The Charlie Kirk Show - Why Did Pelosi Reject Trump's Troop Offer on J6? With Kash Patel

00:00:00.000 Today on the Charlie Kirk Show, Kash Patel joins us.

00:00:00.000 Hey, everybody.

00:00:03.000 Update on John Durham.

00:00:05.000 We talk about the expansion of the United States security apparatus and why did Nancy Pelosi deny troop support assistance on January 6th or January 5th, I should say.

00:00:16.000 Kash Patel is here.

00:00:18.000 His website is fightwithcash.com.

00:00:20.000 Email me directly, freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:00:22.000 And if you want to support our show, you can do so at charliekirk.com/slash support.

00:00:26.000 If our show has helped you, if you've been blessed by our show in any way whatsoever, go to charliekirk.com/slash support and please consider getting behind us.

00:00:35.000 We'd be greatly appreciative.

00:00:36.000 Get involved with Turning Point USA, where we're playing offense with a sense of urgency to win the American culture war, starting high school chapters, starting college chapters, communicating the truths of the United States Constitution and American history to future generations.

00:00:51.000 Tpusa.com.

00:00:53.000 Tpusa.com buckle up everybody, here we go.

00:00:57.000 Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.

00:00:59.000 Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.

00:01:01.000 I want you to know.

00:01:01.000 We are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.

00:01:04.000 Charlie Kirk's running the White House.

00:01:06.000 Folks, I want to thank Charlie.

00:01:08.000 He's an incredible guy.

00:01:09.000 His spirit, his love of this country.

00:01:11.000 He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.

00:01:16.000 Turning point.

00:01:18.000 We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.

00:01:27.000 That's why we are here, brought to you by the loan experts I trust, Andrew and Toddl at Sierra Pacific mortgage at Andrewandtodd.com.

00:01:39.000 For the record, the new Matrix is terrible and the Wachowski brothers are now transgender. 1.00

00:01:47.000 The whole thing's messed up. 0.54

00:01:48.000 Wachowski Wachowski Wannakata Tubakowski Waja Dubakowski, whatever they are trans. 0.80

00:01:54.000 Now the new Matrix?

00:01:56.000 No good, I tried.

00:01:58.000 I was so excited.

00:02:00.000 Erica will tell you I was I.

00:02:02.000 I, I planned my whole day around it.

00:02:04.000 I got some sort of subscription to HBO max for it, whatever the heck that is, and it was awful.

00:02:13.000 I mean just everything about it.

00:02:15.000 And if you, if you go a level deeper, there's a great article on the American mind by Spencer, Clavin Clavin, who's really good.

00:02:21.000 He agreed it was terrible.

00:02:23.000 And, by the way, I say this as someone who is a serious Matrix fan of One Two, Three that grew up with.

00:02:28.000 The Matrix is so good and the first the Matrix starts.

00:02:35.000 I can't remember the first scene actually, but the actually I yeah, I don't want to spoil it.

00:02:40.000 You know what.

00:02:41.000 Honestly, if I spoil it for you it doesn't really matter because it's not that good.

00:02:43.000 But the whole thing is really kind of this idea that you shouldn't be stuck in a binary reality if you go into the dialogue and all this.

00:02:51.000 Why is that?

00:02:52.000 Well, it's because you got two men that are trying to cope with their serious mental problems because they're women. 0.94

00:02:58.000 Now, that's basically what the whole movie is about, even though it comes down to a binary choice, either take the blue pill or the red pill.

00:03:06.000 Can't, can't escape that.

00:03:09.000 I will say the best part of the movie and I I am a fan of, Of His, even though he's a left-winger, Neil Patrick Harris, he's a phenomenal actor.

00:03:16.000 I wish he wasn't.

00:03:17.000 I wish he was bad.

00:03:19.000 He's actually rather entertaining.

00:03:20.000 Okay, enough of that.

00:03:21.000 I had to subject Kash Patel to my Epert and Roper.

00:03:27.000 Those are the two guys that used it for my movie analysis.

00:03:29.000 All right, Cash, how are you doing, man?

00:03:32.000 I'm great, Charlie.

00:03:33.000 That was a pretty good movie review.

00:03:34.000 I don't need those Epert and Roper guys anymore.

00:03:36.000 There you go.

00:03:37.000 And I want to just first say you're a great American and it's fightwithcash.com.

00:03:37.000 Thank you.

00:03:43.000 Is that right?

00:03:44.000 Yeah, with a K.

00:03:45.000 Yeah, man.

00:03:45.000 Cool.

00:03:46.000 Very good.

00:03:46.000 Fightforcash.com with a K.

00:03:49.000 Okay.

00:03:50.000 Cash, so you went on Sean Hannity's program, the great Sean Hannity, last week, I'm not mistaken, and broke some serious news.

00:03:57.000 Please share it with our audience.

00:03:59.000 Yeah, thanks for having me.

00:04:00.000 Look, we've been trying to get part of service is to go out and tell the American people what you did when you were serving, especially if the actions of you and your and your affiliates were called into question.

00:04:10.000 So what do we do?

