All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
May 4, 2022 - The Charlie Kirk Show
34:23
Mostly Peaceful Murderers Protest at The High Court with Julio Rosas
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Roe Versade Impact on Midterms 00:15:03
Hey, everybody.
Today, the Charlie Kirk Show.
Should we care if this Roe versus Wade decision is going to impact our midterms?
Will it impact the midterms?
Also, I'm joined by Julia Rosas, who has a new book called Fiery But Mostly Peaceful.
Will they try to burn the country down because of what's happened with Roe versus Wade?
That and so much more.
Email me directly, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Get involved with TurningPointUSA Today at tpusa.com.
Support our young women's leadership.
Summit at tpusa.com/slash ywls.
You can always email me directlyfreedom at charliekirk.com and support the Charlie Kirk Show at charliekirk.com/slash support.
Buckle up, everybody.
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.
Brought to you by Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage.
For personalized loan services, you can count on.
Go to AndrewandTodd.com, the wonderfulandrewandtodd.com.
Okay, so we're getting some emails, and I was on some text messages this morning with some people that you would recognize.
And they said, Charlie, this is a terrible thing for the midterms.
The fact that the United States Supreme Court has come in and overturns Roe versus Wade, this means we are going to lose the Senate and maybe the House.
I said, hold on a second here.
I said, first of all, let's not get ahead of ourselves.
Let's ask ourselves the most important question.
Is that the most important thing?
Now, that matters a lot.
Putting a check on power is incredibly important.
However, I am willing, and I think that you should be willing to say very clearly that the protection of the innocent and the unborn matters more than a potential political cost that might be associated with it.
Getting rid of evil, it's going to be tough.
It's going to be a fight.
However, I reject the premise.
Let me just say this, though.
I reject the premise because I do not believe that this decision will hurt Republicans at all going into November.
Now, it might help Democrats a little bit with turnout, but if anything, it should give Republicans confidence that when they do actually get Republicans in office, that meaningful things can actually occur.
Now, I will say this: Donald Trump deserves a lot of credit for putting Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh on the U.S. Supreme Court, but also Mitch McConnell and the establishment Republicans, of whom I disagree with a lot, that are open borders in their seemingly very into adventurous wars.
Let's just talk about this, though.
This is an important thing.
And I'm not one to praise McConnell.
You know that.
But you look at someone like Susan Collins, right?
So Susan Collins voted for Katanji Brown Jackson.
Susan Collins has always been a vocal moderate.
Susan Collins is not a right-winger.
She isn't.
She's not a conservative.
She and I sat down, we'd agree on a little bit, and that's fine.
But I've always supported the candidacy of Susan Collins because she was very honest about how moderate she was.
Now, here's the irony: Susan Collins is pro-choice.
Is that Susan Collins is pro-abortion, but because she voted for Brett Kavanaugh against the mob and then ended up winning re-election, by the way, Susan Collins, a pro-abortion candidate in Maine, actually ends up being part of the reversal of abortion.
And by the way, if it wasn't for Susan Collins, Brett Kavanaugh would not be on the U.S. Supreme Court.
It just wouldn't happen.
She was the deciding vote.
If I remember correctly, Lisa Murkowski did not vote for Brett Kavanaugh.
Joe Manchin did only after Susan Collins signaled support.
And I think Manchin would have abstained.
That's right.
Yeah, okay.
Lisa Murkowski abstained.
It was a Susan Collins vote.
Now, look, I'm not one to go try and sing, you know, praises of rhinos and of establishment folks, but what frustrates me the most is not moderates we send to D.C.
It's people that pretend to be conservative to their voters and then end up being moderates when they go to D.C. If you're a moderate, run as a moderate.
If the voters give you political power, then okay.
You were very honest with your voters.
Susan Collins has been very honest with her voters for years.
She said, I am a moderate.
I am not a conservative.
I am not a liberal.
I'm in the middle.
I represent Maine first.
All right.
And I'm in a caucus with Republicans.
I respect that.
I really do.
Unlike Mitt Romney, who campaigns like Ted Cruz and actually is more moderate than Susan Collins or some of these other establishment folks.
