All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Feb. 14, 2022 - The Charlie Kirk Show
35:15
Everything You Need to Know about Hillary Clinton's SPYGATE with Kash Patel
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Hillary's White House Internet Access 00:02:03
Hey, everybody.
A bombshell story.
Hillary Clinton had back-end access to the White House internet activity.
We dive into this.
I did a lot of research ahead of this episode.
I spent like an hour in the desk ahead of time.
I got in early, went into all the documents.
We have Kash Patel that breaks it down later in the show.
But if you want to all of a sudden have a prism change where all of a sudden you're like, maybe Hillary Clinton could get indicted.
Now, we might be getting ahead of ourselves, but you got to listen to this episode, take notes into great detail.
I worked very hard on the data side, the research side of this episode.
I think you'll really enjoy it.
You can always email me directly, freedom at charliekirk.com.
That's freedom at charliekirk.com.
Make sure you're subscribed to the Charlie Kirk Show podcast by taking out your podcast app and typing in Charlie Kirk Show.
And if you want to support our show, go to charliekirk.com/slash support.
That's charliekirk.com/slash support.
If you want to get involved with Turning Point USA, go to tpusa.com.
That's tpusa.com, where we play offense with a sense of urgency to win the American culture war, where we operate every single day.
Our goal is to pass down American values from one generation to the next.
tpusa.com.
That's tpusa.com.
Buckle up, everybody.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
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 is 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.
Brought to you by Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage.
For personalized loan services, you can count on.
Go to andrewandodd.com, the wonderfulandrewandtodd.com.
Russian Narrative and Constitutional Implications 00:08:21
Late Friday evening, John Durham, who is running the investigation into the origins of the Clinton Fusion GPS Russia hoax, filed an incredible motion.
Now, this has constitutional implications.
This has legal implications.
This is a massive story.
This is bigger than Trump.
This is bigger than Hillary.
This is a story that has existential implications.
So John Durham files this motion, basically accusing Michael Sussman, who's been indicted for lying to the FBI, of a conflict of interest.
Now, why this was filed when it was filed is a question that Kash Patel is going to answer for us later this hour.
I'm not exactly sure.
We could speculate, but I'm going to tell you what's in it, and I'm going to tell you some of the immediate takeaways.
So in this filing, so many of the suspicions that we've had all along came to light.
Now, you heard Donald Trump say many times, they spied on my campaign.
They spied on my campaign.
So we thought that that was limited to the FISA court application, which is a big deal, by the way.
Using the FISA domestic courts to try and obtain a warrant to spy on a presidential candidate, a law or via Carter Page, was a massive violation of the Fourth Amendment, constitutional orthodoxy, and due process as we know it.
And that story has been unraveling for a couple years.
It's been drip, drip, drip, leak, leak, leak.
And without John Durham, we'd never get to the bottom of it.
But to be honest, I thought that was kind of the extent of it.
I thought we had this kind of all mapped out.
We had Hillary Clinton that paid Fusion GPS multiples of millions of dollars.
That money was then used to try and concoct the Russian narrative.
We know that there was involvement with that Russian woman who pretended to be in charge of an adoption agency, who came and met with Donald Trump Jr. meetings were a big part of this.
This was a collusion scheme.
We know that.
But what we suspected and what we didn't know was the extent of what Hillary Clinton did personally to continue this operation.
So what we have is a timeline issue.
You see, the other side would say, yeah, okay, they tried to get a FISA warrant, but it's because there was a lot of intelligence and they'd created this dirty dossier and, you know, and then Trump became president, and then we left it at that.
But it's much deeper than that.
And it's so reprehensible what these people did.
So what came out in this court filing is John Durham revealed that Hillary Clinton and her campaign continued a surveillance project while Donald Trump was president.
That's right, president of the United States.
Now, you might ask how that would be possible.
Well, Hillary Clinton went and found a group of tech workers.
We suspect these tech workers work for Georgia Tech.
