Unmasking the Supreme Leaker & Playing to Win on the “New Right”
In this special doubleheader interview episode of The Charlie Kirk Show, Charlie is joined by two exceptional guests and longtime friends of the show one after the other. First up—Will Chamberlain, Senior Counsel for The Article III Project, who just blew the lid off of the Supreme Court Roe V. Wade Leaking Scandal by publicly sharing a well-cited and logically reasoned profile of the woman who may very well be responsible for the leak. Next—Matthew Peterson, the Director of American Firebrand PAC, joins Charlie for an indictment of the Old Guard of the GOP and a close examination of what it means to be on “The New Right” and why we must play to win, now, more than ever. Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Get Involved With Turning Point USA00:02:04
Hey, everybody.
Today at the Charlie Kirk show, Matt Peterson of What is the New Right? And Will Chamberlain, and he thinks he's found the Supreme Court leaker.
It's very compelling.
Email me your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
And look, I want to tell you guys to get involved with Turning Point USA.
As you know, Turning Point USA is America's best hope.
We're making hope happen at tpusa.com.
Our high school and college students are fighting on the front lines for America, for liberty, for freedom, where it matters most.
It's tpusa.com.
And you can get engaged and get involved.
You can start a chapter.
And so maybe you are a young woman and you want to come to our Young Women's Leadership Summit and see Candace Owens and Kaylee Mackinene and more.
Go to tpusa.com slash ywls.
That's tpusa.com slash ywls to come to our young women's leadership summit.
Or maybe you want to come to our student action summit in Tampa, Florida, where we now have President Donald Trump confirmed in Tampa, Florida in late July.
Come to tpusa.com slash SAS.
That's tpusa.com slash SAS to check that out.
And just get engaged.
Get involved.
Start a high school or college chapter on the front lines.
That's tpusa.com, tpusa.com.
You can always support the Charlie Kirk show at charliekirk.com slash support.
That's charliekirk.com slash support.
And again, email me your thoughts, freedom at charliekirk.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, 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.
Why The Left Avoids The Leak Talk00:13:57
Who is the leaker?
Who leaked the draft opinion to overturn Roe versus Wade?
What is being done to investigate this person and hold this person accountable?
Well, the great Will Chamberlain went on Twitter and just he went after it.
I'll tell you what.
He went after it in a way that was profound and was so compelling.
And the left is not happy.
Will, welcome back to the program.
Good to be with you.
Apologies for the slight baby issue.
But anyway, good to be with you.
Yes, indeed.
No problem.
So, Will, walk us through.
We have some time.
Who you believe the leaker to be?
How did you come to that conclusion?
And then how did the world react once you made it public?
So, yeah.
Well, I think the, again, we don't know because we don't have inside information or anything like that.
I'm just basing this on what I was able to dig up publicly.
But my guess, my guess is that the leaker is this clerk for Justice Breyer named Elizabeth Deutsch.
And there are two real basic reasons.
One is that her academic and professional history demonstrates that she has a unique focus on abortion and reproductive rights.
Like that's from the time she was in law school, her law school note, her fellowship at the ACLU, her clerkships, her op-ed writing, like they've all been like laser focused on abortion and women's issues.
I mean, a good example would be that her law school note was focused on looking at how you could use the non-discrimination provisions in Obamacare to try and force Catholic hospitals to perform emergency abortions.
So that's part one of it.
Obviously, in and of itself, it doesn't really prove much.
That's okay.
We're very pro-baby as we talk about Roe versus Wade.
So don't worry.
That's okay.
I will filibuster as Will does the more important thing, which is to be a father.
No, that's okay.
That's perfectly understandable.
Just tell me, continue if you're ready.
Yeah.
So, and then the second part of it is that she has a personal connection to Josh Gerstein, who is the author of the political article and the recipient of the leak of the draft opinion.
The draft opinion essentially could only really have come from Chambers, like first and foremost.
It's and also his knowledge.
But moreover, like they, this woman, Josh Gerstein attended her wedding and is close friends with her husband, Isaac Arnsdorf.