Just be honest to your voters.
And so in a very ironic turn of events, here's Susan Collins, who probably has already issued a tweet saying that she's concerned that Roe versus Wade will be, I almost guarantee, Connor, look it up.
I almost guarantee Susan Collins is going to say, like, I don't like the decision, even though she was instrumental in the decision.
And I totally support that.
Now, what I'm getting at, though, and it's a fine line for some conservatives, is we must be willing to be a little pragmatic at times.
Now, that's a difficult word, right?
Because that's not who I am.
I was just in Ohio for JD Vance bashing the Republican establishment.
And then the next day, Charlie, you're complimenting Susan Collins.
Yeah, of course I am.
Because I like people that are honest to their voters.
I want to win.
And Susan Collins is very clear.
This is what she said.
Yeah, this is what Susan Collins says, which is fine, like whatever.
She said, quote, if this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it'd be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office.
That's fine.
Let Susan Collins blow some smoke off.
Let her do that.
She voted for both.
I think she voted for Gorsuch.
Yeah, I'm not mistaken.
Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.
I might, mind you, this is a technical thing, right?
And so Collins is saying that Kavanaugh and Gorsuch misled her.
No, they didn't, because they didn't actually, this decision is not about abortion, right?
This decision is very little about the what they call the medical technology of abortion.
It's not.
It's do the states have a right to determine their own course when it comes to these issues?
Or is what is called a enumerated right a blanket protection all across the land?
Now, this is getting some people nervous because they're worried that now gay marriage could be repealed, amongst many other things.
But Kavanaugh and Gorsuch, I would argue, are actually consistent with what they told Susan Collins.
If I remember Kavanaugh, when he was asked about Roe versus Wade, he said, look, Roe versus Wade is precedent.
It would take a lot for me to have to look at that and overturn it.
And he said something about abortion being protected by the courts.
That doesn't sound inconsistent.
Now, the essence of what Susan Collins might have heard might have been inconsistent, but I actually don't care what Susan Collins is putting on a press release.
I don't care.
And you shouldn't either.
She voted for them.
So we as conservatives, we want to start to win.
We want to put points on the board, of course.
But it starts with honesty.
So if you try to create a team and one person stands for something and then they don't, you're not able to create that coalition.
And this is one of the things that bothers us most about some of these more rhino senators is that they run like a super right winger in their states.
They come at the other thing.
But then Susan Collins has always been a moderate.
She's even a moderate in her decision.
Whatever, fine, okay.
What matters is Roe versus Wade is now repealed thanks to her decision.
It would not have happened if it wasn't for Susan Collins, and God bless her for that.
Despite her press releases, despite her own pro-abortion leanings or inklings.
And by the way, regardless of your position on abortion, which I know there's a million different positions on abortions, not a million, but there's a lot.
There's a lot of nuance people have with it.
I have a very strong pro-life views, obviously.
Let's just bring it to the states.
Let's just start there.
That shouldn't be controversial.
Bring it to your state.
We want local government.
When you have a highly complex issue, I don't think it's that complex, but let's just say it's complex.
Okay, fine.
Let's just say it's controversial.
I'll agree with that.
People get really heated about it.
Let's let the states govern their own course.
We do that with other things, by the way.
We've done that with marijuana.
We've done that.
We used to do that with gay marriage.
We've done that with all sorts of different things.
You go to New Jersey, for example.
They don't let you pump your own gas.
It's like a weird thing.
Like you go to New Jersey, they have someone that pumps your own gas.
Not exactly sure that should be federal law.
Tennessee, you can get Ivermectin now without a prescription.
Laboratories of democracy, as the liberal Justice Louis Brandeis said.
And so in a highly fractured time, what is the argument actually to nationalize abortion?
There really isn't one.
The Constitution was designed from a bottom-up perspective, and that's precisely what Alito and Roberts and Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett and Gorsuch decided in this leak decision is not that they think abortion was wrong.
I would have made, I think if Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion, you're like, hey, I think that abortion is unconstitutional.
I think Gorsuch and Alito would have agreed.