They are internet service providing tech geniuses, you could say.
Hillary Clinton hired them and basically knew that they had back-end government access.
So these tech workers worked for DARPA, which is the defense research agency.
So basically, they were able to track internet activity and maybe know more, but we know at least internet activity of what was happening in the EOP.
Now, the EOP is the executive office of the president.
So Hillary Clinton, according to this filing, hired tech workers, outside vendors, who then came through and were monitoring what websites the White House was visiting.
Your government.
So these tech executives had government access and exploited it for money and for espionage.
This is total and complete domestic espionage, using their access to spy on a sitting president of the United States.
Let's play cut two, Maria Bartaroma on how countries would love to have access to the White House and how is it that a tech company was able to gain access?
Play cut two.
Every American should be outraged by this.
Do you know how many foreign countries want to get into the White House's internet flow?
How many adversaries out there want to get into the White House, the president of the United States, internet activity, and this tech executive was able to do that?
What does that tell us about the national security of this country?
What does that tell us of the power of the Clinton machine enabling to take down her political enemy for four years straight and damage his reputation?
This is even bigger than just spying on a campaign.
As soon as Donald Trump took the oath of office, there was an assumption amongst many conservatives that the spying stopped.
How do you spy on a president?
He has secret service protection.
He has special encrypted phones.
He has hardwired internet access.
It's the president, after all, isn't it?
Nope.
Hillary Clinton found a way to still spy on Trump.
She found a way to continue the Russian narrative while he was the commander-in-chief.
What do you think about that?
He's in charge of the executive branch of government.
He is the sovereign choice of the people.
He's not sovereign, but the people gave their power to him through an election.
And what does Hillary Clinton do?
She continues the money flow to these tech workers, and Michael Sussman was involved in all of this, to keep on trafficking or monitoring the internet traffic in the White House.
For example, if anyone in the White House may have visited RT, which is Russian television or whatever, hey, that's a traitor.
Now, why would she do that?
She was trying to find little crumbs of internet activity to try to prove that the White House was in communication with the Russians.
Well, of course, they were in communication with the Russians here and there.
It's part of diplomacy.
So the question is: what did Hillary Clinton and these tech workers find and what do they do with it?
They planned a summit in Helsinki with the Russian government.
So let me get this straight.
It's not that the government was spying on you.
That's happening now.
It's Hillary was spying on our government.
I want you to think about that.
Who's actually in charge in this situation?
This is how naive I was.
I thought that, okay, once you get president, become president, it could leak.
They can attack you.
But then, should we be really that surprised?
I shouldn't now that I thought about it.
They spied on Donald Trump's phone call to Ukraine and leaked the contents of it, a perfectly fine phone call, and they impeached him because of it.
What Hillary Clinton did via these tech workers, which again, think about it, these guys are internet programmers.
They are paid by the federal, they are paid by the federal government, and then they're like, oh, let's do some side work to exploit our security clearance for political opportunity.
That used to be called treason.
You can't do that.
It's not like an innocent mistake.
Like, oh, well, yeah, I didn't know that we can't give the internet logs or the traffic of the White House.
I want you to think for a second: what if there was a serious leak from these tech workers?
I'm talking about we were going to go take out Al-Baghdadi and one of these tech workers was compromised by ISIS.
What if we were going to take out Qassam Soleimani and they leak it to the Iranians?
All of that is conceivable based on this back end.
Hillary Clinton built a back tunnel into the internet access of the government of the United States.
Treasonous Use of Security Clearance 00:03:11
This is bigger than anything we thought previously.
Okay, you spy on Trump using Pfizer.
You try to do that.
No, no, no.
She built a tunnel so she could see what your government was doing because she didn't like their politics.
With all the noise surrounding the topics of money and the economy, today, more than ever before, you need a financial guide that you can trust.
That's why I trust PAX Financial Group.
Not only do they share my conservative values, they are committed to putting your interests ahead of their own.