They actually bylined articles together at Politico.
So she has this very, very direct connection, like personal connection to the guy who leaked the article.
So you have personal motivation, a direct personal connection to beer personal leaky article.
And I don't think either of those two things are really met.
Can I interrupt though?
Can I just interrupt?
So like, how many clerks are there?
Like, so how big is the pool of people we're looking at?
Like, I have no idea.
I mean, we're talking less than 40 clerks, right?
Okay.
For each act of justice.
Oh, no, that's less, though, because, I mean, it's not Clarence Thomas's clerk isn't going to do it.
Is that correct?
Right.
And realistically, like, if you're talking about the liberal clerks, we're talking 12.
Okay.
So you're talking about a population of 12 people.
Yeah.
And possibly administrative staff.
No, I don't think so.
Again, I don't know.
How do they get it to Politico, right?
That's that's the question.
Right.
And also the thing about the political article is Josh Gerstein didn't just have the draft opinion, he had the vote count, the current vote count on DOC.
Interesting.
That's such a good point.
Right.
Yeah.
And so if you have the current vote count, the administrative staff isn't going to have a good handle on that, most likely.
It's going to be the clerks and the people who are talking to the justices.
So this is just a leak from straight in chambers.
Odds are really high.
And so the question is, okay, which of these clerks is like most likely to leak it?
And we can get to the next part, which is how the left reacted to this.
They're just acting like this is inconceivable that people would speculate as to the identity of the leaker when there's a limited universe of people that it could be.
Yeah, I mean, exactly.
We're not talking about like a congressional staff here.
I mean, this is a, and this is, but, and Will, you're, you're a legal, you know, expert, Article 3 Project, uh, senior counsel.
Has this ever happened before, a leak like this?
No, never.
Uh, I think you talked with Mike Davis about this, I assume.
And I mean, he would have said the same thing.
This is completely unprecedented, right?
The leak of a draft opinion prior to the judgment leaked with the intention of trying to either, you know, change the vote or rile up public outrage.
It's insane.
It completely will break the way the court works.
It's unclear whether they'll be able to have temporary clerks in the future at all.
Like they might have to completely change the way the court has done business for 100 years because this has never happened.
They've always assumed that the risk of career damage for someone who's worked so hard to get a Supreme Court clerkship was enough to keep people online, but apparently not.
Yeah.
And so I suppose the calculus by this woman, what's her name again?
This woman's name?
Elizabeth Deutsch.
Again, Elizabeth Deutsch.
And we don't know.
Again, like, you know, I know that we're treading on like speculation.
So I don't want to.
But again, you're talking about a very finite population though.
Right.
And so I don't think a Gorsuch clerk is going to be leaking this anytime soon.
Agreed.
It's not going to happen.
Right.
So you can look at her on LinkedIn, Elizabeth Deutsch, and she went to Yale, which helps, I think, prove your point, by the way, because Yale is just a cesspool for the worst direction of America.
So how did the left react, Will?
They came after you and your family.
Yeah, no, personally, right?
They accused me of doxing this woman, which is not true.
I didn't, there's zero like addresses, phone numbers, anything like that.
Everything I link to is public information, right?
I'm sorry, I linked to your New York Times wedding announcement.
I don't think that qualifies as doxing.
It was published in the New York Times of all places.
But I mean, and then also, it's like if you end if you are the leaker, I'm sorry, you kind of lose kind of the anonymity thing.
So, right.
It's these people aren't anonymous.
They're working directly.
Their direct superior is a justice in the Supreme Court of the United States.
These are public servants.
Like every part of this is not there.
And yet the left has come after me in the most vicious personal ways.
I don't want to belabor it because we're all big boys here, but I've had like endless people on Twitter, but also on my personal phone going after me.
I've had even threats to my, you know, somebody harassing my children, like four-month-old daughter, who you've been hearing a little bit through the course of this interview.
And I mean, it's like they want to believe the worst about me.
And so they're actually doing the thing they accuse me of doing.
They're doing to me what they accuse me of doing to her, which I did not do, right?