Maybe Andy Kony Barrett, but I don't think they would have won Kavanaugh over with that.
Instead, the way this was decided and the way that the prudent way to look at it is, look, what does the Constitution say?
Why don't we allow the states to make their decisions?
And let's do it.
Because, look, I believe that it's unconstitutional, but I'll fully admit it takes some kind of calisthenics to make that argument.
You have to kind of infer some things, but that's okay.
But there's no way you could say abortion is protected in the Constitution.
It just isn't.
It isn't a specified right.
It is not.
By the way, taking decisions away from D.C. weakens these woke radicals and the great reset team.
Regardless of your position on the issue, that should give you hope that D.C. got weaker with this decision.
There's something a little bit suspicious about the timing of all this, don't you think?
Why this week?
Now, it could be that this is just kind of leading up to the summer, but there's some weird things happening.
And I'm not saying they're connected, okay?
I'm just saying that are there coincidences to such a great extent.
Just explore this with me.
Kamala Harris is allegedly speaking at the Emily's List fundraiser tonight.
This is the week that 2000 Mules is out by Dinesh D'Souza.
We know the regime doesn't want you focused on that.
Probably would have taken all the headlines.
We know that Democrats were failing in midterm polls.
Maybe they thought this would resurrect their midterm chances, give them a chance to really organize ahead of time.
I think it's bad timing for them.
Should they have waited closer to the midterms?
Well, the Supreme Court decision would have happened in late June at the latest.
So this is not that ahead of time.
Maybe it was just a politico ratings thing.
They got it as quickly as they could and they could turn it around.
I don't know.
Maybe they're really worried that JD Vance is going to win in Ohio.
I'm kidding.
Could be.
I don't know.
It could be.
They could be using this as a distraction or there could be nothing behind this at all whatsoever.
Let's play some sound here of, boy, there's so many sound.
The reactions are up.
Everyone has a take on this, by the way.
Every Democrat is virtue signaling.
And I just want in particular that it's, again, we live in Orwell's world, don't we?
Where they say something, and it's the exact opposite, actually, of what they're saying.
This is Elizabeth Warren.
End the filibuster, codify Roe versus Wade with a national law protecting abortion rights, expand the Supreme Court, stop this horrifying injustice in its tracks.
Injustice, really?
What is the injustice exactly?
My favorite is when they tweet out that people are going to die.
Like, nope, that's already been happening, actually.
And by the way, this will motivate our base as well.
And not to mention pro-life Catholics and moderates that are pro-life, especially in some of these states where Democrats are going to have a tough time.
Arizona in particular, Georgia is a very pro-life state.
North Carolina is a very pro-life state.
Pennsylvania has a lot of pro-life Catholics that traditionally vote Democrat.
So if that's on the ballot, look, if the Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, no, that's not what it was.
It was one of the props.
In 2004, Karl Rove, whom I have plenty of disagreements with, but he's always been really nice to me, but I totally disagree with him on some stuff, came out and had a brilliant idea, which was to put marriage referendums of one-man, one-woman marriage in all the key states across the country, bolstering Christian turnout in 2004, which is one of the reasons why George W. Bush won re-election against John Kerry.
So maybe this will actually help increase turnout.
I don't know.
Or maybe it will help increase turnout for younger voters that are really, really pro-abortion.
This is all speculation.
Rachel Maddow is saying that if this ruling is published, abortion would become illegal in and around two dozen states due to so-called trigger laws, play cut 36.
If, in fact, this ruling survives to see the light of day, which there's no reason to expect that it won't, at least in substance, do so, from what we understand from Mr. Gerstein's reporting tonight, this would have the effect of enacting what are so-called trigger laws in more than two dozen states in the country.
More than two dozen Republican-controlled states would immediately ban abortion upon the publication of this ruling.
And so that would be 24 states that have said that if Roe versus Wade ever gets repealed, that abortion would be illegal.
Basically, this would allow states to determine if they want abortion to be illegal, putting the power back into the people.
Now, obviously, I believe it's a moral stain on the entire country.
I'd love to see it abolished completely, but that's incredible.