00:04:11.000 We've been trying for a year to get out the facts that President Trump authorized 10 to 20,000 National Guards men and women two days before the January 6th First Amendment movements across the country.

00:04:25.000 And why is that important to me as a former chief of staff for the Department of Defense?

00:04:29.000 Because we, the military, cannot move National Guard troops without a presidential authorization.

00:04:36.000 Step one.

00:04:37.000 Step two, the law mandates, even if you get that authorization, unless there is a request by the mayor, by a federal law enforcement agency, i.e., the Capitol Police, that they need assistance from the National Guard, even though you have a presidential authorization, you cannot, by law, employ and deploy the National Guard.

00:04:57.000 And after we got it from President Trump on January, I think it was the 4th, it was two days before, in the Oval Office with the SECDAF, myself, and the chairman and others.

00:05:07.000 We went to Mayor Bowser, who controls Washington, D.C. She's essentially the governor. 0.98

00:05:13.000 She has a right to make that request.

00:05:15.000 We went to the head of the Capitol Police and said, Look, we don't have the line on the domestic intelligence.

00:05:21.000 It's not our job.

00:05:22.000 But the president gave us authorization for 10 to 20,000 troops.

00:05:26.000 Do you want any?

00:05:27.000 Do you want more than the 250 that we've already given you and that you requested?

00:05:32.000 And Mayor Bowser, in writing, and that letter is available in the DOD Inspector General report that was created by Biden's DOD, flat out refused, said, absolutely not.

00:05:42.000 We don't want any more.

00:05:44.000 The United States Capitol Police told the Secretary of the Army, who represents the National Guard posture: no, we also don't want your National Guard here on the Capitol grounds or around it or assisting in traffic matters, which is basically their job.

00:05:59.000 And so January 6th happens, and then what happens?

00:06:03.000 The world saw it.

00:06:04.000 And then everybody in Capitol Hill started calling us and saying, where's the uniformed military?

00:06:09.000 Well, the National Guard, for most of your audience who might not know, is they're doctors, they're lawyers, they're teachers, they're cops.

00:06:18.000 They're people in our communities.

00:06:19.000 They're not everyday uniformed officers.

00:06:21.000 We have to go get them, pull them out of their daily lives, move them into the region, employ them, deploy them, train them up, kit them out, give them authorizations and instructions, and then move them out. 0.98

00:06:31.000 People think that like we have these guys sitting around on buses to just deploy at the drop of a hat.

00:06:36.000 And we moved expeditiously as the Biden DOD found out.

00:06:39.000 The Biden Inspector General, excuse me, found the Trump administration did not delay or obstruct its National Guard response on January 6th, which to me says it all.

00:06:50.000 And so where does the Nancy Pelosi kind of component play into this, right?

00:06:55.000 So can you just unpack?

00:06:57.000 Because there's this narrative that Pelosi rejected potential assistance, Bowser.

00:07:03.000 And I mean, so can you just kind of map out all the different dynamics here?

00:07:07.000 So we're going to, we're talking about D.C. Let's just talk about Washington, D.C.

00:07:07.000 Sure, sure.

00:07:12.000 So if we were talking about New York, we'd go to the governor of New York.

00:07:15.000 But since we're talking about Washington, D.C., and there is no governor, there's only a mayor, it's Mayor Bowser who runs the show and whose request we need for National Guard under the law.

00:07:23.000 Separately, we are talking about the United States Capitol, which is a function that's supposed to be protected by law enforcement, but sometimes law enforcement needs assistance.

00:07:32.000 So they, the United States Capitol Police, whose chain of command reports to the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, would have had conversations that we had with them and saying, DOD came over to us.

00:07:45.000 They've said we've got 10 to 20,000 National Guards, but we, the Capitol Police, have to make a request.

00:07:50.000 Does our chain of command support that?

00:07:52.000 And what we were told in writing and in direct communications with the Secretary of the Army and others, no, we don't.

00:08:00.000 So we could not employ these folks ahead of time as we had asked them to do so.

00:08:07.000 Yeah, I mean, it's an extraordinary revelation.

00:08:09.000 And it does beg the question, and this is speculation.

00:08:13.000 Do you think they wanted there to be a thin force that day?

00:08:17.000 I mean, that's the question, right?

00:08:20.000 Did they want it to be intentionally sparringly staffed?

00:08:26.000 Yeah, I mean, look, here's the thing about that.

00:08:29.000 You know, unfortunately, there probably are one or two folks out there who would want some kind of criminality, some kind of riot to occur, and, you know, unfortunately, some tragic incidents such as deaths to occur.

00:08:40.000 And it could have all been prevented.

00:08:41.000 How?

00:08:42.000 You don't even need the military.

00:08:44.000 It's a law enforcement function.

00:08:45.000 Chris Ray and the FBI and the Department of Justice, who are the lead government agency for the whole January 6th period, could have put a thousand FBI agents around the Capitol.

00:08:55.000 You know what else they could have done?

00:08:57.000 You've seen it in DC, the no-climb black fence that you can't get over.

00:09:01.000 They could have fortified the place and built a perimeter fencing around the United States Capitol, and then no one could have gotten anywhere.