They're doing, you know, they're going after me, like posting personal addresses and phone numbers and things like that.
It's abhorrent.
Clearly over the line, exactly what I didn't do quite intentionally, because I know that that's wrong, like any normal person.
And yet we're still, you know, we're still dealing with it.
And it's not just the, it's like Eric Swalwell and George Take and Park Mamenko and the list of lefty influencers and congresspeople who've been upset by this leak.
Alex Vindman was mad.
Steve Schmidt was mad.
I didn't expect the entirety of blue check liberal Twitter to be that by the concept of trying to figure out the leaker.
And if you ended up not being right about your speculation, it's still an unbelievably informed guess.
I mean, you have someone who writes about, she's a clerk.
Okay.
So she's one of, we're talking about 12 people, right?
That's number one.
Number two, she's laser focused on this issue.
Number three, she went to Yale.
You just have to put that in.
Number four, she has a personal relationship with the author of the article.
Is that right?
Right.
Yes.
So much so that at most, it's like once, like a very close, I mean, her husband does, right?
For certain, right?
Her husband is the co-wrote the article with her.
And the author went to her wedding, right?
So like, it's just, it's, it's right there.
It's, it's right there.
Even if they don't, even though they don't regularly talk to each other, like they, they know each other well.
And so that's a pretty compelling case for me.
I mean, and so we'll see.
Maybe there's an even more compelling one.
There was another clerk that they were speculating as well.
I can't remember his name, but so it was a meat giant.
Yeah, that's right.
So did my org clerk.
Just really quick gut reaction.
Does this backfire on the Democrats, the fact that they leaked this?
Yes, yes.
Normal people will look at this and think it's ridiculous.
It's there's a reason they're trying to talk about anything but the leak.
And I think also it will make the end result.
I think somebody made this very good point.
It will make the final release of the decision somewhat anticlimactic because we knew it was ours.
That's exactly right.
She also has a master's degree in gender.
So that just adds to the list.
Again, it's pure speculation.
But I don't think that if she had a master's degree in aeronautical engineering, it would put her higher up on the list.
Nor would she be a clerk for Breyer.
Will walk me to the political calculus here.
Who do you think?
I think that there's something to be said that because they leaked it early, that you can't really have that kind of, whoa, abortion is gone, even though it's not, it goes back to the states, right?
So it kind of makes it anticlimatic.
And also, there's a moral high ground from a messaging standpoint where we could say, well, we don't want who leaks stuff.
Walk us through this.
What's your analysis?
Yeah, I mean, I don't think the leak ends up helping the Democrats all that much, right?
No matter what, they would have had the decision before midterms in the sense of if there was some motivating force of the repeal of Roe to get people to get Democrats to the polls.
Well, that was going to happen anyway because the decision was going to be released by June.
Yes.
So, you've got, you know, they get a four-week head start on the protesting and anger.
So, I don't think that helps them very much.
I think it obviously gives the right the massive moral high ground.
The leak is devastating to the way the court functions, as we discussed.
You know, it's not clear you could even do normal clerkships.
And it creates, I think people get used to the idea of this happening and makes it less of a problem.
One moment.
That's okay.
We will filibuster as Will does the moral obligation of making sure generations, future generations, are well taken care of.
So, yeah, I mean, look, I suppose the question that I have is: why now?
Do you think there's anything to the timing of this?
I mean, how long were they sitting on this?
What's the whole idea of it?
I mean, yeah, what's your thought?
I think the best analysis is that they're, you know, the most likely scenario is just sort of irrational, hail Mary hope that you get somebody to change their mind.
I think that that's like, you know, that's, that's why I think Deutsch is such a likely candidate, right?
She spent her whole career working on this issue, and all of a sudden it's going to get blown up, right?
Like it's like seeing your life's work disappear in addition to you having what I'm sure she feels is pretty substantial moral outrage.
So that's, that's what I think that's the most likely answer.
Simply not really thinking like strategically or like a Machiavellian or anything, but just an emotional, like, I hate this.
What I'm going to do whatever I can desperation.
