00:00:14.000That is members.charlikirk.com to get involved and to be a member and to support the program and ask us questions directly and to listen to all episodes advertiser-free.
00:00:50.000We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
00:01:02.000Noble 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.
00:01:12.000Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at noblegoldinvestments.com.
00:01:46.000They say they're upholding the law, but a close examination reveals politics of the very worst kind meant to influence the 2024 election.
00:01:56.000Investigations unprecedented in American history, part of a broader attempt to silence and penalize a president who challenged the status quo.
00:02:05.000You have four or five different prosecutions in different form on different highly aggressive theories and applications of the law.
00:02:17.000On the eve of an election of the president of the United States, can there be any doubt that there's a sentiment of this is get Trump.
00:02:27.000These prosecutions against President Trump, both the criminal prosecution along with the civil fraud prosecution, is blatant election interference.
00:02:38.000It's Democrat lawfare to take out President Trump.
00:02:41.000They fear that they can't beat Trump on November 5th, 2024.
00:02:46.000And so they just want to throw him in prison for the rest of his life.
00:02:50.000Revealing the depth of four politically motivated prosecutions.
00:02:54.000Chasing Trump, political prosecutions, justice gone wrong.
00:03:02.000Yeah, thank you for having me on, Charlie.
00:03:03.000Chasing Trump is produced by the good people at American Greatness.
00:03:09.000And I was pleased to volunteer my time to participate on this important documentary because it shows this is Democrat lawfare and election interference driven by Biden and his White House counsel and his Justice Department to take out Trump on many different fronts.
00:03:26.000They have four unprecedented criminal indictments.
00:03:29.000The first one of those starts on Monday.
00:03:32.000Sorry, respondent Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg is bringing an unprecedented indictment against Trump.
00:03:40.000A trial starts on Monday for the non-felony of a businessman settling a nuisance claim.
00:03:46.000And these Democrat operatives have transformed this, what would be at best, time-barred bookkeeping misdemeanors from seven years ago.
00:03:57.000Somehow they've turned these into felony charges against Trump, like 34 felony charges that the prior Manhattan DA Cy Vance, the Manhattan U.S. Attorney, the Federal Election Commission, and Alvin Bragg himself declined to prosecute until Matthew Colangelo got deployed from the Biden Justice Department, a senior Biden Justice Department political appointee to resurrect this zombie case against Trump that starts on Monday.
00:04:24.000And that's just one of the four cases.
00:04:26.000You also have Alvin, you also have Jack Smith, I'm sorry, charging President Trump down in Florida for the former president having his presidential records in the office of former president, which is allowed by the Presidential Records Act.
00:04:41.000At the same time, they gave Biden a pass for his clear espionage from when he was the vice president and even a senator where he made $8 million on his book advance when he intentionally gave classified records to his ghostwriter.
00:04:57.000And not a damn thing happened to Biden for clear espionage, yet they're going after Trump for presidential records he's allowed to have.
00:05:05.000You also have two prosecutors going after Trump, Fannie Willis down in Georgia, Fulton County, Georgia, in Atlanta, and Jack Smith going after Trump for objecting to a presidential election, which is allowed by the Electoral Count Act of 1887.
00:06:15.000I mean, you're dealing with a biased, a George Soros-funded Manhattan DA, Matthew Colangelo being deployed from the Biden Justice Department.
00:06:24.000This Democrat Manhattan Judge Juan Mershon donated to Biden versus Trump in 2020.
00:06:31.000Judge Juan Mershon donated to another anti-Trump group.
00:06:35.000His adult daughter, Lauren Michon, is a leading Democrat consultant who's consulted for Biden and Kamala Harris and many Democrats.
00:06:44.000She has a financial stake in this criminal trial starting on Monday over which her father is presiding.
00:06:52.000She's fundraising off of this criminal trial, these criminal proceedings.
00:06:57.000And Judge Juan Murshon refuses to recuse in violation of New York law.
00:07:03.000And when Trump raises this issue in a motion to recuse and raises this publicly, this Judge Juan Mershon responds by saying that Trump is somehow making violent threats against Judge Mershon and his adult daughter.
00:07:18.000Apparently, when you raise evidence of a judge's bias, that somehow is a violent threat.
00:07:23.000And this Judge Mershon has illegally, unconstitutionally gagged President Trump, where he cannot talk about Matthew Colangelo getting sent from the Biden Justice Department to go after Trump with this unprecedented indictment of a former president who happens to be the leading presidential candidate.