That's a huge win.
Something massive.
Of course, the left is going 10 out of 10 immediately, losing their mind to be expected.
This is an interesting one.
By the way, if you want to go to my kind of a sidebar when I'm looking through the cut sheet here, this goes to show the argument that how, this is a weird coincidence.
Amazon new employee benefits allow them to get $4,000 in reimbursement for traveled costs to get an abortion.
What are they going to fly private to go get an abortion?
Far Left Ends Justify Means 00:14:16
$4,000?
Play cut 30.
Amazon told its employees today that they would be providing a new workplace benefit to allow workers to travel to other states if they need to for abortion procedures.
Sure.
Well, I don't have any comments on a decision by a private sector company.
We know our view on the archaic abortion laws that we've seen put into place across the country in some states, far too many states.
So Amazon comes out with new employee benefits saying that $4,000 in reimbursement costs for travel to get an abortion.
By the way, every time you use Amazon, remember, you're funding the abortion industry.
$4,000 in reimbursement for their travel costs to get an abortion.
I'll go into that at a different time, why Corporate America is super supportive of that.
Hey everybody, Charlie Kirk here with the left in total panic over Twitter and DHS essentially creating their own ministry of truth.
It is safe to say we're facing the biggest threat to the First Amendment in our lifetime.
That's why I'm proud to support Patriot Mobile, America's only Christian conservative cell phone provider.
They offer broad nationwide coverage to get the same great service about funding the major carriers who donate to the left.
Patriot Mobile has plans to fit any budget and their U.S.-based customer support team provides exceptional customer service.
Most importantly, Patriot Mobile shares your values and supports organizations fighting for religious freedom, constitutional rights, and the sanctity of life.
Make the switch today.
Go to patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972 Patriot.
Get free activation with the offer code Charlie.
That's patriotmobile.com slash Charlie.
They also have special discounts for our veteran and first responder heroes.
That's patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972 Patriot, patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972 Patriot, patriotmobile.com slash Charlie.
Again, that is patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972 Patriot, patriotmobile.com slash Charlie.
So we have a really good guest with us right now.
Fiery but mostly peaceful is the name of the book by Julio Rosas.
And he's doing a wonderful job.
And again, it's called Fiery But Mostly Peaceful, one of the best frontline journalists in the country, a legitimate journalist, unlike the people at the New York Times, the Washington Post.
Julio, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show.
Yeah, Charlie, thanks for having me.
So Julio, tell us about your book.
Tell us about kind of being on the front lines and being an actual journalist, and we'll go from there.
Yeah, so I mean, I started covering the riots in 2020 when everything popped off in late May.
And initially, my thought was, okay, I'm just going to cover Minneapolis and then that'll be it.
But then I went to Seattle to cover Chaz, that whole little experiment that happened in Seattle.
I went to Atlanta, Washington, D.C., where I'm based out of.
And it just kept happening.
And then it shifted from, oh, so this is going to stop to when is it going to stop?
And it reached a point to where not only was I obviously seeing the devastation and destruction that BLM and Antifa rioters were bringing to American cities, but then the other half of it was, well, the media was really downplaying or trying to excuse or trying to justify what was happening because of who was committing the violent acts.
And it was kind of, well, the ends justify the means or, you know, you're not really, you're focusing on the wrong things by focusing on business owners who had their places destroyed.
You know, this is what really matters.
And for me, it's really, I take really big offense to that because, like I said, I was seeing this firsthand in city after city.
And more importantly, people were innocent people who had nothing to do with, you know, for example, George Floyd or Jacob Blake and Kenosha.
They were suffering.
These were just ordinary Americans.
A lot of them were already struggling with the effects of the COVID-19 lockdowns.
And now this was being thrown on top of it.
And then the people in power, both within the media class and political class, saying, well, it doesn't really matter.
You know, what you're going through doesn't matter as much.
And so I wanted, so I wrote this book to talk about my experiences and also share the experiences of others whose voices were not really highlighted by the rest of the media.
And also to call out the media and Democratic politicians for downplaying this very, very destructive time period in our nation's history.