I think if there is like a strategic calculus, it would be something like we want states to get out in front of this knowing that Roe is about to be repealed so liberal states could implement pro-choice like policies on the books and get ahead of it.
Maybe that would be the most likely outcome.
But I don't think that makes much sense because conservative states can get out ahead of it too.
And it's not clear that that improves things for the pro-choice movement.
But that's like, that's my best guess.
I still think it just, the thing that makes the most sense is just, you know, someone reacted so negatively to the potential repeal of Roe, which they feel is just an outrage.
So in closing here, Will, I want to shift gears.
You've been on the tech censorship issue more than almost anybody else in the last couple of years.
What's your thought?
I didn't ask you on Elon buying Twitter.
It's great.
I mean, we shouldn't have to depend on billionaires like coming to the rescue, literally the single wealthiest person in the world coming to the rescue and saving us from the problems of social media censorship.
But I think it's an incredibly good thing that it's happening.
Clearly, he's very much anti-censorship based on what he said on Twitter.
I think that the left is obviously reacting a way that we would anticipate.
And I think it, you know, it provides a model for potentially a different type of corporate activism.
We've constantly thought about compete, compete, compete, right?
If somebody's doing something we don't like with a big institution, well, we should just compete against it and build a brand new institution to compete with it.
Well, I think there's a different model.
Like, take it over, buy it out.
There's, that's, it turns out if you can do it with something like Twitter, maybe you could do it with something like Disney or something else, some big institution with, you know, enormous capital investments all over the place.
I mean, competing with Disney is hard.
I'm glad the Daily Wire is trying to do it.
But, you know, it would be nice if we could buy it and then use the existing massive infrastructure and capital of Disney to do things that we think are good.
This will be a, I said this the other day.
I said, the good news of a recession and the market going down and having a lot of dollar bills is there will be buy-in opportunities.
Let me tell you what.
And there will be a lot of woke companies that could be bought and sold for parts.
I'll tell you what.
They got overleveraged.
They got too excited in COVID.
I mean, look, Disney's still a $200 billion company, but they could sell parts of Disney off.
Don't.
I mean, they could sell a cartoon company here or rights to something there.
I mean, so that's a really, really good point.
I think that's smart.
Will, thank you so much for joining us today.
Appreciate it.
Absolutely.
Always.
Thank you.
It's a lot happening right now, and some call it the rise of the new right.
And I want to explore that with the brilliant Matt Peterson.
Matt, welcome back to the program.
Hey, thanks for having me on.
Lots happening these days.
A lot happening.
It feels like we're gaining ground.
Kind of give us your analysis.
How big was this week?
Selling Parts Of Woke Companies00:11:23
What did this mean?
And what is the new right?
Well, first off, this is an enormously important week because JD Vance winning that primary for the U.S. Senate really is the shot heard around the world.
They don't want to talk about it, but it has the establishment seething and very afraid.
And it really is the first of, I think, a series of dominoes that are going to fall leading into this fall that are going to define this red wave as something that's not coming about due to God bless them, Mitch McConnell and others, but due to strong new leaders on the right who are taking the America first agenda and moving forward.
And so really, you know, they're not talking about this enough.
This is incredibly important what just happened.
Millions of dollars were spent by establishment Republicans against JD Vance.
And that win, which now sets him on course to go to the U.S. Senate, is just it should be the shot heard around the world.
This is not over.
You know, the American right is not done.
There are a number of new leaders who are saying the right things and they're brave to say it now when it's not clear who's going to win.
And those people who consistently spread that message, I predict, are going to be the leaders of this red wave moving forward.
So tell us kind of what is the new right.
We've gotten a lot of feedback from our audience.
It sounds exciting.
The left uses that as a pejorative, by the way.
I think we should use it as it's kind of fun, right?
I mean, it's kind of a great branding.
I don't want to be the old right.
What is the new right?
What do we stand for?
What makes it different?
Yeah, so that's a great question.
And I think that's the, there's a lack of clarity on this because so many people who control media outlets, even on the right, don't quite understand or aren't comfortable with where things are going.
I would define it as a group of people who realize just how bad things are.
