All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
June 19, 2020 - The Charlie Kirk Show
37:56
Deport John Bolton! And the Supreme Court’s DACA Disaster

As the supposedly “conservative” leaning Supreme Court fails once again to come to a conservative ruling on whether or not President Trump can, by executive order, reverse an executive order put in place by President Obama (he can), Charlie...

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Real Time Updates and Support 00:02:22
Thank you for listening to this podcast one production.
Now available on Apple Podcasts, Podcast One, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts.
Hey, everybody.
Today on the Charlie Kirk Show, we dive into all things Supreme Court, DACA, and John Bolton.
This show is brought to you advertising free by the Charlie Kirk show team.
If you guys want to support us with just, you know, any contribution you want, there's a way to do it.
It's CharlieKirk.com slash support.
That's charliekirk.com slash support.
You guys can check it out at charliekirk.com.
Email us your questions, freedom at charliekirk.com.
We have a convention happening in Phoenix, Arizona.
If you're in the American Southwest, come.
It's on June 23rd.
It's coming up right now, Tuesday, June 23rd.
So email me, freedom at charliekirk.com.
If you guys might want to go, it's trumpstudents.org, trumpstudents.org.
Email me, freedom at charliekirk.com, freedom at charliekirk.com.
We have a great show in store, everybody.
Buckle up.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country.
He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
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.
That's why we are here.
Well, just when you thought things couldn't get worse, well, we're going to turn to the Supreme Court and see what they think about the most important issues in our society.
Now, this is not a message of pessimism.
We're just going to tell things exactly as they are happening in real time.
But I'm going to be honest, I have just been so let down.
And honestly, I feel betrayed by the Supreme Court, by people that were nominated and confirmed by Republican presidents that are now ruling repeatedly with left-wing justices and decisions.
So, and what's now quickly becoming an absolute disaster and train wreck of a year for the so-called conservative Supreme Court justices, Chief Justice John Roberts, who is a George W. Bush appointee, by the way, sided with the court's liberal wing on Thursday when it blocked the Trump administration's plan to end DACA, which is the deferred action for childhood arrivals.
The DACA Deportation Reality Check 00:06:23
It's an Obama-era program that basically shields nearly 700,000 young illegal immigrants from deportation.
Now, let's get our terms straight.
The left, they say these are undocumented immigrants.
These people are not individuals that lost paperwork while they were checking out at a grocery store.
It's not like they lost their airline ticket.
Undocumented makes it seem as if something got lost in the mail.
Do I have sympathy for them as human beings?
Of course.
Do I have compassion for them?
Absolutely.
However, we have laws for a very specific reason.
Laws are standards.
They must be enforced.
They cannot be impartially applied to certain portions of American society on emotive or pathological reasons.
So because of this, I stand firm that if you are illegally domiciled into our country, you should be removed and deported back to your home country.
If you want to come to America, apply to come here legally.
So the 700,000 young illegal immigrants that are here, people call them undocumented, they say, well, they're not here because of any choice that they made.
Recognize and understand that.
That does not mean they should stay here.
People say, well, they know no other place besides America.
Well, if that's really that important to you, then go change the law.
Don't use the courts to try to become a legislative branch.
So the way it works is basically, if you were under the age of 16 when your parents brought you to America illegally, DACA says every two years you must reapply for deferred deportation.
Recipients came before the middle of 2007 and have lived in the United States continuously since then.
Now, mind you, if we were serious about building a wall under President George H.W. Bush, if we were serious about building a wall when Newt Gingrich was speaker, if we were serious about building a wall when George W. Bush was president, which we weren't for the last couple decades, this wouldn't have been a problem.
If we would have actually stopped the flow of illegals into our country, then we very well might have been able to stop this.
People say, well, Charlie, aren't they just as much of Americans as the rest of us?
Unfortunately, the prerequisite to being an American is being granted access into the country.
And so if they want to blame someone, they can blame their parents.
And they can also blame their parents for doing something very immoral.
And this is something that's not talked about enough, is that the parents knew exactly what they were doing.
They were putting their kids into a permanent position of being a political football.
Their parents were not doing the moral thing for their children.