Big Wall Street firms are forcing their political agendas into your investments.
And it's time to stop giving your money to companies that don't share your values or use their profits, my profits, as a way to silence Christians.
PAX is proud to offer an alternative called BRIs, biblical responsible investing.
Look, I got to know the people behind PAX Financial at a pro-life dinner in San Antonio.
I got to know them and they told me about biblical responsible investing.
And at first, I wasn't really sure what to make of it.
But as I got to know the team behind PAX Financial, we agreed to partner with them here on the Charlie Kirk Show.
Biblical responsible investing supports and promotes our values of being pro-family and pro-life and screens out companies that support pornography or anti-Christian or anti-conservative.
If you have $150,000 or more in investments, text them, Charlie, at number 74868.
Text them, just Charlie, right now to number 74868.
They'll be able to schedule a 15-minute free no-obligation consultation.
I'm moving some of my money over to PAX Financial.
And honestly, I hope they do well with it with some of the returns.
But I'm happy that part of my portfolio will be able to go towards biblical responsible investing.
I think they're going to crush it for me in the market, but I'll be able to know that my hard-earned dollars are not going towards pornography, anti-Christian, pro-BLM nonsense.
You'll be connected with a financial advisor who will walk this through with you.
Text Charlie at number 74868 today.
Invest in companies that don't hate you.
Invest in companies that I believe are actually consistent with biblical truths.
Go to biblical responsible investing.
If that interests you, text right now to 74868.
Just Charlie in the body there.
Check it out right now.
Brought to you by PAX Financial Group PAX.
Front page of the Washington Post.
They have an infographic of the game-winning play from the Super Bowl, but no mention of this new court filing from Durham.
Now, I'm going to say something.
I don't think it's likely and I think it's unlikely, but it's first time it's in the cards.
I think that's in the cards that Hillary could potentially be criminally culpable and indicted.
I don't think it's going to happen.
I'm too cynical for that.
And I've learned that there's two sets of rules, a two-tier justice system.
But what has been revealed in these documents, it's far worse than just paying for a dirty dossier and you know what's going to happen for the FISA court.
Two-Tier Justice System Explained 00:03:43
No, this was an ongoing espionage operation, and it warrants a couple questions.
How long was it?
What period of time was Hillary spying on the White House?
What did Hillary know about it?
Where were the reports sent to and from?
What was done with those reports?
What information was gathered?
Remember this when Hillary Clinton had tweets on Trump colluding with Russia?
Cut eight.
Hillary Clinton, Twitter account.
Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump organization to a Russian-based bank.
Here's another.
It's time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia.
Now, this was right before the election.
That's what's so bizarre about it.
Instead of spending money in Wisconsin or Pennsylvania, Hillary was spending millions of dollars paying computer scientists to hack into Trump Tower.
And that's the other part of it.
The other part of it is that this started with hiring tech workers to infiltrate Trump's towers internet activity, DNS activity.
And then she found other tech workers or continued as tech workers and did it to the government of the United States.
This is an insurrection, or it's close to it.
If you want, all of a sudden use that word insurrection.
I mean, maybe it is, maybe it isn't.
I know that word is overused.
But wouldn't it be closer to someone actually hiring tech workers to monitor and spy on the government of the United States?
Hillary Clinton, who is a non-government employee, a citizen, hires tech workers to spy on what the government is doing.
That's a lot more like insurrection than a 75-year-old grandma coming into the Capitol Rotunda with a don't tread on me flag taking a selfie of herself.
Which one is more like an insurrection?
The grandma going into the Capitol Rotunda and smiling and taking a selfie, or Hillary Clinton paying millions of dollars to tech workers using their back-end access to see what sites and internet traffic is occurring in the White House.
So what's next is the question.
Well, Kash Patel is going to join us in just a couple of moments to walk us through that.
And what's so extraordinary about this is Hillary didn't stop.
Trump becomes president, and she didn't suspend all the espionage or the dark arts operations.