They realize that the institutions in America have become corrupt under the watch or lack of watch of the people who should have been the adults in the room.
And because those institutions are now so corrupt and doing such egregious, you know, terrible things, they've already disintegrated any kind of norm that people were pretending used to exist.
We now need to take more serious action to retake America, to refound American civilization, to renew an American way of life that's worthy of the name.
And I think, I mean, that's very generic in a way, but it really defines everything to me.
It's people who realize, look at how bad the situation is, and therefore, what needs to be done in order to retake those institutions?
And in many cases, that means creating new institutions or new super PACs or new activist groups.
But in some situations, it simply means using the force of the power we have to combat this tyrannical religion that is trying to take over all of America.
And I think there's a sharp distinction there.
So a perfect example would be what DeSantis is doing in Florida.
Ron DeSantis takes up arms against Disney.
And in the past, we would say, well, that's sort of alarming.
A lot of conservatives, we shouldn't be singling out corporations.
It should be a free and equal playing field.
And of course, the problem is it's not.
Big woke corporate has decided to attack half of America and insert itself into the political process.
And the new right would say that means that political power will indeed need to be appropriately used to combat that political force.
And so, you know, but if I just sum it up in a few words, it's people who realize how corrupt our institutions have become and our culture has become, and therefore what it will take, the bold actions it will take to save America.
That's well said.
I'm going to get a sound here that will prove your point of Asa Hutchinson from Arkansas, who says, look, we shouldn't punish Disney versus DeSantis.
It's a great contrast of old right versus new right.
And so, I mean, also this kind of comes with foreign policy, though, doesn't it?
One of the kind of things with JD Vance, I mean, I was there with J.D. the last couple of days campaigning with him.
We did five campaign stops in the scenic tour of Ohio.
We were everywhere.
I'll tell you what.
And I was reflecting on the race, and JD came out and he came up pretty firm.
And he said, look, I don't think we should have a no-fly zone in Ukraine.
I don't think that we should over-involve ourselves or over-entangle ourselves kind of in these very complex theaters when our own country has such significant problems.
Wasn't this also kind of a blow to the neoconservative establishment?
Oh, yeah.
Look, when JD Vance came out and said, why?
I'm not worried about Ukraine.
I'm worried about our borders.
I'm worried about America.
Why are we putting these resources there?
I mean, I have lots of friends who aren't even neocons who thought, well, in the current environment, you know, that's not going to work.
That's too extreme.
But what this shows is it's not too extreme.
People understand that the Republican base is one thing.
And the neocons and a lot of these establishment types who are just holding on to power, they simply have no conception of where the people are at.
And regular people are going, yes, why would we get so involved?
I care about Ohio.
I care about my fellow citizens here.
And, you know, gosh darn it, look around.
We have enough problems here.
Let's deal with those problems.
And so it was very much like when Trump came out and said, hey, maybe Iraq was not such a good idea.
And everyone went, oh, he's never going to win now.
And it's true, he or JD wouldn't win if you took a poll of people in D.C. who make their money off the defense industry.
But as it turns out, the people of Ohio thought, yeah, we don't have a problem with that.
We agree with him.
Yeah.
And the chattering class was like, this is the end of JD's campaign, that he would dare push back against it.
And so it also is, in my opinion, the new right is defined by a commitment to playing to win.
This is something you've said before.
And it's, we know what we want, right?
We want a country that is recognizable, right?
And we're willing to do what is necessary in prudent and incremental steps, if necessary, to get there, meaning we don't relish in having to use political power.
I would love to live in an America where everyone kind of just did their own thing.
But if I have to do that to preserve liberty and to protect children, then I'm not going to be afraid to do that.
Okay, I want to play a cut here and get your reaction.
This is Connor put in our cut sheet.
This is the governor genital mutilation.
So it's Governor Asa Hutchinson, very pro-chemical castration guy.
Play cut 81.
Well, first of all, Disney has handled this very poorly.
Secondly, the law that was passed is, to me, common sense that in those grades, those lower grades, you shouldn't be teaching sexual orientation and those matters that should not be covered at that age.
But I don't believe that government should be punitive against private businesses because we disagree with them.
That's not the right approach either.
And so to me, that's the old Republican principle of having a restrained government.
And so let's do the right thing.
It's a fair debate about these special tax privileges.
I understand that debate.
But let's not go after businesses and punish them because we disagree with what they said.
Matt?
I mean, I just, I don't live in the same universe.
I don't know what alternative universe he lives in, but it must be a marvelous place.
The one, the world that we live in, the landscape of reality that I see is that government is pushing businesses all the time.
Government is coercing businesses all the time.
Government is taking your money and investing in woke capital and as part of the woke capital complex.
I mean, state pension funds are doing terrible things.
I mean, they're investing in China.
They're not pro-American at all.
And they're forcing, they're using the power of business, of capital to crush political dissent for private citizens and businesses, as well as politicians in the political process.
So it's not even like, it's like a fish in and out of water.
Like the entire landscape he describes just doesn't exist.
The real world, in the real world, business and woke capital is being used to push private citizens, to push corporations, to push politicians in one direction.
And there's only one way to stop that.
And that is saying, no, we're going to, you want to play the game.
You are going to be punished.
Well, and also a favor, a handout for a certain company is by definition a punishment to another company because they don't have access to that, right?
So it's the opposite, actually.
And I'm sure I'd love Asa Hutchinson to explain: hey, do you give Walmart any favoritism in Arkansas?
Just asking for a friend?
Like, do they?
No, no, do they get any sort of tax shelters?
Like, I don't know.
In Bentonville, do they pay their fair share in property tax?
Do they have any sort of TIFF districts?
I don't, maybe not.
Or how about Tyson Foods?
Like, I'm sure they don't get any sort of favoritism.
And so what's hilarious is that the libertarians, of which I agree with them on like guns and like, that's about it.
But like, they, they always were like, okay, we need to get rid of corporate subsidies.
That was their whole thing, remember?
Get rid of export, import, bank, and all that.
I was like, okay, sure, I agree.
But no, here's Ron DeSantis getting rid of corporate subsidies.
And they say, well, it's punitive.
Well, hold on a second.
What's the reason why?
The reason is because Disney decided to become a communication arm for the most radical anti-family pedophile values of the American left.
I hate to put it that way, but it's just the way it is.
Your reaction in about a minute.
No, you're so right.
I mean, look, they're being punished.
What are they being punished for?
For trying to groom our children?
You shouldn't punish them.
That's against what?
Like, why?
And of course, the arguments for the subsidies, I can just hear the good governor and others saying, like, whoa, Walmart does a lot of good for us, and it's good for them to be here.
Well, guess what?
They decided it's bad for Disney to have those deals there.
And if it was just punishment for their political views, what's the point of having a political system or democracy where you have debate and some kind of freedom if you can't punish the other side and attack them just like they're attacking you?
They just sit there.
They do this every day.
I mean, in Washington, they go after oil companies.
In California, they go after gun manufacturers.
I mean, they go after every one of our core industries every single day relentlessly.
And we just remove a tax shelter to even the playing field.
And we have to be lectured.
Well, it's like, well, you know, while I've always said we're not the company of the party of corporate handouts, we need to be the party of corporate handouts.
Like, actually, I don't need to take you seriously anymore, actually.
Like, you're grooming five-year-olds and you lose your tax privileges.
Matt, this is something I said the other day.
Removing Tax Shelters To Level Up00:03:37
I want your opinion.
I don't think the people have changed.
I think they're finally getting the leaders they deserve.
What's your thoughts on that?
Yeah, I think that's very true.
I think the people have been leading, the people are already new right, right?
The vast majority of the Republican base is already new right.
So in a sense, it's not really new.
It's just American political leaders catching up to where the people are at because the people are reacting to the landscape of reality, the aforementioned landscape of reality from the last segment.
They are dealing with real problems, real people.
They have real problems.
And those problems don't necessarily match the talking points from 20 years ago in Republican think tanks in D.C.
And, you know, of course, the left has become much more violent and belligerent.
And so really what you're seeing is a new crop of thinkers, of leaders, of doers, of politicians who are rising to the fore to respond to the situation we find ourselves in.
And I just think that's really exciting.
And it's, you know, it's not going to happen all by itself, but certainly the tide is moving in this direction.
Yeah.
And it's going to take a combination of forces and kind of the old Republican talking points.
You're right.
They fall flat.
And that's why JD's victory is so big.
What other races, Matt, are you looking at that could also be kind of the furtherance of this trend?
Primary races in particular?
What are you looking at?
Well, there's a number of people out there who are good.
And look, this is an important question because the problem right now is it's hard for regular people who are really interested in this to find the right leaders.
There's no like credentialing body.
And so, you know, if you watch a lot of conservative commentary, you'll just see a lot of different names mentioned.
And some of these people are very much on board with moving things forward.
And some of them are just the same old, same old.
So I'm definitely looking at Blake Masters in Arizona.
I think he's an incredible candidate and could become another incredible leader in the Senate.
If you had JD and him working together in the Senate, that would be amazing.
He's just much more competent like JD is than most politicians.
And then Joe Kent is a favorite of mine in the Pacific Northwest.
He's running for Congress, really an American hero who's willing to stand up and talk about a realistic foreign policy that makes sense.
And then someone I've gotten to know over the last year who really deserves even more attention is Anthony Sabatini.
He's a friend of me.
Yes.
Yes.
Look, Anthony is really a doer.
He's someone who gets his work done.
And he's running for Congress in Florida, could become an incredible leader in Congress.
Anthony Sabatini's terrific Ana Paulina is another one in Pinellas County, Florida.
She's got the president's endorsement at Turning Point PAC.
Turning point Action, we've endorsed Caroline Levitt up in New Hampshire.
That's a tough race, but we think she'll be able to pull it off.
We have Bo Hines in North Carolina as well.
And so on the Senate side, there's not as many, but the Congress, there's a lot.
But there's a lot happening on the state legislative side.
And you're right, there really is no credentialing body because, you know, it's tough to look a level deeper, isn't it?
And still, people still email me.
I get these emails.
Charlie, I think JD's a Democrat and all this.
Still, after he wins the primary, I said, and Matt, I just, I tell him this, and you know JD, and I said, just wait one year and email me back.
Just one year when he's a U.S. Senator, give him 90 days.
Would you agree with that?
Oh, yeah.
Finding Real Statesmen In Politics00:01:43
And look, I understand people's distrust of politicians.
Let me be honest.
I don't trust politicians.
I mean, the reason that we created a PAC is because I wanted to create a super PAC to just stay outside of the usual powers that be on the right.
We could say whatever we want.
We could critique people on the right.
So, you know, so that's why we did that with the team of people that were committed to the same.
And it's what you need, though, what we have to pay attention to, is who's going to say the right thing at the right time.
And what I would say is, if you look at JD and these others, forget about the past.
What are they saying now?
They have real skin in the game.
And before everyone else, they're saying the right things, right?
They're saying the right things.
And there's a certain element of this where Anthony Hopkins once said that he didn't believe in getting really into the character and like doing drugs to be a druggie actor, you know, kind of thing.
He said, look, Catherine Hepburn once told me, just say the lines.
And that's my message for politicians.
That's how I read it now.
Just say the damn lines.
And if you're willing to say the right thing and put some skin in the game when no one else is doing it, then you're worth following.
And then later on, I just, I want you to vote the right way.
That's right.
Right?
Exactly.
I don't know what's in your heart.
Only Jesus knows that.
I need you to say the right thing and vote the right way.
And at least that's a start.
And then every once in a while, after, you know, after some years go by, someone surprises you and you see, wow, this is an actual statesman.
But that's the only way you have to do that.
Like Ron DeSantis is a real statesman.
Matt, thank you so much.
Firebrand Pack.
Everyone, check it out.
We'll have you on next time.
Thanks, Matt.
Thanks.
Thank you so much for listening, everybody.
Email me directly, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thanks so much for listening.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.