All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
May 10, 2022 - The Charlie Kirk Show
51:22
Pfizer Docs + 2000 Mules—Debunking the "Fact Checkers"
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Pfizer Documents Contain Everything 00:14:39
Hey, everybody, welcome to this episode of the Charlie Kirk Show.
Charlie Kirk is taking some time away from the microphone, and we're excited that he's doing that.
This is producer Andrew Colvett filling in for Charlie.
Honored to do so.
We have a blockbuster episode here.
We talk about things you're not supposed to talk about, including Pfizer docs.
What's in them?
Why has it been trending?
What do they allege?
What do they not allege?
Why are the fact checkers coming after them?
And so much more.
We also bring on Dr. Keith Rose, who actually runs one of the largest urgent care networks in all of South Texas, an MD, one of the friends of the show.
We break it down and we explain what Bill Gates is saying about the vaccine all these months later.
What did he know and when?
And finally, we invite Jennifer Van Law, who is the managing editor of Red State, to break down 2,000 mules.
How are the fact-checkers trying to debunk it?
Why are they wrong?
Jennifer has the receipts.
You're not going to want to miss this episode.
Important stuff.
Buckle up.
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 andrewandtodd.com, the wonderfulandrewandtodd.com.
Dr. Keith Rose, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk Show.
Thanks, Andrew.
Yeah, honored to have you as always, my friend.
You are a wealth of knowledge.
You have been privately, you and I have been chatting a lot about, let's just call it the Pfizer docs.
All right.
It was trending on Twitter as soon as that happened.
You know, if you just Google Pfizer docs right now, all you will see is about 15 articles from Reuters, AP, Newsweek, fact-checking some of what they call the rumors on social media and conservative messaging boards.
I think this is a really fascinating conversation.
So I'm going to say like this, Dr. Rose.
I don't know how to interpret all of this data.
I'll be really honest, but we have pulled here on the show a lot of very interesting screen grabs.
Okay.
So that people have been pulling.
They've been analyzing it this way and that.
And I think it's completely fair game to talk about the Pfizer docs.
Now, for people who are uninitiated, Dr. Rose, tell us what the Pfizer docs are and how this became a news story to begin with.
Well, my understanding is that Pfizer wanted the documents that are now in the public domain held for 75 years, I believe, is what they requested.
And that in and of itself is bizarre.
I mean, that's about the equivalent of taking the national security safes and putting it in your museum and locking them up for five years.
You know, it doesn't make any sense when this kind of information should have been in the public realm.
Yeah.
That was just referring to Obama taking up it.
Yeah, no, what was their justification for doing that?
There wasn't a justification.
And that's, I think that you have to look at things.
We have a lot of content, but we also need to view that content in context.
And that's what I think the liberals of progressives are very good, is they corrupt the context of the content with, quote, fact checkers.
They tell you there's nothing to see here.
Move on.
And I think it's really important as American citizens.
It's not only that we have the right, but we have an obligation to future generations so that this doesn't happen again.
And what I mean by that is you have a lot of content pouring into the public domain.
You have people going over these Pfizer docs.
You have Pfizer officials on a Zoom call just a few days ago that was recorded on YouTube that talk specifically about the vaccine having a 71, 71 times higher chance of people that took the vaccine at a 71 times higher chance, the way they described it, of people getting a heart attack.
And they said for every one person the vaccine helped, two were injured.
Now, you can have fact checkers debunk that, but those are their words, not mine.
Those are the FDA words on a Zoom call.
Yeah, I see this right here.
So this is from Francis Buell or Boule.
I'm not sure how to pronounce his last name.
He says, FDA in their virtual meeting yesterday, quote, we were falsely misled by Pfizer about the safety of the vaccine.
Heart attacks are 71 times higher than other vaccines.
The vaccines are killing two people for every one life saved.
And then it said, and we'll try and pull this really quick.
It says, listen from the four-hour, 20-minute mark.
But that's it.
I mean, no wonder this is causing such a reaction.