Yeah, so talk a little about kind of being on the front lines, though, right?
Because you covered it in a way that was very compelling and was honestly exceptional and took a lot of courage and it took a lot of time and a lot of work.
Most journalists weren't willing to do that.
Give us just kind of some first person kind of snapshots, right?
I mean, you were right there on the front lines.
You continue to be.
So the basic example of just kind of how these things work is just with, for example, with Kenosha, with specifically the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
And so I saw the second half of that.
And that was a very pivotal and very important thing to be present for.
Granted, I didn't expect to be in that.
It was just, it just kind of happened.
But it really solidified my reasoning for why I did this work.
Now, I didn't set out that night to try to prove someone's innocence, but obviously throughout that case and throughout the trial, which I also covered and talk a little bit about in the book, it's just the importance of just record what's happening.
in these very chaotic events.
You know, things are, there's a lot of things happening.
It's a little sensory overload.
You're high off adrenaline.
And so you have to really make a good effort to just record what's happening and relay that to the rest of the country.
And so I really, for me, I really made an effort for that.
And it was dangerous.
I mean, not just with Kenosha, but a lot of these other places too.
And, you know, I have to wear body armor.
I have to wear gas masks when the need arises from tear gas or from wherever.
And so it's a very taxing job, but I enjoyed doing it just because, again, a lot of the rest of the mainstream media, they're not going to be willing to put themselves there.
And so it's long hours.
I was in very great shape in 2020, just running around for 12 hours, week after week after week with all this gear on.
But it was very necessary.
And it was sad that as a nation, we reached that point.
Yeah.
And so let's talk a little bit about kind of how the left views the mob, I guess you could call it, right?
So last night they leak an early decision of what looks like to be the overturning of Roe versus Wade, almost trying to kind of stow a mob reaction, right?
Like swarms of people and potential riots.
Kind of talk more philosophically.
How does the left view these events?
Do they view them as helpful?
Do they view them as destructive or an impediment, kind of an annoyance?
How do they view these kind of mass events of destruction?
So the far left definitely views them as a tool.
I mean, it's very much the epitome of the ends justify the means.
Now, for it kind of, depending on who you're talking to in the far left, is kind of sometimes they just want to defund the police, sometimes they want to abolish the police.
And FIFA, they want to completely overthrow the U.S. government, right?
But they absolutely view just having chaos and mayhem as a way to achieve their goals.
And so that's why they do it.
And that's why they hate it when people such as myself are willing to talk to the victims of business owners, right?
I mean, the constant talking point from them is, well, you know, it's just a building.
You can replace it.
There's insurance.
And really, as I've learned kind of through research for the book and talking to business owners who survived this, for insurance, for example, not every business has the right insurance to cover this type of event.
I mean, really, from the company's perspective, that's like an act of domestic terrorism.
So you didn't have a domestic terrorism coverage.
And these are very small businesses usually that were targeted.
And so they didn't have that.
And so they're out of luck.
And so the far left really does view this as the ends justify the means.
And they're more than happy to throw people under the bus to get what they want.
And that's why it's very disturbing to see this sort of tacit, very low-key approval from politicians, from people with large platforms.
Because, you know, in my view, I don't see how destroying communities and having just wanton violence achieve the goal of defunding the police because, I mean, just on overtime, a lot of officers got overtime over this because they had to constantly be out there.
And so there's actually a problem with some cities not having enough funding to pay for that.
And so, and then they now have justification to have things like the military surplus armored vehicles and riot equipment and protective equipment.
It really kind of backfired in that way.
But now we're still dealing with the effects of the riots because the criminals saw how far people were able to get away with things.
And so now it's like kind of a low-level type of criminality with the high crime rates and the progressive DAs letting people out with little to no bail under this veneer of racial justice because of what happened in 2020.
And so really, I mean, this is snowballing and it's really very devastating to these communities, even to this day, just in a different way.
Yeah, I mean, that's such an important point.
And I mean, they try to minimize the violence and the destruction.
Oh, it's just a building.
Well, actually, it's someone's livelihood, right?