00:07:40.000President Trump can't talk about Lauren Mershon and how she's making money off of her dad's trial of President Trump.
00:07:49.000There's a reason these Democrats waited 30 months to bring these four different indictments in four different places.
00:07:56.000And in three of these places, New York, D.C., and Atlanta, you have these Democrat judges, these Democrat prosecutors, these Democrats, other attorneys, these Democrat witnesses, and these Democrat hellholes.
00:08:09.000There's no chance that Trump is going to get a fair trial anywhere.
00:08:33.000It would be very hard because on the federal case with Jack Smith on January 6th, remember, it is not a crime to object to a presidential election.
00:08:43.000It's allowed by the Electoral Count Act of 1887.
00:08:46.000Democrats objected to Republican wins in 1968, 2000, 2004, 2016.
00:08:53.000You don't see Al Gore and John Kerry and Hillary Clinton in prison.
00:08:57.000You also have a First Amendment right to object.
00:09:00.000And President Trump has raised the issue of presidential immunity in that case.
00:09:05.000If you're going to charge President Trump, if Jack Smith is going to charge President Trump for contemplating firing his acting attorney general, that is clearly a presidential act.
00:09:17.000That is clearly covered by presidential immunity.
00:09:20.000So the Supreme Court is going to have to decide that case.
00:09:23.000There's going to be oral arguments later this month on April 25th.
00:09:27.000I presume the Supreme Court's going to rule on presidential immunity by the end of June.
00:09:33.000And then I presume the Supreme Court's going to hold that the presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for their official acts, just like federal judges, just like members of Congress.
00:09:43.000The case will get remanded to Judge Chucken, this Obama judge in D.C., and she'll have a mini trial on what is Jack Smith alleging that's within President Trump's presidential powers that are immune from prosecution versus what did Trump do in his personal capacity that are not.
00:09:59.000If that happens, it will be very difficult for Jack Smith to try Trump for January 6th in D.C.
00:10:05.000Now, this Mar-a-Lago case for the presidential records where Garland and Jack Smith have charged Trump with espionage while Garland gave Biden a pass for Biden's clear espionage when Trump is protected by the Presidential Records Act.
00:10:21.000It doesn't look likely that that case will get to trial because there are so many pretrial issues.
00:10:26.000But at least in Florida, we know with Judge Eileen Cannon that she's a fair judge.
00:10:31.000She's going to ensure that Trump gets a fair trial in Florida.
00:10:35.000And she's not going to be a rubber stamp for Trump.
00:10:38.000She's denied many of Trump's motions, but she's going to do what any judge is supposed to do, which is to protect the criminal defendant's constitutional rights and to make sure he gets a fair trial.
00:10:51.000Hey there, investing feels overwhelming right now, doesn't it?
00:12:25.000Well, if they were smart, they would, because at the Article III project, we've done over 3,000 media hits in the last nearly two years, including many times on your show.
00:12:35.000And we've helped change the politics of this, where these Democrats thought they were going to bring these indictments and just take out Trump.
00:12:48.000They tried the same thing during the Kavanaugh confirmation, where I was the chief counsel for nominations on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
00:12:54.000They thought they would just bring six bogus allegations against Kavanaugh, and it would be too messy for Republicans who are cowards and don't have a spine.
00:13:03.000And Republicans would just throw Kavanaugh overboard.
00:13:06.000And I think they thought the same thing here, that Republicans would just throw Trump overboard.
00:13:14.000It took a while for many of these Republicans to get on board.
00:13:17.000It was pretty lonely out there for six months or so, but they got on board, and this is backfiring badly.
00:13:23.000We are taking, we are turning lemons into lemonade, and we are going to make sure that these Democrat prosecutors and these Democrat judges and these Democrat hillholes in New York, D.C., and Atlanta understand that the American people, not Democrat operatives, get to choose the president of the United States on November 5th, 2024.
00:13:43.000So the other one, Mike, that we can't forget about is the confiscation of Donald Trump's business assets.
00:13:48.000And there was all this drama about posting bond.
00:13:54.000What is the status of that as they're trying to deprive Trump of his cash and his freedom?
00:13:58.000This is truly outrageous and scary and dangerous, what New York Attorney General Tish James is doing to Trump, because this is so much bigger than Trump.