00:09:07.000 They didn't do either.

00:09:09.000 I, at the Department of Defense, went out in the middle of the night, bought no climb fencing, and had my National Guard put it up on the night of January 6th because no one else would step up to the plate and do it.

00:09:20.000 So these are things that they could have proactively done.

00:09:23.000 And this is the best example I think that you and so many others in America can relate to.

00:09:28.000 The Dunkin' Donuts and Starbucks around the United States Capitol had been boarded up for a week.

00:09:33.000 Are we to believe that they had better intelligence than the Federal Bureau of Investigation? 0.94

00:09:38.000 It's just ludicrous.

00:09:40.000 And yeah, and it really does beg the question, was this an intelligence failure or an intelligence operation?

00:09:46.000 And, you know, there's increasing evidence with Ray Epps and the revolver.news stories and the lack of the justice towards the pipe bomb, you know, that there's this is this is an unfolding drama that the other side is telling a completely different story intentionally.

00:10:04.000 And your firsthand perspective from the Department of Defense is critical to this because President Trump's instincts were, no, let's deploy as many people as we possibly can to protect the entire city of D.C.

00:10:18.000 I mean, and I've been, I'm into the Capitol many times, so have you.

00:10:22.000 I was shocked that on that day it was so thinly staffed.

00:10:28.000 Not to mention the people that were staffed there, they were propelling flash bang grenades into the crowds, almost trying to provoke them and agitate them.

00:10:38.000 It's very suspicious.

00:10:42.000 I believe in being healthy and staying active, whether that means working out or playing sports, the last thing I want to be held back in any way, I'm sure you feel the same.

00:10:49.000 So when aches and pains start to creep in, what do you have to keep them from taking you out of the game?

00:10:53.000 Charlie Kirk here, if you haven't tried Relief Factor, I highly recommend that you do.

00:10:57.000 I've seen firsthand what it can do, and I've heard even more stories from satisfied customers about how Relief Factor helped their body fight off aches and pains.

00:11:04.000 That seems a worthy try to me.

00:11:06.000 About 70% of the more than half a million people who have tried Relief Factor end up ordering more, and that's because it works for them the way it worked for me.

00:11:12.000 Isn't it time for you to get out of pain?

00:11:14.000 ReliefFactor at relieffactor.com is your first step to becoming pain-free and just might be to order the three-week quick start for the discounted price of only $19.95.

00:11:22.000 Just go to relieffactor.com or call 800 for Relief to find out more about this offer.

00:11:27.000 Feel the difference.

00:11:28.000 100% drug-free supplement, relieffactor.com.

00:11:32.000 That is relieffactor.com, discounted to the price of only $19.95, or call 800 for Relief to find out more about this offer.

00:11:39.000 Feel the difference, relieffactor.com.

00:11:45.000 Cash, you've worked all throughout our government in a variety of different roles.

00:11:49.000 You were a partner with Devin Nunez in uncovering the unmasking.

00:11:53.000 And later, I want to ask you about our friend Durham and how that entire project is progressing, in your opinion.

00:12:02.000 But I just want to ask you kind of more broadly: can you talk about the threat that the United States security state, the whole security apparatus poses against either conservative Americans or Christian Americans, or what would be considered disagreeable political opinions, and tie that together with what you uncovered in the Russia investigation with Donald Trump and how they entrap Donald Trump and they use the FISA court surveillance.

00:12:29.000 Talk a little bit about that.

00:12:31.000 Yeah, that's a great question.

00:12:32.000 Look, it's all interconnected, as you were alluding to right there.

00:12:36.000 Basically, the sum and substance is what we are seeing is the politicization of the national security apparatus in the United States.

00:12:44.000 The one apparatus that is supposed to be apolitical, the one apparatus when Donald Trump came in and said to me when I was running his counterterrorism programs or was his deputy director of national intelligence or later over at DOD, was this is what we're doing.

00:12:57.000 We're going to end the forever wars.

00:12:58.000 We're going to wipe out Al-Qaeda senior leadership. 0.99

00:13:00.000 We're going to kill the emirs of ISIS, take out Soleimani, return American hostages, seal our southern border, prohibit Chinese fentanyl and opiates from pouring in and killing our youth. 0.98

00:13:09.000 These are things that are apolitical and that you would think all Americans would want, especially Americans who have children, would want for their youth. 0.96

00:13:17.000 And when Donald Trump got elected, that narrative got blown up.

00:13:20.000 And it started with the Russiagate narrative, which I was fortunate enough to be the chief investigator on for Chairman Nunes.

00:13:25.000 We wrote the Nunes memo.

00:13:26.000 We wrote a report and we basically showed the largest criminal enterprise perpetuated by the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign and intentionally faulty actors in Andrew McCabe and James Comey and Clapper over in the FBI and IC to go to an intelligence court and say lying to an intelligence court just to surveil their opponent because they didn't like the guy.

00:13:47.000 That trend, unfortunately, has tragically continued the politicization of the national security apparatus throughout Donald Trump's presidency and now into Joe Biden's presidency for the next one year that he's been in power.