It's their savings that they brought from another country, maybe, and they try to invest it here.
It's not just the building.
And by the way, if it was just a building, it doesn't make it right.
It's not yours.
The protection of private property is fundamental to Western society.
So, Julio, let me ask you: how are the protests right now in the Roe versus Wade thing?
And how serious do you think they're going to get?
So, I was out at the Supreme Court last night just seeing, and it got a little lively because there were some pro-life people that came out also in celebration, but it was overwhelmingly pro-abortion people.
But, you know, so as of right now, they are peaceful, mostly peaceful, actually.
There wasn't anything crazy.
There wasn't actually anything, you know, rocks or bottles being thrown.
What I will say in terms of, because people have like, they were messaging me as soon as the news broke, like, oh, you might have a sequel to your book a lot sooner than you thought.
What I'll say is that kind of the theory that I have with this is that it requires buildup.
You know, these things build up over time because there is a lot of rage.
Because if we look at 2020, it was a combination of the COVID lockdowns and the effects that had.
It was a presidential election with Donald Trump where people either really love him or they really freaking hate him.
And then the spark was what happened to George Floyd.
So I think very much, I could be wrong.
These things, these things can spiral control as we've seen.
But the way I view it is, I think maybe what this decision or this potential, not yet final decision, but if when Roe versus Wade gets actually overturned, I think that's going to be kind of one of the tenants that leads to that buildup to then maybe lead to some more destruction.
And that's really sad because that then that means that our natural default or people's natural default to not to their reaction to not getting what they want is going to be violence.
And this is what I'm saying, where these things escalate.
And if we don't really kind of come back from the ledge that we're kind of careing towards, it's going to be bad.
And it's not just have to deal with Roe versus Wade.
Like I said, there could be some other things too.
I mean, when we talk about economic insecurity, I mean, the fastest way to get people to riot is to take away their ability to make a living or to feed their family.
I mean, this is real.
I mean, and that's why when we look at the Biden administration as a whole and what a disaster it's been for the country, I mean, the building blocks for something like 2020 to happen again is very real.
And, you know, I'm not trying to be like this doom and gloom.
It's just that I've seen that anger and I've seen that hatred just boil over.
And it's really real.
It's really palpable.
And it's frightening, quite honestly.
And so I don't know what's going to happen these next few years because I mean, not just with the midterms, but with 2024.
And if Trump were to say when again, I think we could be headed towards another chaotic year.
But we'll just have to wait and see what happens.
The book is fiery, but mostly peaceful.
Check it out right now and keep up the great work, Julio.
We're behind you 100%.
It's been many years since you were getting the start at turning point and doing all sorts of things together.
We're very proud of you.
We're 100% behind you.
So check it out right now.
Fiery, but mostly peaceful by Julio, Juli Rosas.
And thank you so much, Julio, for joining us today.
Really appreciate it.
Thanks for having me.
Look, inflation is out of control.
One area we see it more than ever is the grocery store.
Even though grocery prices feel like they've doubled, Good Ranchers' prices have stayed low and affordable.
Once you subscribe, it's locked in.
The price never goes up.
Your best price is locked in for life.
They sell 100% American meat and deliver it to your door for a great price.
Good Ranchers help solve your meat problem.
And the problem is 85% of the grass-fed beef in stores and online is imported.
Shop Good Ranchers for all your beef, chicken, and seafood needs.
Their pre-trimmed and pre-marinated chicken breasts are absolutely delicious.
I love Good Ranchers, and you guys should too.
Their animals are ethically raised and they're beautifully sourced.
They do the things the right way and it shows in every box.
Good Ranchers takes the guest work out of the meat aisle and grocery shopping.
Get a steakhouse quality at home with Good Ranchers.
Right now, go to goodranchers.com/slash Charlie and do it right now.
It's Good Ranchers, American meat delivered.
I love Good Ranchers.
When Good Ranchers get delivered to our home or to our office, it's something incredible.
If you don't buy the meat in your house, tell the person who does to check out Good Ranchers.
Support the Charlie Kirk Show, support America, goodranchers.com/slash Charlie.