They knew that their kids would be classified as illegal under the laws of the United States, as being here domiciled into the United States of America without legal status.
And yet the parents made that willful decision.
And now we have to compensate for that for giving them legal status.
Now, look, putting aside this incredibly wrong-headed ruling for just one minute, it's important for everyone to understand the history of DACA.
Let's dive deeper and exactly why this has been such a highly controversial program to begin with.
So, DACA recipients become eligible for a work permit in the United States and other benefits.
DACA is not the same as the Democrat-proposed DREAM Act.
DACA does not provide a path to citizenship.
Very important.
DACA was created by an executive branch executive order memorandum by President Obama on June 15, 2012.
In other words, by executive fiat.
So Obama acted like a tyrannical king, an authoritarian autocrat.
The memorandum was highly unconstitutional, which is why today this is so baffling.
We'll get to that in just a second.
But the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, USCIS, began accepting applications for the program eight weeks ago now, in August of 2012.
And it's estimated that there are between 700 and 800,000 recipients.
Some outlets quote different numbers.
In September of 2017, the Trump administration announced a plan to phase out DACA.
The administration announced for a six-month, basically wind-down process to the reversal to allow Congress time to pass some other legislation protection for illegal foreign nationals in exchange for increased border security while funding and a closure to immigration loopholes like chain migration, the visa lottery, and other ridiculous policies.
Now, in fact, Trump was willing to expand the policy so that DACA would have covered well over a million people living in America.
He was even willing to discuss a pathway to citizenship had he got everything he wanted.
So, by the way, President Trump advocates for the RAISE Act, which would allow us to have less legal immigrants into our country, but have the prerequisite to come into the country be much higher.
So, have maybe a wealth requirement, have an English speaking requirement.
The RAISE Act is a phenomenal piece of legislation that says, no, to come to America, you must bring something to America.
It's not based just on emotion or sympathy.
And yes, I personally have emotion and sympathy for these people.
However, endlessly taking in foreign nationals to America is bad for American workers.
If those people coming to America do not have skills, they don't speak the language, they might not bring money or resources.
If you continually bring in low-skilled immigrants to America that might not share our values, you have an assimilation problem, you have a problem of cultural future.
Now, mind you, Congress failed to act, and the time expired on March 5th, 2018.
You might have remembered that.
Regardless, the phase-out of DACA had been held up by several courts where leftists were appealing the Trump administration's decision to phase it out.
In August of 2019, District Court Judge Andrew Hainan ruled that DACA is likely unconstitutional.
However, he let the program remain in place as litigation proceeded.
And now today, the Supreme Court ruled against the Trump administration's order to rescind DACA, saying the administration had not provided adequate reasoning under the Administrative Procedure Act.
So look, I want to explain exactly why DACA is unconstitutional.
Judicial Activism and Amnesty Risks 00:14:58
Before I get into that, though, I want to tell you right now, this episode is brought to you ad-free by our team here on the Charlie Kirk Show.
There is a way that you can support the Charlie Kirk Show by you go to charliekirk.com right now.
There's a portal.
You can give $5 a month.
You can give $10 a month, $20 a month.
All of your contributions help us make episodes like this one ad-free.
We have advertisers.
We're blessed by many advertisers.
But just like many other people like Tucker Carlson, there's plenty of drama with advertisers because we are taking a stand against the Black Lives Matter movement, against the radical leftists, against the social justice warriors.
So if you guys want to support us like you support, I hope you don't support national public radio, but you want to chip in some money, you go to charliekirk.com.
That helps cover our production costs, helps pay the people that I have to pay here on the Charlie Kirk Show, helps us continue to keep the show well researched and thoughtful because we're dedicating five or six hours a day to the Charlie Kirk Show minimums, probably even more than that.
It's probably seven or eight hours a day diving into it.
So if you guys, my one challenge to you, I ask you, just spend more on the things you care about, like your country, than you spend on coffee each month.
Go to charliekirk.com.
There's a portal, the donate link.
You guys can support us.
We'd be blessed by your support.
So for those of you who remember the first term of President Barack Obama, you'll remember he had control of both the House and the Senate.