00:13:58.000 And it's permeated the domestic aspects of our lives, which I think was one of the points you hit on in talking about January 6th or domestic extremism or looking for white rage in the DOD, all these fictions that don't occur.

00:14:10.000 But when you have the fake news media perpetuating them, repeating them over and over and over again, people think it's a reality.

00:14:16.000 And that's terrible for our institutions.

00:14:19.000 No, it's beyond terrible.

00:14:22.000 And I say this as someone who I was very young and naive.

00:14:26.000 I used to kind of be sympathetic and defensive of saying, yeah, we need to give all this power to the federal government to go spy on Al-Qaeda.

00:14:34.000 It was all a bunch of nonsense.

00:14:35.000 Like, I'm not libertarian on many things, but my goodness, has Rand Paul won me over on the potential abuses of how FISA could be used to go against political opponents.

00:14:46.000 There's a lot of different aspects and dynamics of this, please.

00:14:50.000 You raise a great point.

00:14:52.000 The fact that so many, and you, who are one of the most dialed-in people in all of America, if not the world, on our national security apparatus and our politics, the fact that you've lost faith shows to me that we have failed you.

00:15:04.000 That is, the American people have been failed by leadership because of things like RussiaGate and the FISA abuse scandal.

00:15:10.000 Look, I was a former terrorism prosecutor.

00:15:12.000 I used FISA process all the time, but we did it the right way. 0.95

00:15:15.000 I prevented guys from blowing up shopping malls in Houston, from blowing up the state capitol in Sacramento.

00:15:20.000 Those guys are sitting in prison because we used the FISA process appropriately and righteously, but it was destroyed and the faith in our system was destroyed by the James Comey's of the world.

00:15:30.000 And that juxtaposition is what we need to talk about in depth because the fact that guys like you have lost faith in it, and I think rightly so, because you've been betrayed, we need to restore that faith.

00:15:41.000 And the only way to do that is we got to put us back in power.

00:15:43.000 No, I think that that's an important point.

00:15:45.000 It sobers me a little bit, to be honest, and it calms me down because you just cited a couple examples.

00:15:50.000 I'm sure there's dozens of others where that did thwart the bad guys, right?

00:15:55.000 And that did thwart the people that, you know, were playing games and in the shadows of trying to legitimately harm the American people.

00:16:05.000 Showing up to a school board meeting, I don't think fits you in the category as Ted Kaczynski or Timothy McVay or Eric Rudolph or ISIS or al-Qaeda.

00:16:16.000 And there is this intentional conflation.

00:16:19.000 And it does go back to Donald Trump.

00:16:21.000 They were willing to do it.

00:16:22.000 And the cooler heads did not prevail within the left where they said, hey, this might get out of hand eventually, you know, calling Donald Trump a KGB agent.

00:16:31.000 Doesn't matter.

00:16:31.000 Get rid of him.

00:16:32.000 He shouldn't have won in the first place.

00:16:34.000 And you're starting to see the very, very serious ramifications of that.

00:16:42.000 Look, it's back to school time and you might be feeling the burden of college bills and private tuition expenses.

00:16:47.000 With home equity at an all-time high and interest rates low, refinancing your house could be a great way to get some cash and pay those bills.

00:16:53.000 So look, if you want to refinance your house or do anything with a bank, let's just say timeout, right?

00:16:58.000 We're going to call a timeout two-minute warning, right?

00:17:01.000 Hands on the shoulders.

00:17:02.000 We're going to just kind of say, let's take a pause here.

00:17:07.000 Are you using a bank that hates your values?

00:17:10.000 It's a very simple question.

00:17:12.000 Are you using a bank that is at war with your worldview?

00:17:16.000 Well, if you have refinanced recently with a big bank, you have just given a check, a cashier's check, a wire transfer to Nicole Hannah-Jones, to Stacey Abrams, to Joe Biden, to Chuck Schumer, to Nancy Pelosi.

00:17:31.000 You see, when you refinance with the big boys, the banks of the Wookesters, you might as well give your hard-earned money to the revolutionaries that are burning down our streets.

00:17:42.000 You might as well give it to Planned Parenthood.

00:17:45.000 But if you want to support the good guys, two Christian men that I've got to know very well, they love the Lord.

00:17:52.000 They love the Bible.

00:17:54.000 They are great people.

00:17:55.000 We just hung out in Dallas and we had the best time.

00:17:58.000 We had a great meal together.

00:17:59.000 They're terrific.

00:18:00.000 Andrew Del Rey and Todd Avakian at andrewandTodd.com.

00:18:05.000 They are with Sierra Pacific Mortgage, and I know them and trust them.

00:18:09.000 And you should work with them too.

00:18:10.000 Just go to andrewandod.com and take the 30-second survey to answer a couple questions.

00:18:15.000 But look, maybe you're a calling person.

00:18:16.000 You're like, Charlie, I take enough surveys.

00:18:18.000 Fine.

00:18:19.000 Test me.

00:18:20.000 Call 888-888-1172 and say, I would like to talk to Andrew and Todd.

00:18:24.000 Charlie Kirk sent me.

00:18:25.000 That's 888-888-1172.