She accelerated it.
Think of the spine it takes.
And I'm being nice by using spine, by the way.
You can fill it in with any word you want, that it takes, the gumption, the wherewithal it takes to say, hey, he got sworn in.
I solemnly swear.
And he walks over to the White House, and then you go send your goons, Mark Elias, Sussman, and others, to go find tech workers that have been given security access to the government to say, hey, can you leak some of that so that we might be able to leak it to the FBI so we can continue to try to build a fake Russian narrative against Donald Trump?
There's a lot of words you could use to describe this, treason, insurrection, espionage.
But here's what we do know.
There is a 0% chance Hillary was not the architect of all of it.
So how's your new year going so far?
Pretty good, I hope.
But it's been tough, hasn't it?
Lots of us have begun to wake up and smell the roses.
And some of us have smelt coffee instead.
All of us are now realizing how quick time is rushing past.
You're that much closer to retirement and that much closer to not earning.
But in the meantime, you've got some catching up to do.
With crypto and markets very risky right now and inflation running anywhere between 8 to 20 percent and conservatively it's 8 percent.
Architect of Espionage Revealed 00:14:29
Where are you going to keep your money to keep up and beat it?
You might want to talk to an expert at Noble Gold and run through the options for keeping your money safe.
No pressure, no hassle, and no call centers.
This month, Noble Gold is giving away a free one-tenth of an ounce solid gold American Eagle coin with any qualifying plan that you start.
So just speak to someone who knows what they're talking about for once.
How good would that feel?
Call us at 877-646-5347 or visit our website at noblegoldinvestments.com.
That's noblegoldinvestments.com.
I want you to imagine if the Russians did this, let alone Hillary Clinton.
Imagine if the Russians were able to get some contractors and say, we want to spy on the internet activity of what's going on in the White House.
What's to say that hasn't happened, by the way?
If it's that easy to just get the internet activity to the White House, the Chinese have probably already done it.
The Iranians have probably already done it.
An ongoing monitoring operation of a sitting U.S. president.
Now, remember when Donald Trump was on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stalt?
And he said, my campaign was spied on.
And she said, oh, there's no evidence of this.
Play cut one.
The biggest scandal was when they spied on my campaign.
They spied on my campaign.
There's no real evidence of that.
Of course there is.
It's all over the place.
Leslie, they spied on my campaign and they got caught.
Can I say something?
You know, this is 60 Minutes.
And we can't put on things we can't verify.
You won't put it on because it's bad for Biden.
We can't put on things we can't verify.
Leslie, they spied on my campaign.
Well, we can't verify it's not totally verified.
No.
It's been, just go down and get the papers.
They spied on my campaign.
They got caught.
No.
And then they went much further than that and they got caught.
And you will see that, Leslie.
And you know that, but you just don't want to believe all the internet.
As a matter of fact, I don't know that.
This is 60 Minutes.
We take ourselves very seriously here.
And there's no real evidence to suggest that.
Even though there was at the time.
Now, what Trump was focused on in that exchange with Leslie was not even the Hillary Clinton spying on the White House allegations.
It was the Carter Page allegations.
That was the main focus of it because that's what we knew.
But John Durham has now dug up invoices from Michael Sussman, who is now indicted, who is basically invoicing the Clinton campaign for ongoing services of monitoring the White House.
Here's just like some general word to the wise.
If you're going to spy on the White House, don't put it in your legal invoices.
Just call it general legal consulting.
No, instead, it was consulting for X tech company to Y service.
But don't worry, according to Leslie, she says, Look, we're 60 minutes, okay?
You have to take us very, very seriously.
Now, Trump likely knew in that conversation about Hillary Clinton spying on the White House.
But let me tell you something.
I think Trump should have leaked it.
Now, that might have screwed up the Durham investigation, but hasn't this whole thing been more about public opinion than anything else?
If we knew that Trump was being spied on, the whole White House, it's not just Trump, it's all the White House staffers.