SLED Acronym for Abortion 00:05:03
There is a huge push right now to try and repeal the filibuster.
Kirsten Sinema, who is just, she's something else.
You got to give her credit.
She is an unusual duck.
I'll tell you what.
So Kirsten Sinema comes out and defends the filibuster in a statement criticizing decision to overturn Roe versus Wade.
She says, quote, protections in the Senate safeguarding against the erosion of women's access to health care have been used a half dozen times in the past 10 years and are more important now than ever.
Throughout my time in Congress, I've always supported women's access to health care.
I'm a co-sponsor of the Women's Health Protection Act, and I'll continue working with anyone protecting women's ability to make their decisions about their futures.
She's still defending the filibuster, which means that you cannot go to, you cannot use the filibuster to repeal, not repeal, to enshrine or to codify Roe versus Wade.
That's the word I'm looking for.
Cut 38, Corey Bush, who is from Missouri, I believe, St. Louis, abolish the filibuster and force pro-life Americans to fund abortions for pregnant people.
Play cut 38.
Yes, I think that the president should really, that's been my stance, abolish the filibuster.
You know, but when I think about what else the president could do, one option could be through the federal, I'm sorry, through the Food and Drug Administration.
The president could have the FDA issue regulations to expand access to medical, medication abortion.
You know, we need to bring that back into the conversation so that pregnant people could have access to a two-pill regimen safely and be able to end a pregnancy.
So, look, you just got to brace yourself for unrivaled irrationality that will plague our land for the next couple of days and weeks.
If you thought you saw something with the COVID stuff, you have not seen anything yet.
I mean, just, I don't even know what she's saying.
She's talking about the Food and Drug Administration and funding chemical abortions.
Whoopi Goldberg, philosopher queen herself, has come out.
She said, quote, the decision to have an abortion is between my doctor, myself, and my child.
Really?
If it's child, then what decision do you have to make?
Play cut 37.
You, you know, you got people telling me I got to wear a mask or don't wear a mask or do this.
Everybody wants to tell me what to do, but you won't let me make my decision about my body.
You are not the person to make that decision.
My doctor and myself and my child, that's who makes the decision.
And my child.
Wait a second.
Hold on.
Wait, what?
Okay, so let me kind of address.
Their hypocrisy is so revealing, obviously.
Their hypocrisy is so transparent, where they're the ones that are screaming for bodily autonomy and they were perfectly okay with vaccine mandates and mask mandates.
They're still okay with it.
From our perspective, though, is that as soon as life begins at conception, that being is necessary and worthy of protection.
The pro-abortion crowd uses sled, size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency.
That is the acronym S-L-E-D, SLED, to try and advocate for abortion.
Size means nothing.
Just because someone is shorter than me does not mean I have a moral obligation or a moral right, I should say, or a moral ability to be able to crush them.
Level of development, just because someone is less along the process of becoming someone like me, they're all human, but becoming an adult doesn't mean that they should be able to be eliminated.
Environment, where someone is means nothing.
Whether someone is in Cincinnati or Columbus, they have equal human rights no matter what.
And degree of dependency, just because someone is dependent on their mother doesn't all of a sudden mean that they can be abolished.
Sled, size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency.
Those are the four arguments that the left will use.
And all of them have incredible contradictions within them.
Because if you actually extrapolate the moral argument to the rest of society, it actually doesn't apply at all or the rest of civilization, how they want things to operate or how it works.
We believe that human right is worthy of protection.
We believe that human beings should not be able to be terminated without their consent or in the womb, obviously.
And what does it say for a society or civilization if you can't protect those that can't protect themselves?
And for those of you that might be pro-abortion listening right now, just it's a very simple question.
When does life begin?
When does life begin?
Whoopi Goldberg said, when my child, what does she mean by that?
If so, she's acknowledging a human life.
But maybe she means her grown kids.
I don't know.
It's rather transparently contradictive.
Thank you so much for listening, everybody.
Email us your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com and support the Charlie Kirk Show at CharlieKirk.com slash support.
Thank you so much for listening.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.
Export Selection