I mean, you know, folks listening in the audience, remember we've played this montage before of big pharma and how they advertise on CNN, MSNBC, like all the mainstream news networks.
There is a lot of money in this.
So when you have something like this, where Pfizer is forced to share these documents ahead of schedule before they're, you know, asking to, I mean, they asked for 75 years and a judge blocked that.
This is a bombshell story.
Now, so it doesn't surprise me that you would see a lot of media attention on it.
It doesn't surprise me that you'd see a lot of fact checkers on it.
There's also, Dr. Rose, there's a lot of information about, I guess, pregnant women, right?
There was 124 mother cases and they said 75 serious cases, including 25 PTs abortion spontaneous.
Have you read into this as well?
I have.
In fact, if you look at it, only one person that was pregnant in that section of the study didn't have a problem.
I mean, that's unheard of.
But here's the thing that's that again, it's content and context.
The content of the Pfizer documents just came out in the same context.
And I want to back up for a second.
I'm going to get to the pregnancy issues.
But when you talked about there was injuring two or killing two people for every one person it quote saved, then you had someone intimately involved with the development of the vaccine, and that's Bill Gates, who was just recorded the other day as saying, we now know that the vaccine didn't work.
I'm paraphrasing, but he said it didn't prevent transmission and it didn't prevent acquisition of the disease.
That's the words of Bill Gates.
So then you have.
Yeah, let's go ahead and play that, Keith.
I want to play it so everybody can hear it in his own words.
That's cut 31.
Let's play cut 31.
Well, once Omicron comes along, the vaccine is not reducing transmission hardly at all, particularly about three or four months after you take the vaccine.
So we need to fix that.
And there's good ideas about how to do that.
The other thing is duration.
You know, we're seeing through a variety of the data, Israel data, UK data, that particularly if you're in your 70s, within four or five months of taking the vaccine, the protection really is going down.
Right.
And then he also said it didn't keep you from getting the disease.
So it was earlier in that clip.
So my question to Bill Gates or his smart experts is that if you have a medication, an experimental vaccine that doesn't prevent the transmission of a disease or the acquisition of the disease, by their own words, it makes you have less severe symptoms.
That would be a therapeutic.
It would not be a vaccine.
And I don't understand how physicians that when you go to medical school, and back when I went to medical school, I remember our graduation, we had someone come up and speak about how physicians he felt were truly the last group of professional people that really adhered to the maxim, you know, primum non-necessary, first do no harm.
But I think we've lost that moniker because we have at least a group of physicians, unfortunately, a large number, that are doing harm either by omission or commission.
And I think they need to do no K-N-O-W harm because they're not recognizing that these vaccines are not a one-off.
They're not helping, but they are actually hurting.
So the Pfizer documents on top of Bill Gates' revelation gives the context that the vaccines are pretty insidious.
That with data from around the world, I think that's why you have the fact checkers spinning up in record numbers.
And again, to put context to everything, to this content, the fact checkers are not physicians.
They're not medical professionals.
They're, from what I understand, mostly millennials that are told what to say, what to do, and they just get out there and they say we're fact checkers.
And how do they take someone who spends 20, 30, 40 years of their life studying medicine, who understands the scientific process, who understands therapeutics, who understands pharmacology, who understands biochemistry?
And then you have someone saying, well, you're wrong because the science doesn't show us that.
I mean, it's not the first time we've seen this.
We saw this back in the 70s when the former director of the CDC after swine flu had killed 4,000 people, or excuse me, killed 50 people and they stopped the vaccine.
It had injured 4,000, came out.
And when he was asked by Mike Wallace, Chris Wallace's father, he was asked by him.
Mike Wallace asked me, he said, why didn't you stop when you saw these people being injured?
And his quote was, that's not what the science showed us.
So the science is some nebulous data point.
And it's not because the science is always changing.
Science changes every year because we're constantly learning.
There's no such thing as settled science.
Well, you know, it's interesting too.
And so I want to play another clip for Bill Gates here from that same talk he was giving.