00:18:28.000 AndrewandTodd.com, andrewandtodd.com.

00:18:31.000 No more Goldman Sachs.

00:18:33.000 No more JPMorgan Chase.

00:18:35.000 No more Wells Fargo.

00:18:36.000 No more financing or refinancing with the banks that hate your values.

00:18:41.000 Again, I hate to be this tribal about it.

00:18:44.000 They hate you.

00:18:46.000 Go to people that love you at andrewandodd.com.

00:18:50.000 They love the Lord.

00:18:51.000 They love the country.

00:18:52.000 Let's support them at andrewandodd.com.

00:18:58.000 You have a really good perspective here because you just mentioned that you used the FISA court process correctly to go after legitimate bad people and people that wanted to commit massive crimes.

00:19:09.000 Can you I'm not sure where you're going to land on this.

00:19:12.000 How important is the distinction, terrorism versus crime?

00:19:18.000 Because there was a little bit of a controversy last week with that with Senator Ted Cruz, of whom I have a lot of respect for, and he's a friend of mine.

00:19:24.000 Is it important that term, or is it just kind of, you know, kind of just word games?

00:19:30.000 Is it important when they start to categorize us as terrorists?

00:19:33.000 I think it's critically important.

00:19:34.000 Look, as a former federal prosecutor and a public defender before that, those words have meaning under the federal statutes.

00:19:41.000 And when the media starts grabbing hold of these terms, and you've seen it with the quote-unquote insurrection, that's a crime tantamount to treason.

00:19:48.000 Those things have, and the reason you haven't seen this Department of Justice issue any insurrectionist indictments on January 6th is because it was not an insurrection.

00:19:56.000 But that doesn't stop the media from grabbing onto it.

00:19:59.000 That's just one example.

00:20:00.000 You raised another one with the terrorist example.

00:20:02.000 Look, as a counterterrorism guy, the head of counterterrorism is President Trump.

00:20:06.000 That word has a meaning. 0.50

00:20:07.000 It's reserved for people who commit crimes against the national security interest of America and its citizens and who kill them and attack us. 0.98

00:20:14.000 Those are terrorists.

00:20:16.000 Then for the media to go out and hijack that term and say, okay, well, we have domestic, quote-unquote, domestic terrorists in America.

00:20:23.000 And the domestic terrorists or anyone that supported Donald Trump and or who was around January, the Capitol on January 6th or protesting for the rights of freedom and Second Amendment, what have you.

00:20:33.000 When you bandy about terms like that, it hurts our national security apparatus immensely.

00:20:40.000 And that's why I think the distinction is so important.

00:20:42.000 I'm glad you highlighted it because the words terrorism, domestic terrorism versus criminality or criminal conduct should and are rightfully so separated in the federal statute because the crime and the terrorism aspect of it is so different and so egregious in nature and the punishment is so different that there has to be a distinction.

00:21:02.000 And that's why Congress made one.

00:21:03.000 So as a former federal prosecutor, walk us through then all of a sudden.

00:21:07.000 So they introduce the terrorism kind of trial balloon via the New York Times.

00:21:13.000 And, you know, we make fun of the New York Times.

00:21:14.000 They are very important because unfortunately powerful people read the New York Times.

00:21:18.000 And I think the New York Times and Harvard are the most powerful non-governmental entities outside of Silicon Valley.

00:21:24.000 And we kind of make fun of them, but they give a lot of credibility to bad ideas, a lot of research to hooligans that don't deserve it.

00:21:30.000 And the New York Times and trial balloons, the language of it.

00:21:32.000 And so here I have right here, you know, the New York Times.

00:21:34.000 I haven't even read it today.

00:21:36.000 I read it so people don't need to.

00:21:38.000 Oh, yeah, it's right here.

00:21:39.000 Panel on riot presses pence for testimony.

00:21:41.000 Now, they're calling it a riot at times, the New York Times.

00:21:43.000 They use these interchangeable terms.

00:21:45.000 CNBC, which used to be a respectable outlet, is calling it an invasion.

00:21:49.000 So let's just pretend, what would that mean, Cash?

00:21:52.000 If it was an invasion, would that you could use the Marines?

00:21:56.000 I mean, what does that even mean?

00:21:58.000 It means that it means that they're losing the ideals that they ultimately stood up this whole January 6th committee for.

00:22:05.000 First, it was an insurrection.

00:22:07.000 And the Biden's DO, Biden's Department of Justice didn't indict anyone for insurrection because it wasn't an insurrection.

00:22:12.000 So they, what do they do?

00:22:13.000 They need a new word.

00:22:14.000 So they need a new word.

00:22:15.000 What's the new word?

00:22:16.000 Invasion or the other word you cited.

00:22:18.000 And that's something that the media will carry on for another six months till we run into the midterm because they don't have anything to run on.

00:22:25.000 All they have is to run against Trump in January 6th.

00:22:28.000 They just want new inflammatory terminology that doesn't mean anything under the law. 0.95

00:22:32.000 So they have a massive issue with the insurrectionists because they have a supply and demand problem, right?

00:22:38.000 So they have no supply of insurrectionists, but they have a demand to find them.