He had an overwhelming mandate to pass whatever he wanted to pass.
So what did he choose?
He chose health care.
We got the unconstitutional Obamacare because of that.
Now remember, the unconstitutional Obamacare ended up being ruled constitutional thanks to John Roberts, where he really began to show us who he really was.
Immigration reform advocates were very upset that Obama didn't advance their open boards agenda in the first two years.
He spent all of his political capital on health care, not immigration.
Obama lost control of the House of Representatives in January of 2011, thanks to the Tea Party wave.
Establishment hack John Boehner became Speaker of the House, and Obama could no longer pass legislation like amnesty because of the grassroots infusion of conservatives into the House of Representatives.
There just simply were not enough votes for amnesty.
Under the Constitution of the United States, Congress has plenary authority over immigration.
Here's what that means.
It means they have complete authority in every respect, absolute and unqualified.
Now, the president only has the authority delegated to him by Congress, and Congress has never given the president the power to provide a pseudo-amnesty and government benefits to illegal foreign nationals who broke laws to come into our country.
Now, if you don't believe me, consider Obama's own words on the topic.
Responding in October of 2010 to demands that he had to implement immigration reforms unilaterally, Obamacare declared, I'm not a king.
I can't do these things just by myself.
Now, again, in March of 2011, he said that, respect to the notion that I can't suspend deportations through executive order, that's just not the case.
And once more in May of 2011, he repeated that, I just can't bypass Congress, you know, change immigration law myself.
That's not a democracy work.
And yet that is exactly what he did in 2012.
I guess I evolved on the topic, one would say.
Obama unilaterally signed the memoranda, which provided foreign nationals and illegals brought here by their parents illegally with work authorizations and access to Social Security and other government benefits, 800,000 of them.
And of course, the press totally covered for Obama.
The activist media acted like this was the greatest thing in the world.
They painted this very rosy picture of why DACA recipients were totally perfect angels, as if they were the main contention or controversy of those who opposed DACA.
Now, nevertheless, we were told DACA amnesty wouldn't apply to those with felonies or serious misdemeanors.
But take this, for example.
Three DACA recipients were arrested after rioting and looting in the streets of Phoenix, not to mention, did you know that over 79,400 DACA recipients with previous arrest records?
It was so bad, in fact, that Obama discontinued background checks because too many had criminal histories.
This is exactly why we cannot allow any form of Democrat amnesty.
Now, Tom Fitton, who we had on a previous episode of the Charlie Kirk Show, I encourage you to check it out.
He originally posted February 5th, 2019 and retweeted it today, stating that, quote, Obama gave away illegal DACA amnesty without promised background checks.
Play tape.
Judicial Watch encourages you to let your elected members of Congress know what you think.
But in the meantime, you can be sure that Judicial Watch will continue to advocate on behalf of the rule of law through our Freedom Information Act requests, figuring out what's going on.
For instance, in the DREAM Act and the DACA amnesty that Obama instituted lawlessly, we found out that his administration just didn't do any security background checks.
They stopped doing them because they were getting away of stamping him in.
I mean, that informs us about how amnesty is going to work.
So we were told DACA amnesty wouldn't apply to those with felonies or serious misdemeanors.
So those three DACA recipients were just arrested after rioting and looting in the streets of Phoenix.
Do you think they'll have their DACA authorization rescinded?
Of course not.
Because for the left, they don't care about justice.
They care about social justice.
They don't care about fair and impartial juries.
They care about going after who they deem to be the oppressor.
Now, if you still don't believe that DACA or DACA is unconstitutional, consider how the Fifth Circuit ruling Obama's 2014 attempted expansion of the DACA program called DAPA.
Deferred action for parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Resident Program, or DAPA, just like DACA, provided for an administrative amnesty for illegal aliens who came back to the United States as adults but had children that were made legal by DACA.
DAPA, like DACA, also gave them work authorizations and access to government benefits.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a nationwide injunction against DAPA.
And then the Supreme Court allowed the injunction to stand.
DACA is just as unconstitutional as DAPA.
So what gives Justice Roberts?
We'll get to you in just one second.