That's just cut one.
Let's go ahead and play it and we'll react to it after that.
Cut one.
It wasn't until early February when I was in a meeting that experts at the foundation said, there's no way, you know, there's been too much travel without diagnosis for us to contain this.
And then at that point, we didn't really understand the fatality rate.
You know, we didn't understand that it's a fairly low fatality rate and that it's a disease mainly of the elderly, kind of like flu is.
Yeah.
So I'm glad we didn't overreact, right, Dr. Rose?
Well, I just appreciate the fact that Bill Gates and his experts, as soon as they realized that there was no way to, quote, contain this, came out and said that lockdowns weren't effective and that let's not crush the economy.
Let's not cause an increase in drug use and suicides.
Let's not destroy jobs.
Let's do something different.
It's interesting.
He talks about it.
And if you're watching talk, he's just kind of rattling off the top of the head like there were no consequences to this.
No, it was his group that funded the IHME that gave us these bogus projections in the beginning that forced all the lockdowns.
It said there were going to be millions and millions of deaths.
So Amia Kulpa, two years later, I mean, it's not even Amia Kulpa.
It's like, oh, I guess we got it wrong.
Yeah, by the way, you started this whole exchange talking about how the science is changing and how they use that time and again to justify the most absurd conclusions.
And yet here you go basically saying, hey, the science didn't change.
As a matter of fact, back in February, we knew there was no containing this thing.
So why did they even try and contain it to begin with?
And you were actually the one that taught us on this show that you have never used lockdowns.
You've never used quarantining to quarantine the healthy.
It was always historically used to contain the sick.
That's a tremendous clip from Bill Gates, basically admitting that we had a coordinated overreaction and he knew in February.
Here's what's really interesting.
So the Pfizer docs drop.
People are digging through the data.
There's thousands of pages of data.
A lot of it's just raw data.
A lot of people are going to make sense of it heads or tails.
It can be difficult.
But it really started when Marjorie Taylor Greene tweeted about this.
So in her tweet, Green shared a screenshot of a document released by the Food and Drug Administration, which she took as meaning that 1,223 people died during Pfizer's post-authorization adverse events report.
A number of other conservative figures also posted why they are skeptical about the safety of the vaccine with Pfizer documents hashtag.
Here's their, this is Newsweek.
While the report discussed adverse reaction to the vaccine in a 90-day period and the figures are genuine, the pharmaceutical company has said the documents do not link the vaccine as being responsible for the people's death.
So basically, they're saying that the fatalities listed in the report are among nearly 160,000 adverse effects.
The cause of each fatality is not verified and therefore may also include those who had various illnesses such as cancer or cardiovascular disease, says a Pfizer spokeswoman.
So let me just make sure I'm getting this straight, Dr. Rose.
Pfizer is basically saying, oh, these aren't, you know, this isn't real data.
And Marjorie Taylor Greene's full of it because, you know, we can't verify all of this.
Isn't this the same excuse that those on the left used to debunk the VARES data because they said they couldn't verify all the adverse events?
Is this what's happening here?
Right.
Medical License Consequences Explained 00:02:45
You have to understand when you listen to the mainstream media or liberal progressives, I call it the rule of exchange.
They exchange one set of data for another set of reasons and they use it back and forth.
A great example is the governor of your state, Gavin Newson, who is now trying to take the medical license from any physician.
They're pushing a bill right now at your state legislature to take the medical license from any physician that, quote, promotes misinformation.
And at the same time, Gavin Newsom, who locked down an entire state and is trying to force vaccines, was out, I think it was 72 hours ago.
And his quote was, he's upset about Roe versus Wade.
And he said, remember, my body, your body, your choice.
So again, liberals use the slogans that fit their narrative.
And if you say anything else, like you said, it's misinformation.
So they don't, they're not, we're not working on a level playing field.
So you have to bring context in to show how far off these guys are, how far off the mark they are.
And speaking of context, you know, you just read me a quote from Bill Gates that was so asinine that I assumed it was from February or March of 2020.