It's the National Security Council, it's John Bolton with that weird mustache.
It's all everyone, their internet activity was back-ended.
So I want you to imagine: here's the analogy of basically what happened.
I want you to imagine, without you knowing it, someone was able to monitor all of your internet search activity to your house and your business and build a dossier of alleged information based on that.
For example, oh, he Googled hotels in Moscow.
He must be a Russian agent.
Maybe you were just interested what hotels there were in Moscow.
Just kind of, you were just searching on Expedia for fun.
That's what they were doing.
And someone who knows this better than anyone else who has been the anti-cynic Kash Patel, who is terrific.
He's joining us by phone right now.
Cash, how are you doing?
Late, I was talking to our great friend and leader, President Trump.
So apologies.
No, that's okay.
I'm sure he's a little fired up right now.
So that's not an easy conversation to end.
Cash, I did my best to go through all of this.
I mentioned the filing on Friday, what was in the filing, the ongoing surveillance project of a sitting president of the United States in the White House, which is beyond comprehension.
What is the public missing?
What I might be missing?
Tell me what I might be missing in regards to this.
To me, I think you nailed it, Charlie.
That's the highlight.
I mean, it's sad that we now say that surveilling a presidential candidate is sort of last week's criminal activity.
Now we're talking about surveilling an entire White House compound, not just the Oval Office, but the National Security Council, the Economic Council, the Office of the Vice President, the Office of the Trade, and every other piece of traffic that goes through the compound of the 17 acres where the president resides.
That is the most, the biggest criminal activity that has occurred that I've ever heard of.
I don't think science fiction could have written it.
Yeah, and it's just, I mean, it's, I think it should be illegal, right?
I mean, who's who says you could build a back-end access to White House internet activity?
How's that possible?
Well, let's have some fun now that I'm finally out of government.
And since I haven't been around the intelligence, they can't accuse me of disclosing classified intelligence.
But what I'll tell you is my take.
In the Durham pleading, he wrote that there was a sensitive arrangement, quote unquote, that allowed those tech guys that the Democrats and Hillary Clinton and Jake Sullivan hired to gain access to the White House.
So the only way that happens, Charlie, the only way on planet Earth that happens in my estimation is if you have an arrangement with the NSA.
Oh, so you think the NSA was working with these tech contractors to build an encrypted tunnel or not a tunnel so you could look at internet access of the EOP?
Is that right?
So in my experience, and since I haven't been around the intel and I'm giving you my estimation, there's no other sensitive arrangement you could make to get access to the most secure servers on planet Earth unless you're talking to the intelligence community, i.e. the NSA.
So the NSA allegedly willingly built a leaking operation of what websites the White House was visiting via these tech workers.
So how do the tech workers come into play here?
They were just the middlemen?
No.
So what happens generally is the tech, they become contractors.
So they go to the NSA and they form some sort of arrangement like we do all the time with private companies.
And we say, we are going to hire, we, the NSA, the intelligence community, are going to hire you, the tech workers, to do X, Y, and Z. Or the tech workers approach them and said, we want a contract for you.
And this is the effort that we want to undertake with you.
And that's the only way in.
There's no other way in.
There's no other sensitive agreement, arrangement, excuse me, to use John Durham's words, that allows you access to those servers.
It just doesn't exist.
So just so I understand, the NSA worked with Hillary.
Is that right?
Through, in my estimation, the NSA and the intelligence community worked with the Hillary Clinton campaign to surveil a sitting president of the United States and not just him, his entire compound.
Yeah, I'm not trying to interrupt you, Cash, but the campaign was over, right?
I mean, she wasn't president, right?
She lost.
And so.
No, you're totally right.
But remember, the guy that's indicted, Sussman, the lead lawyer for the Hillary Clinton campaign, right?
He peddled the whole Alpha Bank server situation that he had made up by these same very tech guys in February of 17.
He brought that to the FBI.
So they continued on through the campaign, through the election, and into President Trump's presidency.