Thankfully, Republicans seem unified in their criticism for Chief Justice Roberts' terrible decisions.
Senator Tom Cotton, who we had on a previous episode of the Charlie Kirk Show, I encourage you to check it out, said this.
Roberts was behaving, quote, like a Solomon who thinks he will save our institutions from political controversy and accountability.
If the Chief Justice believes his political judgment is so exquisite, I invite him to resign, travel to Iowa, and get elected.
I suspect voters will find his strange views no more compelling than do the principled justices on the court.
Senator Ted Cruz went after Roberts doing a Senate floor speech saying, Judging is not a game.
It's not supposed to be a game.
But sadly, over the years, more and more, Chief Justice Roberts has been playing games with the court to achieve the policy outcome he desires, Cruz said.
Senator Marco Rubio said, quote, it seems that he appears to be legislating.
What really troubles me, as a lot of people, is that some of the folks in the Republican Party have put on this bench because they say that they understand that their job is to interpret the law, not to write it, and are becoming activists.
Obviously, Roberts has been at the core of some of those decisions.
Senator Josh Hawley said in a tweet that it is, quote, the most disappointing week for the Supreme Court in years, that the problem here is that you've essentially done what you've said.
One administration can put in a set of rules by executive fiat, but then another administration can't reverse those rules.
This is exactly the point that I made on Twitter, which is this: if Barack Obama can create immigration policy with an executive order, why does it take an act of Congress for Trump to repeal it?
So, look, I think that Roberts sees himself as the last adult in the room.
Who cares about the rule of law or your judicial philosophy?
He hates President Donald Trump and he hates what he thinks is going bad in the country so bad, and he's probably being influenced by the DC cartel and by the people that his family is connected to.
Now, in the majority opinion, Justice Roberts wrote, The dispute before the court is not whether the Department of Homeland Security may rescind DACA.
Roberts wrote for the majority.
He says, All parties agree that it may.
The dispute is instead primarily about the procedure the agency followed by doing so.
So, what is there to debate?
Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions said at the time that DACA, quote, deliberately sought to achieve what the legislative branch specifically refused to authorize on multiple occasions.
Such an open-ended circumvention of immigration laws was an unconstitutional exercise of authority by the executive branch.
So, how would Roberts want the administration to rescind the order?
What process?
He's just making stuff up.
In fact, it's so obvious that he is being corrupted by the D.C. cartel.
Maybe they have something over him.
I'm not sure.
He is not ruling fairly.
He's not ruling impartially.
He hates Donald Trump.
He loves Barack Obama.
And John Roberts is a national disgrace.
John Roberts will go down as one of the most morally compromised, dishonest, disingenuous individuals in Western society.
And if he's comfortable participating in the downfall of the American Republic, then you can judge him appropriately.
And by the way, best buddies of George W. Bush.
That should tell you something.
By the way, speaking of Trump derangement syndrome, Joe Biden, who's sleepy, corrupt, confused, tweeted out just now: Here's my promise to you.
On day one, I'll send a bill to Congress.
I think that's what it's called.
That creates a clear roadmap.
I don't know what that is.
To citizenship for dreamers and 11 million undocumented people who are already strengthening our nation.
It's long overdue.
Am I president yet?
Okay, sure, okay, Joe.
You've had half a century in Congress.
Day one was in 1973, okay, if you remember that day.
And I will fight more than ever before to make sure that you never get another shot at implementing your handler's radical agenda.
Anyway, upon hearing the ruling, Donald Trump tweeted out: Do you get the impression the Supreme Court doesn't like me?
Terrific.
One of his all-time greatest tweets, by the way.
Well, at least Trump is able to keep laughing at these increasingly ridiculous judicial activists on the U.S. Supreme Court.
These judicial activists are philosophically no different and politically no different than the people that are burning down the streets of our country.
Now, side note: why is it that the only Republican appointees seem to fail conservatives?
Why are liberals always united in defeating leftism?
It's because they're united.
I mean, because the left is on the same page about America being a bigoted, awful, backwards, racist place, and they have a unified power center.
Because the left controls the places of influence.
They now control our churches.
They control our universities.