00:14:09.000They went after Trump for the non-fraud of a businessman paying back sophisticated Wall Street banks in full on time as agreed with interest.
00:14:20.000They rigged the case so it was front of this Democrat Manhattan judge, Arthur Ingeron, a total partisan clown.
00:14:27.000And they came up with like this $500 billion damages award when all the banks got paid back in full.
00:14:35.000All the banks are happy and all the banks would gladly do business with Trump going forward.
00:14:40.000No one was defrauded, but Tish James used this to go after Trump.
00:14:44.000They got this outrageously large damages award, unconstitutionally punitive damages award.
00:14:53.000In order for Trump to file an appeal, to pursue an appeal on this clearly illegal, clearly unconstitutional judgment on many different fronts, they made Trump put up this bond, which was just an outrageously high bonds.
00:15:10.000The appellate court reduced the bond, but it's still too high.
00:15:13.000Trump was able to get the assets to come up with this bond.
00:15:17.000And now Tish James is saying that's not good enough.
00:15:20.000She's going to apparently try to go take his property from him.
00:15:26.000And again, this is so much bigger than Trump, because if they can do this to a billionaire, former and likely future president, just imagine what they can do to the rest of us.
00:15:36.000Why would any person, why would any businessman want to invest in New York if you have these partisan Democrat prosecutors and judges who can bring third world Marxist tactics and just take away your property overnight without due process, without fair hearing, without following the Constitution?
00:16:15.000I just volunteered to appear in this thing, but it's American Greatness, the good people at American Greatness who are producing and getting out this documentary chasing Trump about this Democrat lawfare and election interference.
00:18:14.000There's the one part where you got the court, and that part was certainly abused relative to spying on President Trump's campaign and all the things that we know that come up with Strzok and Page and all the stuff that we learned about a few years ago.
00:18:26.000There's the other part of FISA, which is the 702 database.
00:18:30.000And this is where they surveil foreigners.
00:18:32.000They collect all this information, but inevitably pick up lots of Americans in this, what I call this giant haystack of information in that data.
00:18:39.000And there are hundreds of thousands of searches done on that database each year on Americans using your phone number, your name, or your email address.
00:18:50.000And what we're saying is the FBI that spied on a presidential campaign, the FBI that said if you're a parent at a school board meeting, you need to be investigating.
00:18:57.000The FBI that said if you're a pro-life Catholic, you're an extremist.
00:19:01.000And maybe most important, Charlie, the FBI that said we're going to retaliate against and did retaliate against whistleblowers who came and talked to our committee about those issues.
00:19:10.000We don't think that FBI should be able to police themselves, particularly with all those abuses.
00:19:15.000So we're saying you got to do what our Constitution and our great system has done for 200 plus years.
00:19:48.000And to me, that is the fundamental fight.
00:19:50.000And if it doesn't get back in the bill, I ain't voting for the bill because I think we have to have this fundamental constitutional protection that has served our country so well for so long.
00:20:00.000So help me understand because there was a split and I'm getting kind of two different versions of the story from people that I really respect, like you and other members that tried to block this yesterday.
00:20:11.000What was the attempt to block yesterday by, you know, Eli Crane and Matt Gates, where they said they wanted to kill the renewal.
00:20:20.000I think there was a frustration with what they saw was like the pressure and the push against the amendment I just described.
00:20:28.000I think there was a frustration with that.
00:20:29.000There was also another amendment that we had in the bill that came out of the committee that wasn't part of the rule package and is not being allowed to be offered to the base text as an amendment.
00:20:42.000I think there was some concern about that.
00:20:44.000And then frankly, I think there was some concern about the length of time for this reauthorization for a five-year time frame.
00:20:52.000So I think those were the concerns that the people voted against the rule.
00:20:54.000I voted for the rule because I am focused on one thing, winning this warrant requirement.
00:21:00.000This to me is the most important thing.
00:21:05.000The people on the other side say, oh, no, no, this is a U.S. person query.
00:21:10.000Well, I tell folks, query is a fancy name for search.
00:21:13.000And you're not allowed under our system to just search Americans' information without first getting a warrant from a separate and equal branch of the government, the judicial branch.
00:21:23.000So particularly, here's the other thing, Charlie.
00:21:25.000The Inspector General reported that 278,000 times the FBI didn't follow their own rules and they illegally searched, didn't follow the procedures in place at the FBI, and they searched this database on U.S. on American citizens.