So it's no surprise that they stuck to their efforts that they had been working on for almost two years by that point.
So explain this to me.
And Cash, it's just hard to comprehend.
It shouldn't be, honestly, but because we've become so cynical.
But this one even blew me away.
I spent like an hour diving into it this morning and I have more questions than answers.
Why did Durham do this filing on Friday?
And what's the significance of these filings?
Just walk us through the legal technicalities of that.
Yeah, sure.
So look, what he's doing, it was a motion regarding conflicts of counsel.
And basically all that means is John Durham has a duty as a federal prosecutor, as I did when I was running these types of cases, that if you see that the target, your defendant, in this case, Sussman, his lawyers are representing multiple people that are targets of an investigation or witnesses of an investigation.
He, John Durham, has to let the court know that there exists a possible conflict of interest.
Because if he, John Durham, knows about it and doesn't let the court know, then that's basically an automatic reversal, i.e., Sussman can go to trial, get convicted, and it'll be reversed in the appellate courts because there was not a waiver of what we call a waiver of a conflict in counsel.
So basically, all of the Perkins Cooys, the Democratic lawyer machine, they went out and hired this big fancy law firm, Latham and Watkins.
But all of them were represented by the same one firm that Sussman is.
So Durham Durham is basically saying, look, Judge, I'm putting everyone on notice.
And by the way, here's a bunch of other information.
He's being very smart because it's his only way to talk to the public.
That makes perfect sense.
And I suppose it also is spooking all the other ones because of this filing, right?
I mean, they're now learning their targets of the investigation.
So, Cash, last time we had you on this program, you said that you think it wouldn't go higher than maybe the FBI deputy director.
Now, what do you think now?
I mean, I said, and I could be wrong, I think it's unlikely.
I think it's a low probability, but is a Hillary indictment in the cards here?
What's your analysis here?
I mean, I try to, you know, I would say that's wishful thinking.
I try to be realistic.
It's going to be very hard to indict her because she's just, you know, she's so smart and she's so, let's be honest.
Machiavellian.
Exactly.
And so she covers her tracks.
She's not dumb.
She's very smart.
And she hired a team of people to execute her Machiavellian plan here, to borrow your words.
And of course, those people aren't going to have signature trails leading back to her phone calls or emails or anything like that.
They just wouldn't operate like that.
So it's going to be very hard to get her.
But I think you can start targeting the Jake Sullivans of the world, the current National Security Advisor and former Hillary Clinton top aide, who I believe has been lying to Congress in America when he says, oh, I had no idea what Perkins Cooey was doing.
I mean, just think about that, Charlie.
The head of the Hillary Clinton campaign who's paying Perkins Cooey millions of dollars is actually telling America he didn't know what they were spending the money on.
Cash, and you have to be careful because of all the roles you've had in government, Chief Staff to DOD all this.
Were you shocked to learn this filing that the surveillance continued while he was president?
I will say now, yes, I was floored that it continued into the White House.
Yes.
That is absolutely not even unheard of.
I haven't even literally, I was like, I was interweb searching the other day just for like the craziest things that can happen at a White House and I couldn't find anything like this.
Yeah, I mean, I said earlier, this feels more like an insurrection than a bunch of grandmas walking into a rotunda and taking selfies.
I'm not saying it is.
I'm not saying it is an insurrection.
I think that word is overused, obviously, but it surely is closer when you get back end access to internet traffic of the executive branch of the United States.
Who's to say the Iranians or the Russians, which we're supposed to hate, or the Chinese couldn't do the same?
And with the help potentially of the NSA, so this feels like it's highly orchestrated inside government, NSA, all of it.
This could be even bigger than Durham.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, this makes Watergate look like a parking ticket.
It makes Christopher Steele's nonsense look like a misdemeanor.
This is the biggest orchestrated criminal enterprise in U.S. history against a sitting president.
And it has to be.
I mean, just think about what we're talking about.