00:22:43.000 And so that's part of the reason why they've expanded their definition of a terrorist to include moms and dads who show up to school board meetings and complain about their children's curriculum.

00:22:54.000 The Department of Justice announced today that they have a whole new division dedicated to this.

00:23:00.000 As a former federal prosecutor, you are in charge of counterterrorism.

00:23:04.000 Who's going to be overseeing this?

00:23:05.000 What's to prevent them from using this in a way where they could be infiltrating school board meetings or things like that?

00:23:12.000 Tragically, I don't think there is one anymore.

00:23:15.000 And that's why I've lost such confidence as so many Americans have in the leadership cycle at these institutions like DOJ and FBI because they continue to politicize our national security apparatus.

00:23:24.000 And here's the thing: as a federal prosecutor, I'm offended when they say we need a special unit so prosecutors can do the jobs they were already doing.

00:23:32.000 That's what you hire 10,000 federal prosecutors to do and spread them out across the country and have 150,000 people working in the FBI and DOJ.

00:23:40.000 We don't need another unit.

00:23:41.000 Another unit is established to satisfy a media narrative.

00:23:44.000 So they can go out there and say, we're taking this matter so seriously because it's so detrimental to the national security interests of America that we've created a whole new unit.

00:23:53.000 Where are the facts that show domestic terrorism and the like are on the rise?

00:23:57.000 I actually looked into it.

00:23:58.000 Do you know we're at the lowest point of cases in domestic terrorism in DOJ history in the last 10-year cycle?

00:24:04.000 Where are all the extremists?

00:24:06.000 Where are all the insurrectionists?

00:24:07.000 They're not there.

00:24:08.000 The cases aren't being brought.

00:24:10.000 So I just want to reinforce that.

00:24:14.000 So you read the CNBC article by Kevin Bruinger.

00:24:17.000 Again, CNBC, they usually cover stocks, right?

00:24:19.000 They have that lunatic, Kevin Kramer, who basically does his best Mussolini impersonation.

00:24:27.000 Yeah, let's have the military run it. 1.00

00:24:28.000 Just investigate everybody or vaccinate everybody.

00:24:31.000 So I just want to reinforce this.

00:24:33.000 So the CNBC writes that the Department of Justice on Tuesday announced forming a new unit to combat domestic terrorism as officials warn a persistent and evolving threat of violent extremism.

00:24:45.000 You're saying that's not the case.

00:24:46.000 Can I just also clarify something too?

00:24:49.000 Do you know that domestic terrorism is not a federal offense?

00:24:53.000 It's not a law.

00:24:55.000 You can't charge someone with the crime of domestic terrorism unlike you can charge someone with the crime of international terrorism because that is an actual crime.

00:25:04.000 Domestic terrorism only comes into play after a conviction for a crime for what we call a sentencing enhancement.

00:25:11.000 What we do is we walk in and we say, hey, this guy committed, remember the guys out in Oregon and Washington State that sort of took over this property and they were labeled funding, right?

00:25:20.000 They weren't charged as domestic terrorists, but at the end of the case, they were tried to enhance their sentence, meaning you go to prison for longer because the law doesn't allow you to charge us as domestic terrorists, but there's these things called sentencing enhancements, which guide a sentence.

00:25:32.000 And that's fine.

00:25:32.000 That's okay.

00:25:33.000 But this is where America loses its faith in its institutions.

00:25:37.000 Now, all of a sudden, you have most of America, because they read the New York Times or whatever, believing you can charge people with domestic terrorists.

00:25:42.000 So, what does CNN and MSNBC do?

00:25:44.000 They say, oh, all these people are domestic terrorists or extremists.

00:25:48.000 You have to charge by the conduct that's on the books.

00:25:50.000 And domestic terrorism isn't on the books.

00:25:52.000 I hate to break it to the mainstream.

00:25:53.000 Well, that's super interesting.

00:25:54.000 I didn't even know that.

00:25:56.000 You wouldn't know it based on just kind of a regular reading of the media or any of the coverage.

00:26:04.000 They could find some other technical problems, obviously, which is why they're trying to expand the entire umbrella of what they're looking into.

00:26:15.000 But most of these charges are trespassing charges, right?

00:26:18.000 Most of them are, they're, or they're just typical violence charges in order to get into, you know, the, you know, the technical aspects of it.

00:26:31.000 So you're saying like Timothy McVay was charged with murder and then sentencing said, oh, by the way, he's also a domestic terrorist or technical.

00:26:38.000 Exactly.

00:26:39.000 Okay.

00:26:39.000 Right.

00:26:40.000 He used explosive devices.

00:26:41.000 So that's a whole nother scenario and a whole other set of crimes you can charge when it's matched like that.

00:26:46.000 Yeah.

00:26:47.000 Right.

00:26:48.000 I want to get to something that is bothering me, Cash, a lot.

00:26:51.000 And you're the only one that really shoots straight on this topic, is the two standard of justice.

00:26:56.000 I'm so tired of seeing James O'Keefe's apartment rated, Rudy Giuliani's apartment rated, while I just don't see that kind of push for justice.

00:27:06.000 So maybe there's no update.