Read that for the audience.
This is a quote reported on Bill Gates when he was talking about Elon Musk takeover of Twitter.
And he said, you know, Elon Musk could make misinformation on Twitter worse.
And right after he said that, he was answering questions on COVID.
And he said, well, yeah, it comes from bats and it spread because of climate change.
So you have someone saying that Elon Musk is going to make misinformation worse.
And then you have someone basically talking misinformation.
But it's not just Bill Gates.
It's the same mainstream media and fact checkers.
Let's just keep it simple that said Hunter Biden's laptop was rushing misinformation, which we know because of Washington Post articles, New York Times articles, Hunter Biden's laptop is real.
And so, you know, you would think that if I was a liberal, it might cause me some cognitive dissonance.
You know, I might look at it and go, hey, this may not be correct.
But unfortunately, today, we have a lot of people that are specialists in propaganda.
That's why when you hear information come out and everyone's saying the exact same words and catchphrases, you can almost bet that that's misinformation.
Yep, the bumper stickers, beware of the bumper stickers.
And by the whole, one of the just flimsiest arguments is when they say, you know, your body, your choice, it's just plainly not their body.
Biblical Responsible Investing Strategy 00:02:13
I mean, in the vast majority of instances, that person chose to engage in intercourse.
There are potential consequences for that.
And sometimes, yes, it creates another body.
It's called a baby.
And that baby doesn't get a choice unless we fight for it.
But Andrew, look at this.
I mean, even their body, their choice.
Look, now, ever since Roe versus Wade, the Democrats have discovered the definition of a woman.
I mean, we didn't even know what a woman was until I had Roe versus Wade.
And now everyone understands a woman.
I'm not a biologist, but it was a happy Mother's Day yesterday.
So Happy Mother's Day to all those wonderful mothers.
We need you to be sane and just stand up.
Dr. Rose, wish we had more time per usual.
Thank you for joining us.
Have you looked at how much of Russia is inside your 401k or IRA?
Did you know my friends at PAX Financial Group have zero investments in Russia through their biblical investment strategy?
Those companies were screened out long ago because they didn't pass the treat people right test.
One of the most important tenets of the Christian faith is to love your neighbor, and this includes to love your employees.
Based on PAX's biblical responsible investment strategy, a company, domestic or international, is excluded from an investment from your portfolio if it violates our innate God-given fundamental rights.
So PAX Financial is wonderful.
They share our values.
In fact, I know people that have switched to PAX Financial from our partnership, and they speak so favorably about it.
Stop using the woke money managers.
PAX Financial is rooted in biblical wisdom.
So if you have $150,000 or more and would like to know more about biblical responsible investing at PAX Financial Group, text Charlie to number 74868.
That's Charlie at number 74868.
That's Charlie to number 74868.
So you just take out your phone, text the number 74868 and type in Charlie to get to know about PAX Biblical Responsible Investing, biblical responsible investing strategy.
Take out your phone, text Charlie to 74868.
They're about to manage some money for me.
I really think highly of PAX Financial.
Text Charlie to number 74868.
Johnson Vaccine vs Blood Clots 00:06:33
So PfizerDocs is trending on Twitter.
It becomes a big trending topic.
Next thing you know, you see 15, 30 fact checks from Reuters, AP, Newsweek, all of the above, all the usual suspects.
And, but what's, there's a couple things that are very clear here.
And they're, and now they're debunking some of the debunking, using air quotes.
It's an air quote day.
Some of the tactics that they're using to debunk this data is the same tactics that they use to debunk various, right?
So they're basically saying, you can't trust any data, and yet, but you could trust us that this is a completely safe and effective vaccine.
And as Dr. Rose said, you know, it's not a vaccine, it's a therapeutic.
We even heard from Bill Gates himself saying that the vaccine stopped being able to protect people from the infection in the first place.
So this is a therapeutic.
The main point that they made with the therapeutic was that it reduced severity of illnesses.