It's now been proven that they penetrated.
They, the Hillary Clinton campaign, penetrated the White House to spy on a sitting president and his team who are duly elected and charged with running the governance of this country.
That has to be criminal.
Totally.
So how high do you think this goes?
How wide does this go?
I mean, Sullivan might be involved, all these different sorts of things.
And what's the timeline look like here?
Because now we're getting teased a little bit with some justice and that a president who was elected is still spied on and the internet activity is back-ended.
What do you think the timeline to hold people accountable is here?
Well, you know, I think you and I have talked about in the past.
It's still a couple of months away because, and I think this teasing, you know, these bits of information we're getting from John Durham show you why it's taking him so long because it's so complex.
I mean, he's unraveling a scheme that literally sci-fi writers in Hollywood couldn't conjure up.
And to prove it, you can't just say, oh, I know it happened.
You have to prove it in a court of law, which is twice as hard to do.
So he's obtaining, you know, literally millions of call records, data records, internet traffic.
He's got to get people to digest that, to look at it, to connect the dots, to make it so that it's translatable in a court of law.
Timeline for Accountability Indictments 00:03:26
And that's a big lift.
I think in the next two to three months, I've always said that's basically the timeline.
You're going to see a couple more indictments start coming.
And then it's just going to keep going.
So we'll see another pleading or two is my guess from him in the next week or two with more information, which will ultimately lead to more indictments.
I'm convinced of that and have been for a long time.
If a foreign government did this, what would it be?
An act of war, treason?
What would it be if the Iranians hired a subcontractor to get back-end access to the White House?
I mean, it's look, as a foreign federal prosecutor, I don't want to throw around words, you know, but it's essentially treasonous behavior because they, our foreign adversary, is trying to take out the operations of the White House, you know, the center of the United States government.
So that would be not, I don't want to say an act of war, but it would be an act that would be responded to swiftly and harshly, say if Iran did this or somebody else like that.
And it should be no different if now we are learning that, you know, it was Hillary Clinton and her campaign, the response to be harsh and swift.
And the fake news media has to start covering this.
That's the second tragedy that, you know, we, I know we haven't talked about it, but as bad as this criminal activity is, I think the media is responsible for it as well because they failed to cover it, lied about it for so long.
And let's see what they do now with the latest pleadings.
Well, they still aren't covering it.
And it's bigger than just FISA.
It's bigger than just Carter Page.
This is now bigger than a dossier.
The question is, who is giving back end access to the executive branch of our government?
I just, that to me is the centerpiece.
It's bigger than anything I have heard previously.
Tell us why.
You're absolutely right.
Because we have to demand answers to that question because there is no other arrangement that can be made.
What John Durham is saying is this tech group that was hired by the Hillary Clinton campaign had permission through a sensitive arrangement to obtain data from White House servers.
What United States government would allow that?
Obviously, not the Trump administration because no one asked the Trump administration, which proves what we've been saying all along.
Leadership, career bureaucrats who were in place set up arrangements in contravention to the commander-in-chief to spy on him and they did it with President Trump's enemy.
I mean, if Republicans did this, we know how it would.
I mean, it's just insurrection treason.
And this is when they said they were going to do whatever was necessary to get rid of Trump, they really meant it.
And Chuck Schumer, it was not an idle threat when he went on Rachel Maddow's show back in January of 2017.
They meant it.
Very possibly built back end access to internet activity in the White House to continue this.
This is bigger than spying on a campaign.
It was spying on a president duly elected by the people.
Cash, we're out of time.
Thank you so much.
It's fightwithcash.com.
Everyone, check it out.
Fightwithcash.com.
We'll see you soon, Cash.
Thank you.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email us your thoughts as always freedom at charliekirk.com.
If you want to subscribe to the Charlie Kirk Show podcast, type in Charlie Kirk Show and hit subscribe in the upper right-hand corner.
It's a plus sign.
Thanks so much for listening.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.
Export Selection