00:27:09.000 I see these things.

00:27:09.000 They come across every so often.

00:27:11.000 I don't know if I could trust it.

00:27:12.000 Hillary Clinton's campaign is being investigated.

00:27:15.000 Is that true?

00:27:16.000 Is there movement in the Durham camp towards the Clinton campaign?

00:27:20.000 Is that a legitimate report?

00:27:21.000 Yeah, let me set the parameters, though.

00:27:24.000 You know, I'm the biggest proponent of John Durham because I think he's doing the work methodically in the way I would do it.

00:27:29.000 Let's have a real conversation, though.

00:27:30.000 Was Hillary Clinton or Obama ever get indicted?

00:27:32.000 No.

00:27:33.000 I think Andy McCabe is John Durham's target, and I think that's a righteous target if we can hit it.

00:27:37.000 And the reason I think that the Hillary Clinton campaign is being investigated is because John Durham indicted the lawyer for the Hillary Clinton campaign and spent 40 pages telling the American public why the Hillary Clinton campaign was so involved in the Russia Gate criminal conspiracy.

00:27:52.000 And I don't know if you saw this pleading, but a week or two ago, John Durham issued a pleading for Danchenko.

00:27:58.000 And he said, Do you know who's representing Igor Danchenko, the number one source for the steel dossier?

00:28:03.000 He was indicted by John Durham.

00:28:05.000 Hillary Clinton's lawyers.

00:28:07.000 So there's this thing called a conflict of interest, where you cannot be represented by someone if that other someone represents a target of an investigation.

00:28:16.000 That was a glaring, glaring production by John Durham that almost everybody overlooked, which tells me that he's not only looking at the Hillary Clinton campaign, but investigating people in it because he notified a federal judge that there's a conflict of interest in the representation against one of the defendants.

00:28:32.000 It was a striking move from anyone, but it's not shocking that the Hillary Clinton campaign has nested themselves into the middle of the John Durham investigation so they can acquire information to protect the campaign.

00:28:46.000 And what's so unprecedented about this is how you had the political campaign that just kind of had unfettered access into these very same domestic agencies that we're looking at.

00:28:56.000 What other updates have we seen recently out of Durham that might be of note, if any at all?

00:29:03.000 I think that's it because the last time we talked was just before the holiday.

00:29:05.000 And I think right now that that conflict of interest one was a big, big piece of information for the public because it shows us where he's going.

00:29:12.000 If he didn't care about the Hillary Clinton campaign, it wouldn't matter to him.

00:29:16.000 If the Hillary Clinton campaign, to me as a prosecutor, were not a target of investigation, it doesn't matter that her campaign represents someone who's charged.

00:29:23.000 But the fact that he did that means not only are they a target of the investigation, here's what he's telling the American people: I, John Durham, are probably going to call witnesses from the Hillary Clinton campaign in my prosecutions.

00:29:33.000 I have witnesses.

00:29:33.000 I got a target in the grand jury.

00:29:35.000 There's so much work that has to be done by John Durham that I think it was only a two-page pleading, but I think it's immensely substantial.

00:29:44.000 Look, everyone out there has been asking me, Charlie, how do I get more pillows?

00:29:49.000 Well, that's mypillow.com.

00:29:51.000 And it's promo code Charlie, actually.

00:29:52.000 It's a great special.

00:29:54.000 And MyPillow doesn't have their box stores anymore, so we got to help them out.

00:29:57.000 And part of them being canceled, they want to give you the lowest price yet.

00:30:01.000 So you can get the lowest price in the history of MyPillow for their classic standard MyPillow regularly, $69.98, now only $19.98 with the promo code.

00:30:11.000 They also have queen size, regularly $79.98 and $24.98 with a promo code or king size, usually $89.98, only $29.98 with your promo code.

00:30:21.000 MyPillow is not just pillows.

00:30:22.000 They have over 150 products, everything from sleepwear to new beds.

00:30:26.000 The promo code Kirk also works on mystoreandfrankspeech.com.

00:30:30.000 Go to mypillow.com or call 800-875-0425 and use promo code Kirk to take advantage of Mike's special offer on his standard MyPillow.

00:30:38.000 That's mypillow.com, promo code Kirk, or call 800-875-0425, mypillow.com, promo code Kirk, mypillow.com, promo code Kirk.

00:30:50.000 Cash, I'm getting tons of emails and notes here from people that they're losing patience.

00:30:56.000 People say, McCabe is not high enough.

00:30:58.000 You know, what could we people are losing just faith in the justice system in general?

00:31:05.000 I'm sure you share some of those sentiments.

00:31:07.000 Yeah, 100%.

00:31:09.000 And it's extremely frustrating, especially as a former national security prosecutor who's in those shoes to say, well, I'm going to go after everybody else, but not.

00:31:18.000 I'm not going to go after the individuals in charge of the agencies, the enemy caves of the world that lied to the American public, was caught by the DOG Inspector IG, and was fired.

00:31:27.000 What do I say to them is that John Durham has a separate mission that is thankfully outside of basically the rest of the Department of Justice.