00:21:40.000So if the FBI, they didn't follow their rules before, if you just put new regulations and requirements on them, are they really going to follow them now?
00:21:49.000That's why, again, we think you need this warrant requirement.
00:21:53.000So can you talk about the bipartisan element here?
00:21:57.000Because it seems as if there are some Democrats that are willing to play ball on this.
00:22:03.000Do you anticipate that this could be some bipartisan unity to actually fix FISA?
00:22:09.000And what are the legislative prospects?
00:22:11.000I mean, we kind of see a strange coalition, Freedom Caucus plus squad, and then more, let's just say, moderate uniparty members in both parties.
00:22:21.000No, it's the dynamics are there because there's been abuses on both sides.
00:22:25.000That 278,000 number I gave you of illegal queries that were done to the database by the FBI.
00:22:32.000Those included people who were at the January 6th protest.
00:22:35.000Those included people who were part of Black Lives Matter in the summer of 2020 at the protests and riots around the country there too.
00:22:42.000So there were 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign that were illegally searched.
00:22:47.000So that's why you have the bipartisan element, and that's why it came out of the committee.
00:22:52.000You know, our committee charter, it's pretty partisan in the Judiciary Committee.
00:22:57.000But this bill came out of the committee with a 35 to 2 vote.
00:23:01.000Yeah, Jerry Nadler and Jim Jordan on the same page because we understand that the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment and the Constitution all need to be protected.
00:23:13.000So here's the one question they won't answer too.
00:23:16.000Because in our warrant requirement, we have an exception.
00:23:18.000If there's an emergency situation, if there's an imminent threat to the security of our country, you can proceed with the search of the database.
00:23:27.000But short of that, you got to go get a warrant.
00:23:30.000We know that, again, there's a couple hundred thousand times a year that they search this database on U.S. on U.S. persons.
00:23:37.000So I asked the question, I said, how many of those several hundred thousand searches aren't covered under the exception in our warrant requirement amendment?
00:23:47.000And no one will give me an answer, which should scare us because if it's a big number, that should really frighten us.
00:23:54.000And if it's a small number, what's the big deal?
00:23:56.000If it's just a few that aren't in this emergency situation, what's the big deal?
00:24:01.000But no one will answer that fundamental question, which again, I think raises the concern why we really need it in the first place.
00:24:08.000I might have missed this, Congressman, in all the macro discussion I've had with members, but a question we're getting from our audience: what is the time horizon here?
00:24:17.000Wouldn't it be smart to say, okay, we don't trust you at all.
00:24:22.000You guys get six months and then come back again.
00:24:25.000This 10-year horizon, it just, it is a gift to the intelligence and the administrative state.
00:24:32.000What are we talking about as far as timing?
00:24:34.000That right now, what's being proposed is to take it from a five-year reauthorization of the 702 program that we've been talking about to a simple two to a shorter two-year time or two-year reauthorization time period.
00:25:07.000You have the law enforcement, the government would love to just be able to go look through your stuff.
00:25:14.000But that's not how we operate in this country.
00:25:16.000And it started right from the beginning when they said you shouldn't be able to search Americans' papers and their homes.
00:25:22.000You shouldn't be able to do that without going to a separate branch of government and showing probable cause for a warrant.
00:25:30.000That is the protection we've always had in this country.
00:25:33.000We think it most definitely should apply here.
00:25:36.000And the FBI, particularly in light of their history, the context we're in now, particularly we need it now.
00:25:42.000So, Congressman, your colleagues that are pushing for this with almost no alterations, no reforms, I got to be honest, what is their contention here?
00:25:54.000It is remarkable to me that they say, well, you know, everything's fine.
00:25:57.000We give the FBI exactly what they want.
00:26:00.000Yeah, you'll hear that this would slow things down.
00:26:03.000And by slowing things down, we may not be able to stop a terrorist threat or whatever.
00:26:07.000But I sat in the skip for three and a half hours with the intelligence committee members, with the speaker of the house and judiciary committee members, and people from the intelligence agencies.
00:26:19.000We sat down there in the skip and they gave us the presentation.
00:26:23.000And I'll be honest, nothing in that presentation, nothing in that discussion for three and a half hours told me that we should move away from what's always happened in this country.
00:26:32.000You're going to look at Americans' information.
00:26:41.000There are some people who are in the intelligence community, even in the Trump administration, who say, no, no, you don't want to go with this warrant requirement.
00:26:48.000And then there are others who say, yeah, you do.
00:26:54.000But it seems to me when there's tension, you err on the side of enforcing the, you know, respecting the Constitution and doing what the Constitution has always done, protect Americans' liberties by getting a warrant.
00:27:06.000Well, and then just also, I mean, our base field, I know you do too, Congressman, is that the abuse of FISA is never held accountable.
00:27:14.000And we don't even know the full extent of all the abuse.
00:27:17.000I mean, regardless of people's opinion of Snowden, he did reveal that there was mass lying and abuses by the national security apparatus and national security state.
00:27:27.000So, if you were to make a prediction, which is always a dangerous thing in politics, what do you think we end up with?
00:27:32.000Do we end up with some serious reform, something meaningful?
00:27:36.000I think there's some, you know, some good reform in the base tax, but not enough to get the vote without the warrant for me.
00:27:43.000And I think for a lot of my colleagues, I do feel like every time there's been a debate on this internally and externally, our side is picking up votes, our side meaning the pro-warrant requirement being in the legislation.
00:28:08.000There are, you know, some of the reforms that are in there enhance the penalties for people who violate the other part of FISA, like what we had with Strzzok and Page and the Crystal Steel and Dossier and all the stuff they did to President Trump's campaign.
00:28:20.000But again, I don't think that's enough without the warrant requirement in the 702 program, as I said now several times, to protect our fundamental liberties like we're supposed to under our Constitution.
00:28:32.000Congressman, I want to encourage you to really hold the line on this.
00:28:35.000Our audience is really wanting a win, and I think this one is winnable.
00:28:39.000We have Democrats that are willing to play ball on this, and just for your colleagues that say, oh, it's going to slow down the process, it's not about the FBI, doesn't care about speed, they care about accountability, and they don't want to have to go in front of a judge to explain themselves.
00:30:18.000The abortion thing is like the number one story in the country.
00:30:22.000But up there is also our Nebraska coverage.
00:30:27.000There's a new story with the New York Times that published this morning as follows: which is Nebraska was minding its business until Charlie Kirk came along.
00:30:39.000Now, I wanted to ask Mike Davis this, but we are running out of time.
00:30:43.000Mike Davis was critical to the Kavanaugh and the Gorsuch hearing.
00:30:46.000And as you might remember, in the Kavanaugh and the Gorsuch hearing, we lifted the filibuster in the Senate.
00:30:54.000Nebraska might have to do the same so that Nebraska can get to go to winner take all.
00:31:01.000And you could tell by the press's reaction, my favorite quote in this New York Times podcast is when the gentleman by the name of, I think his name's Estead, Goes through all the states and plays tape from here, the Charlie Kirk show.
00:31:21.000And he says, You know, Charlie's not wrong about Omaha being a deciding electoral vote.
00:31:28.000And it's just the power of this audience.
00:31:30.000I just want you to know that the action items that we put in front of you are having real and tangible impact, and you need to have that posture.
00:31:39.000It has to be an attitude of not sitting on the sidelines and just hoping that things will get better.
00:31:44.000Making those calls, showing up to rallies, running for precinct committeemen, running for state party chair, running for state representative, being on the tip of the spear.
00:31:53.000This show is about action, action, action, which is always what I wanted this program to be, very similar to Steve Bannon's great show on War Room.
00:32:02.000And there's plenty of talk shows out there.
00:32:09.000Republican operatives circulating Tuesday at the Kirk rally seemed smitten with the idea that they might have an easier passage than securing 33 votes needed to beat a pledge Democrat filibuster.
00:32:19.000The plan being discussed would suspend the legislature's rules that would allow a minority-led filibuster.
00:32:26.000It would take 30 votes to suspend legislative rules.
00:32:28.000Doing so means winner-take-all could pass the 25 votes in Pillan signature.
00:32:32.000The best argument, the best argument is Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Amy, Coney Barrett.
00:32:39.000We achieved Supreme Court justices for a generation because we were willing to suspend a filibuster in the United States Senate.
00:32:47.000Pillan has discussed calling senators back to Lincoln to pass property tax relief if they cannot coalesce around a tax package.
00:32:52.000So they'll definitely come in back for taxes, which is a good thing, which means that they're going to be in Lincoln in a post-session anyway.