They control our colleges.
They control our corporations.
Collectivism and collectivists, they do not think freely.
They think collectively.
So they must be in lockstep.
They must be unified together.
This is yet another reason why we must elect Donald J. Trump, President Trump, to four more years in office.
We need not only a majority of conservatives on the court, we apparently need a moron-proof majority.
And speaking of relics from the Bush administration, John Bolton is now making news.
Now, look, I've met John Bolton before.
I've had dinner with John Bolton.
I mean, there's a lot of people that over the years have really, really disliked John Bolton.
I trusted President Trump when he put him in a position of leadership.
But man, when John Bolton started to walk around the White House with pieces of paper that said 13,000 troops to Venezuela or whatever he started to walk around with, as if he was playing some sort of World of Warcraft game with U.S. troops, or what is it?
Clash of conflicts or clash of continents or maybe Call of Duty, right?
Call of Duty in the streets of Venezuela.
Started to little fade on me.
And as soon as we started launching missiles to Iran, I think John Bolton might have started to celebrate on his rooftop with his own tomahawk missiles.
I mean, he's never found a country he does not want to invade.
I mean, I think if you go up to John Bolton and you say, can we go invade the sovereign country of Canada?
He'd say, I've been waiting for someone to ask me.
I mean, the guy is the most trigger-happy warmonger that I have come across.
And look, I have a lot of friends that are very close to John Bolton, but what he is doing right now, gloves are off.
He is one of the most immoral individuals that I can think of that have served in government.
By the way, he's probably upset that we have not sent B-52 bombers into chaz.
He's probably really, really mad about that.
He has not found a piece of property on the planet that he does not think the 101st Airborne should occupy.
Anyway, so look, John Bolton now has this new book, and I think he should be criminally prosecuted and convicted for illegally leaking information.
For John Bolton, what kind of moral ethical system do you operate under?
The president of the free world entrusted you on the National Security Council.
You traveled the world like an aristocrat.
You were platformed more than you ever were in your life at the highest level of government, more so than George W. Bush ever did.
You were given a huge audience with foreign leaders.
You were taken way more seriously than you deserved.
And then with that trust, with those private conversations, with all of that, with your policies actually being implemented a lot of the time, your very hawkish instincts, you then exit the White House because you were not dismissed the way you might have wanted to.
And then you betray all of that trust, which is betraying the United States of America to go write a book for profit.
And look, nothing excites the activist media more, like an insurrection from within the White House.
We're seeing it play out today.
And guess what?
Here's how I try to operate with things.
I did not attack John Bolton because he was a part of the Trump administration, despite my disagreements with him philosophically, because I'm loyal to Donald Trump.
That's the way I operate.
The way I operate, that is if someone trusts me and treats me well, I'm not going to go after them.
And I pray every day I can continue to operate that way.
But John Bolton, he's the type of guy that has no loyalty to Donald Trump and no loyalty to our country.
That's right.
I'm saying it right here and right now.
There is no way that you can believe that you are loyal to the United States of America and our flag and our values and our history and our people and write a book, The Room Where It Happened.
Mitt Romney's Journey of Appeasement 00:14:12
The book goes on to make a number of outrageous claims, and we'll go and break all of them down.
But I hope the advance that John Bolton is receiving is worth it.
I hope that the money that John Bolton is getting, that he is grifting from the American people right now, I hope it's worth it.
And I'm telling you right here, right now, any conservative that platforms John Bolton after this, why would you platform a man that is doing this?
Why would you associate yourself with someone who is going so out of their way to attack Donald Trump?
And by the way, despite bringing him into the administration, again, Donald Trump always disagreed with Bolton's hawkishness.
But there are some things that they agreed on.
Iranian sanctions, a pro-Israel posture.
Now, by the way, I'm so sick of all these insider books.
Jim Mattis, John Kelly, Jim Comey, Anonymous, Andy McCabe.
I mean, what kind of operation is happening at the highest levels of government where this is tolerated, where this is allowed, this kind of insurrection?
This book is nothing new, but when are people going to be held accountable for this?
Is this okay?
I mean, this is how countries crumble and fall apart.
And here's one more thing to keep in mind.
John Bolton said in 2010, quote, if I had something to say that I knew was false to protect American national security, I would do it.
This happened live on air, play tape.
You would lie in order to preserve the truth.
If I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national security, I would do it.
So with all of that in mind, let's get into some of the outrageous, salacious things that John Bolton claims in his book.
This is from the New York Times.
The book offers firsthand evidence that Mr. Trump linked his suspension of the $391 million in security aid for Ukraine to his demands that Ukraine publicly announced investigations into supposed wrongdoing by Democrats, including former Vice President Joe Biden.
This, of course, was the heart of the impeachment case against the president.
But here's the thing: if John Bolton had something urgent to say, something incriminating, some evidence that supposedly would have ended the administration, exposed a real national security threat, don't you think he'd be willing to say that under oath?
Of course not, because he's a fraud.
Instead, he waited to ink a $2 million book deal to leak his, quote, damning information to the activist media.
And again, for you listening to this, and you don't care about the weeds, just imagine how ungrateful you must be to have the president appoint you to a position and do this.
How could you do something like this?
I mean, just don't write the book at all and go live on a farm.
I mean, this is so immoral, plucked from cable news obscurity and given a chance to serve your country and then you go write a book like this.
Man.
And this is from CNN.
At another meeting during last year's G20 summit in Osaka, Bolton writes Trump's, quote, stunningly turned into conversation at the up to the coming 2020 election.
The former national security advisor said while he was flying around the world with Donald Trump, quote, stressed the importance of farmers and increased Chinese purchase of soybeans and wheat in the electoral outcome.
Now, does this sound familiar to anyone?
It's like Russia Gate and UkraineGate 2.0.
This is rinse and repeating a tire narrative of Trump asking foreign leaders to help him win the election.
Of course, I'm being sarcastic.
Now, remember when Trump asked Putin to help him win the election?
Remember when Trump asked Ukraine to help him win the election?
Remember when Democrats even tried to claim Trump asked China?
He said to a gaggle of reporters outside the White House, quote, China should start an investigation to Biden.
It's because what happened in China is just about as bad as what's happened in Ukraine.
It was a totally flippant remark, but impeachable nonetheless, if you ask the House Democrats.
Now, mind you, if the Democrats actually cared about foreign intervention in our elections, which they don't, if they actually cared about foreign involvement, which John Bolton doesn't, they'd care about the illegal immigrants and foreign nationals living in our country.
They'd care about the Middle Eastern money flowing into our country to impact our elections.
They'd care about the Chinese Communist Party purchasing media into our country.
They don't care about any of that stuff.
And am I supposed to care really after Barack Obama was caught on an open mic telling the Russians that if they gave more space to win election in 2012, he'll cave to them on Mitchell defense?
Play tape.
This is my last election, I suppose.
Yes, that's in my election.
I have more flexibility.
My point is this.
This is just Russia Gate 2, 3, or 4.0.
It's all part of the rinse and repeat news cycle of, quote, destroy Trump at all costs.
Truth and double standards be damned.
But we do have truth on our side.
Bob Lighthauser was in the same room as Bolton.
If Trump had asked President Xi to help him win the election, he would have heard it.
And guess what?
Unlike John Bolton, Lighthouser went under oath.
Here's what he said when he asked about the incident.
Absolutely untrue.
Never happened.
I was there.
I have no recollection of that ever happening.
I don't believe it's true.
I don't believe it ever happened.
Maybe you should say it one more time.
For those in the back, Lighthouser, thank you.
God bless you.
You're a patriot who pursues truth.
Now, Senator Bob Menendez, who probably should be in jail if it wasn't for a hung jury, pushed back, quote, so now you fully recollect that you were there.
And then it continued, no, I was at the meeting.
Would I recollect if something as crazy as that happened?
Of course, I would recollect it.
I was at the meeting.
Menendez then cut in to ask, quote, you weren't sure at the beginning that you were at the meeting.
So now that I know you're at the meeting, you in essence dispute Mr. Bolton's account of what took place.
Lighthizer responded, yes, that's correct.
I said what I was meeting at, and this never happened.
In it for sure, completely crazy.
Call me crazy.
I believe the guy willing to go under oath over John Bolton, one of history's most notorious weasels and dishonest hacks.
Now, again, before I get into John Bolton and more of the claims and the legal side of it, I encourage you to go to charliekirk.com, charliekirk.com, chip in some money if you can.
It's kind of a model of supporting the show organically, helps us cover our production costs.
And guess what?
You got to enjoy this show ad-free.
We put in seven or eight hours a day, production costs, editing, hosting fees, all that stuff.
So you can go to charliekirk.com.
We would deeply appreciate it.
Bolton also claims that Trump told President G, quote, that building internment camps was the right thing to do, end quote.
This is, of course, false and meant to be inflammatory.
A year before these alleged remarks, President Trump had publicly condemned China's concentration camp, something other presidents haven't had the courage to do.
Further, in an apparent attempt to sow internal discord, remember Bolton loves starting wars.
Bolton also claimed Mike Pompeo once sent a note to Bolton describing Trump as full of beep.
That's all I have to say.
As Mike Pompeo, someone who has done an incredible job as Secretary of State, responded through a spokesperson, said, quote, the only person full of beep is John Bolton.
The secretary is not a note passer.
And if he had such a note, he would not put up or shut up.
While we're still waiting for the full contents of the book, we're working off of a leaked manuscript here, strategically leaked, I might add, to kick Trump while he's down.
These are just some of the most outrageous lines.
You know what's so maddening?
You know what's so infuriating?
The media has spent at least two decades hating this man.
I mean, they hated John Bolton under George W. Bush.
They hated John Bolton and now he's a hero.
It's kind of the Mitt Romney journey.
It's the opposite of the hero's journey.
I call this the villain's journey.
You see, a hero's journey is someone who starts in a place of innocence.
They find their path.
They find an enemy.
They defeat the enemy and they do something righteous and good.
The villain's journey is they start as someone that is hated by the opposition.
They descend to try to win appeasement of that person.
This is the villain's journey.
And by the way, with Mitt Romney and John Bolton, this is exactly the biblical archetype of Judas.
Judas literally walked with our God on earth.
Judas walked next to Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.
And Judas betrayed Jesus Christ.
He went away from Christ for money.
And this is the archetype of John Bolton and Mitt Romney.
It's not the hero's journey.
It's not the pursuit of truth.
It's the pursuit of earthly possession.
It's the pursuit of appeasement.
It's not the pursuit of that which is righteous and good and courageous.
It's, I'm going to stab somebody in the back.
I'm going to try to benefit myself.
But right now, as the rules of the left do dictate what's happening, the moment someone becomes anti-Trump, all their past transgressions are forgiven.
Like Mitt Romney, who used to have dogs on his roof, Mitt Romney, who used to get made fun of for having car elevators.
I mean, Mitt Romney was, for those of you that were not in the political fight in 2012, maybe you were too young or you just weren't in the fight.
Mitt Romney was so unbelievably and mercilessly attacked.
And I have to tell you, you know what's so frustrating?
I came to his defense so much.
I battled for Mitt Romney because he was our guy.
We got to go to war for him.
And guess what?
Mitt Romney is such a disingenuous hack.
Let's just do that.
We're a family-friendly show.
You guys can use other words.
Say them out loud right now.
Maybe you're drive, maybe you're working out.
Say him.
They might have four letters.
That's all I'm going to say.
Bolton was hated by the left because he was on the neoconservative right.
And look, as soon as they associate with Trump, total even worse villain like Jim Mattis.
But when they rebel against Trump, all of a sudden they become a hero like Scaramucci, like Amarosa.
Look, it's exhausting.
That's the best way I can possibly characterize this.
It's so exhausting and it's predictable and it's really boring.
I remember the first tranche of leaks to come out of the White House.
Everyone was worried, myself included.
Could this be the end of Trump?
And by the way, the leaking should have no tolerance at all.
President Trump should instruct Attorney General Barr to put anyone who leaks in prison for the furthest, the longest period of time imaginable and possible.
The fact there's still leaks in the White House, they should relocate the White House to Camp David to just five staffers and have everyone else zoom in.
They should have everyone in the White House wear wires.
I'm not kidding.
Wear wires and find out who's leaking what they're saying.
And you might say, Charlie, that's really extreme.
What could be more important than the secrecy and the internal harmony of a White House working?
Why is this tolerated?
It shouldn't be.
This is insubordination.
This is insurrection against the president.
And I'm so defensive of the president because I'm so loyal to my country, and this should not be put up with.
So here we go again, folks.
In case you didn't know, the media thinks Trump is bad, and they want you to think so too.
And even it means selling out their souls to what journalistic integrity they might have left to prop up Ambassador John Robert Bolton.
Now, thankfully, the Trump administration is fighting back.
Federal prosecutors are weighing whether to criminally charge John Bolton with disclosing classified information in his upcoming White House memoir.
And the DOJ late Wednesday ramped up its legal campaign by seeking a temporary restraining order to block publication of his book.
Now, mind you, I'm going to read this lawsuit.
I'm super perplexed by this.
I mean, why is the DOJ filing civil suits?
I don't get that.
They have the authority to indict.
I mean, why are you pursuing civil courts when you're literally the Department of Justice?
I mean, maybe there's some wisdom in this I'm missing.
However, to me, it makes no sense.
Indict the guy.
He's using classified information.
David Petraeus, he showed classified information to a mistress, and he got criminally prosecuted for this.
People have done far less.
He's done far worse.
Prosecute Joel and Bolton.
Make it hurt.
And guess what?
Maybe we'll have a precedent for Amarosa, for James Comey, for Jim Mattis.
It really makes you think.
Is there someone going up to these people and whispering in their ear and saying, don't worry, we control the deep state of the DOJ.
You'll be protected.
Because I actually think that's the only way these people would continue to do this.
That someone's whispering in their ear that they actually control the levers of the Department of Justice.
So, Bill Barr, if you're listening to this, which maybe you are, someone around Bill Barr, please prosecute one of these people.
And I'd love it to be the mustache man.
I would love the mustache man to be indicted.
I'd love to have the mustache man who has never found a country that he does not want to invade and go after.
And by the way, I don't like this level of personalization attacks.
But if you're going to go after Donald Trump this way, the man who's done so much for our country, and go, a man who gave you a position, a man who said, you know what, I'm believing in you.
I'm going to give you a platform.
And then you go trade for dollars on that platform.
You go turn the back on the country.
I mean, I can think of things that are more immoral, but this is up there as one of the most immoral things a human being can do.
This is one of the most categorically disgusting things someone can do to advance their own political career.
For what?
Why are you doing this, John Bolton?
Because it makes you feel good?
Because you're going to get a full bank account?
It is the worst aspects of American politics, and I hope he is held totally and completely criminally accountable.
For those of you that want to come to our big Trump rally, that's right, we have a Trump event coming up Tuesday, June 23rd in Phoenix, Arizona.
We want as many people as we can get.
Go to trumpstudents.org.
That's trumpstudents.org.
You can email me, freedom at charliekirk.com, freedom at charliekirk.com.
If you guys can chip in a dollar, $5, maybe $50, go to charliekirk.com.
Check out our store.
We've got some great merchandise there, charliekirk.com.
Get involved with TurningPointUSA.
It's tpusa.com, tpusa.com, our educational organization focused on empowering, identifying, training, and organizing the next generation around free markets, first principles, American exceptionalism, the sovereignty of our country.
We are going to save America with fighters, with courage.
Turning Point USA is the way to do it.
And for the first 15 people right here, right now that email me at freedom at charliekirk.com that you're subscribing, give us a five-star review, you get a signed copy of the MAGA Doctrine.
I read all your emails.
I love hearing your stories.
I love hearing what's happening.
Please keep emailing me at freedom at charliekirk.com, what you're reading, what you're processing, what we're missing, the things that you want to see us talk about.
I'd love to hear from you guys.
Freedom at CharlieKirk.com.
Thank you guys so much for listening.
Come to our rally, Phoenix, Arizona, June 23rd.
Thanks so much.
God bless.
Export Selection