00:31:34.000 And there's no way that he can get fired or shut down because he has brought already three major criminal indictments.

00:31:40.000 His funding's not running out.

00:31:41.000 It can't.

00:31:42.000 His bandwidth, his mandate is not running out.

00:31:44.000 It can't.

00:31:45.000 It can only end when he, John Durham, says it's going to be over.

00:31:48.000 And what I remind people is I used to bring these complex national security cases that I spent three, four, five years on before we got to an indictment.

00:31:57.000 And John Durham's investigating the largest criminal conspiracy in United States history when it comes to a presidential election and a sitting president.

00:32:04.000 I can't even begin to imagine the stuff he's got to go through and how long it takes.

00:32:08.000 So I want it yesterday.

00:32:10.000 I feel with your viewers that want it yesterday, but that's why I think it's coming because he has done it silently and methodically.

00:32:17.000 Is there a statute of limitations or not?

00:32:19.000 Not with the stuff he's dealing with.

00:32:21.000 That stuff could be lifted, if I'm not mistaken, right?

00:32:23.000 Yeah, basically, once you establish a conspiracy, you can just keep it going by establishing one minor act along the way.

00:32:29.000 Okay.

00:32:29.000 And so it extends the window because we're at six years now.

00:32:32.000 And some laws on the books are seven years, if I'm not mistaken, right?

00:32:36.000 Seven, eight, ten.

00:32:37.000 I'm not worried about it.

00:32:38.000 Okay.

00:32:38.000 Yeah, because we're at six years now of when Peter Struckstroke Smirk and his lover, Lisa Page, you know, started to text back and forth.

00:32:47.000 It's the sixth year, Cash.

00:32:49.000 That's crazy.

00:32:51.000 I want you to think about that where we're coming in six years ago.

00:32:54.000 It was the calendar year of 2016.

00:32:56.000 And that's really where this activity happened, right?

00:32:58.000 That's where the wire transfers happened between Perkins Cooey and the Clinton campaign.

00:33:03.000 And that's really where this scheme was, you know, developed and concocted.

00:33:08.000 And it does beg the question of if they go after McCabe, can they get him to sing, right?

00:33:14.000 Probably not.

00:33:16.000 And how harsh of a sentence are they going to try to go for?

00:33:20.000 So, Cash, talk about your fund, Fight With Cash.

00:33:23.000 You know, they're going after you.

00:33:24.000 Why are they going after you?

00:33:25.000 Kind of build out that whole narrative.

00:33:27.000 I really appreciate it.

00:33:28.000 Thanks so much.

00:33:28.000 So fightwithcash.com, just like Charlie Kirkwitz with a K. Look, I got defamed.

00:33:34.000 I got crushed by the media.

00:33:35.000 Charlie, you know what that's like, but it's horrible to be defamed and lied about and have your name and family name dragged through the mud when it's totally false.

00:33:43.000 So I sued the New York Times, CNN Political.

00:33:45.000 I'm suing them for $150 million.

00:33:47.000 Those cases are live and ongoing.

00:33:48.000 But everyday Americans across the country that you meet, Charlie, and that I meet have had the same problem.

00:33:53.000 They basically have said, I've been defamed, I've been to platform, but I don't have the funds and I don't know the lawyers to bring those cases so I can have my day in court and clear my name.

00:34:01.000 FightwithCash.com is raising that money for them and taking their case to court.

00:34:06.000 We have a team of lawyers on standby who review the cases for free, just send in a summary, and we pay for your lawyers if you have a righteous case of action, be it in Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Nebraska, Kansas, wherever in America, and whatever your background is, we will fight for your rights so you can have your day in court.

00:34:22.000 But we need support to do that.

00:34:24.000 And I'm going to put this out there for you, Charlie.

00:34:26.000 I think it'd be pretty fun if we did a Turning Point USA and Fight with Cash combo event somewhere in America.

00:34:33.000 We'd have a lot of fun.

00:34:33.000 I just got back from Nebraska and had 525 people pay to show up.

00:34:37.000 So I think we'd have some fun together.

00:34:39.000 It'd be fun.

00:34:39.000 Nebraska is a great place.

00:34:41.000 You got a lot of good patriots there.

00:34:43.000 So it's good stuff.

00:34:44.000 Cash, thank you so much for joining us.

00:34:46.000 It was great insight.

00:34:47.000 As always, it's fightwithcash.com.

00:34:49.000 Everybody, Cash.

00:34:49.000 We'll talk to you soon.

00:34:50.000 Thanks, Charlie.

00:34:51.000 I appreciate it.

00:34:54.000 Thanks so much for listening, everybody.

00:34:55.000 Email us your thoughts.

00:34:56.000 As always, freedom at CharlieKirk.com.

00:34:59.000 If you want to subscribe to our show, please do so.

00:35:01.000 Make sure you're subscribed by hitting the upper right-hand plus sign in the upper right-hand corner, I should say.

00:35:06.000 Thanks so much for listening.

00:35:07.000 God bless.

00:35:10.000 For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.

The Charlie Kirk Show - January 12, 2022

Why Did Pelosi Reject Trump's Troop Offer on J6? With Kash Patel

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript