we're accused of something.
01:40:05.000 However, the gaming of this system is completely run amok.
01:40:11.000 This judge and judges in general should turn down more of this crap on appeal because it's getting gamed.
01:40:16.000 And so he's having to constantly.
01:40:20.000 Play out in his mind how they're going to potentially game the system to overturn this on appeal.
01:40:25.000 And so he's, you know, in some ways I feel for the judge because he's constantly having to say, I have to have the appearance of fairness in everything I do, give them plenty of time, or else this thing's going to be overturned on appeal.
01:40:40.000 In the meantime, as you guys know, we get this void, this vacuum that gets filled by people that are bad actors, bad faith actors, conspiracists, and, you know, they use this time.
01:40:50.000 To then drift off the system, come up with a YouTube content or whatever.
01:40:55.000 And it's all, none of it is fair to Erica.
01:40:58.000 None of it is fair to Turning Point.
01:40:59.000 None of it's fair to our pursuit of justice for Charlie.
01:41:03.000 Well, Andrew, what we were talking about earlier is they aren't public defenders, but they are being paid by the taxpayers of Utah.
01:41:09.000 And that's something that gets overlooked the longer this goes.
01:41:13.000 Yeah, these taxpayers are footing the bill for this.
01:41:17.000 That's such a great point.
01:41:18.000 They're incentivized to drag this out financially.
01:41:20.000 I mean, I'm not.
01:41:21.000 It was supposed to be a million dollars at first, and now it's up to 10.
01:41:24.000 10 million.
01:41:25.000 It's.
01:41:26.000 This is going to cost Utah over $10 million just to provide a defense for Tyler Robinson.
01:41:32.000 That's obscene.
01:41:33.000 Here's my point.
01:41:34.000 So he does the most heinous act, probably politically, in Utah history.
01:41:40.000 I mean, I don't want to go back all the way to the Mormons.
01:41:41.000 I'm sure some bad stuff happened.
01:41:42.000 But my point is, and then, you know, as a reward for the state of Utah and their taxpayers, they're now on the hook for $10 million to just pay for this guy's defense.
01:41:52.000 So, yeah, expedited trials, limit some of this game playing and the intentional throwing wrenches into the gears of the judicial process.
01:42:04.000 I mean, there's so many reforms that can be made, guys.
01:42:06.000 By the way, here's one for you that nobody talks about.
01:42:08.000 These people that have made a profession of harassing Erica Kirk or me or Blake or Turning Point, like the fact that they can just sit there in the courtroom because they waited however many hours to get these tickets, like, why is it not on a lottery system?
01:42:25.000 Why don't they have some other system where the worst actors are able to get seats in a courtroom and then harass us further on the way out?
01:42:36.000 Because we made a face or we shook our head or whatever they're going to say.
01:42:40.000 So that's another thing that occurs to me.
01:42:42.000 But yeah.
01:42:43.000 Although one of them is actually complaining that you guys ignored him too much that day, which I think.
01:42:51.000 Who's that?
01:42:53.000 I won't even name him because I don't want to give him more attention.
01:42:55.000 But yeah, I think it just speaks to what a lot of these people's real motivations are.
01:43:01.000 They're not titles.
01:43:03.000 Yeah.
01:43:03.000 Narcissists are nothing.
01:43:04.000 It's just pure narcissists.
01:43:05.000 We're here for justice, but mad.
01:43:08.000 Yeah.
01:43:08.000 Just.
01:43:09.000 No, no, they're not good faith actors.
01:43:12.000 They've proven themselves to be among the lowest at a low.
01:43:16.000 And yeah, I've got zero attention for them.
01:43:18.000 I've got zero compassion.
01:43:20.000 I've got zero goodwill to try and understand where they're coming from, frankly, because, you know, listen, I can understand people having questions.
01:43:28.000 Okay, fine.
01:43:29.000 Have some questions.
01:43:30.000 Okay, you challenge the official narrative.
01:43:32.000 Okay.
01:43:32.000 To turn any of that into the character assassination smear campaign against Erica Kirk that they've done and that they seem to, to, to, find joy in some sick satisfaction and that's when it turns into an evil thing.
01:43:46.000 And because of that, I mean as a matter of fact, I think any of these people that are engaging in this like just disgusting behavior frankly shouldn't be allowed in that courtroom to harass further.
01:43:56.000 We know their motivation, but you know I digress.
01:44:00.000 I don't always get my way, but you know thinking out loud here.
01:44:05.000 Well, I don't know if you saw that TPSA front lines did catch a big group of high school and college Turning Point chapter students supporting outside the courtroom.
01:44:14.000 Did you guys see any of that on your way out?
01:44:17.000 Yeah, we saw a bunch of them holding signs.
01:44:19.000 I mean, I kind of kept my head down.
01:44:21.000 You know, I, you know, candidly, it was like the one moment I was like, I just need to get straight in the car.
01:44:27.000 And, you know, I think the security was pretty, pretty, you know, had an appropriate sense of urgency in that moment.
01:44:36.000 But yeah, we kind of just headed out.
01:44:37.000 But I did catch out of the corner of my eye the sign supporting Erica, which was awesome.
01:44:41.000 And I think I saw Caleb Chokut or something out there.
01:44:45.000 I don't know.
01:44:45.000 If I was, my eyes were playing tricks on me, but he was the chapter president, obviously, of UBU when Charlie was killed.
01:44:52.000 But great, great guy.
01:44:54.000 And that was really sweet to see.
01:44:56.000 So I was glad to see that the good guys had a showing and came out and support Erica and Justice for Charlie.
01:45:04.000 So God bless them for that.
01:45:06.000 All right.
01:45:06.000 Well, we've been going.
01:45:09.000 Yeah.
01:45:10.000 It's been a long day.
01:45:11.000 It's been a long day for everyone following this trial.
01:45:13.000 Nine hours of testimony.
01:45:17.000 Thank you guys for holding it down.
01:45:18.000 Of course.
01:45:19.000 Of course.
01:45:20.000 But before we let the audience go, Andrew, any final thoughts on.
01:45:25.000 The day and looking ahead?
01:45:29.000 No, I just, you know, I would just say being in there makes me, it kind of ripped my heart out for Erica in a totally new way.
01:45:37.000 Obviously, I feel like I've been so concerned about her and just this whole process.
01:45:43.000 And, you know, but she's strong and I kind of always just, you know, Erica's strong and all that stuff.
01:45:48.000 Being in that courtroom is a whole nother deal, man.
01:45:50.000 It's a whole, it's like, it's just in your face.
01:45:53.000 And, you know, Tyler Robinson's right in front of you.
01:45:57.000 So just, So, the audience, just pray for Erica, pray for Turning Point, just cover everybody in prayers.
01:46:03.000 We need it, and it really makes a difference.
01:46:06.000 It really does.
01:46:07.000 And knowing people are praying for us is, it's like, I can't explain it to people, but I feel like my whole Christian life, people be like, I'm praying for you, and it kind of like rolled off me.
01:46:17.000 I'm telling you, when somebody says they're praying for us, it means so much, and it really hits hard.
01:46:22.000 And so, yeah, that's what I'd say.
01:46:25.000 Just pray for Erica.
01:46:26.000 Pray for Erica.
01:46:27.000 I think that's a good piece of advice to end on.
01:46:31.000 Pray for Erica.
01:46:32.000 Pray for justice.
01:46:34.000 Be glad that today we saw the wheel of justice grinds very, very slowly, but it does grind very, very fine, as a friend of mine reminded me today.
01:46:46.000 And so thanks for joining us, Andrew.
01:46:49.000 Thanks for co piloting today, Danny.
01:46:53.000 Thanks to everyone who followed this, who's followed every day of the hearing.
01:46:58.000 We'll be doing the normal show again tomorrow.
01:47:00.000 Obviously, tune in next week.
01:47:02.000 We've got a lot of stuff to remember.
01:47:04.000 Charlie on the one year anniversary and to keep pushing his mission forward because we're focused on the trial today, but a lot of stuff is still going on.
01:47:16.000 The mission of Turning Point USA continues, the mission of faith revival, the mission of national values, the conservative values that made America so great, all of that continues as well.
01:47:29.000 So, honoring Charlie continues, getting justice for Charlie continues.
01:47:34.000 The work of saving this country continues as well.
01:47:38.000 And we're grateful to everyone who's been inspired by Charlie, who's joined us in this movement.
01:47:44.000 Thank you to everyone who joined us today.
01:47:46.000 And anything else, Danny?
01:47:48.000 No.
01:47:48.000 Justice for Charlie.
01:47:49.000 We'll see you guys tomorrow.
01:47:50.000 Justice for Charlie.
01:47:51.000 We'll see all of you very soon.
01:47:52.000 We'll see you tomorrow.
01:47:57.000 For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.