How many times have we seen in recent memory of Kamala Harris or Jen Saki?
However, many people that have been boosted twice after the first two shots, so they've gotten four shots.
How many times have we seen them say, hey, I tested positive?
Never fear, I have been double boosted.
I'm very thankful that because of that, that the symptoms will not be severe.
Well, I know a lot of people that have not been vaccinated.
A, very few cases of people actually getting it that have not been vaccinated, at least in recent memory.
I got COVID in December 2020 and have not gotten it again.
I've been around groups where you might call them super spreader instances, and I did not, I never got COVID a second time.
Praying, obviously, that that would be the case.
Continuing on.
And I'm sorry if your situation is different than that.
I'm just telling you anecdotally, what I'm seeing is a lot of self-righteous progressives that brag and virtue signal about how they've been quadruple boosted, and here they are getting COVID.
All right.
So what the Pfizer docs tell us, this is true, right?
You can't debunk what's true.
They even admitted, as I read before in Newsweek, that the data is genuine.
Here's the following is a list, a condensed list of side effects found during Pfizer's vaccine trials.
Myocarditis and other serious heart problems.
Liver failure, blood clotting.
And I'm going to get back to blood clotting in just a second.
Acute interstitial pneumonitis, a whole host of autoimmune disorders, various musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, diabetes, herpes, thyroid disorder.
And by the way, there's like herpes all over the place, apparently.
It's just like an outbreak of herpes from this stuff.
Thyroid disorders, several neurological conditions, including multiple sclerosis, blindness, seizures, epilepsy, narcolepsy, eczema, blisters, asthma, fertility problems, which we discussed as well, inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn's disease, and I guess Julian Barr syndrome, if I'm saying that right.
So what's interesting about this as well is you have doctors like Dr. Keriarti, who we're going to have to get on this show.
I mean, we've flirted around the edges.
But I want to play his clip in quick succession with another clip.
Cut 32.
This is our brought to you by Pfizer montage.
I hinted about it earlier, but I want to play it because I think it builds out the next clip really well.
Cut 32.
Because brought to you by Pfizer, CBS Health Watch, sponsored by Pfizer.
Anderson Cooper 360.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
ABC News Nightline.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
All the mainstream news media gatekeepers brought to you by Pfizer.
Now, I'm going to play this clip from Dr. Cariarti.
Go ahead and play it.
And of course, yesterday's announcement about the Johnson Johnson vaccine.
I'm glad actually that the FDA is acknowledging that there is this concern about thrombosis, about blood clots with the JJ vaccine.
But Tucker, I got to be honest, I'm a little surprised that they're applying that level of scrutiny to the JJ vaccine, but not to the mRNA vaccines, not to the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine, because actually, if you look at overall safety issues, the JJ vaccine probably has a better overall safety profile.
So, this is what's interesting.
So, the FDA and the CDC come out and they warn about thrombosis, right?
So, blood clotting.
Very interesting.
Dr. Cariarti is basically saying what's the key point of intrigue here is that they're not attacking the other two vaccines that are mRNA vaccines, but they are attacking Johnson Johnson, even though Johnson Johnson actually has a slightly better safety profile than the other two.
Now, remember what I just played here: brought to you by Pfizer, brought to you by Pfizer.
The mainstream news media is paid for, bought, by Big Pharma.
So, why are they not attacking the Pfizer mRNA vaccine?
Maybe they don't have as big a pockets as Pfizer.
Maybe Johnson Johnson slumming it in the big pharma world.
This is shocking stuff, folks.
And I have a bunch of clips here from Dr. Naomi Wolf that we could play.
Let's play CUT 25.
I think it's a good way to end this segment.
Cut 25.
Moving on to what Pfizer knew in December of 2020, one month after the rollout of the vaccine.
Their internal documents show three categories, none of them good.
Vaccine failure is one, waning efficacy is another.
And the result of having COVID as a side effect is the third.
So I think that's pretty interesting.
Ties the point together that a lot of people that you know and that I know that have been triple, quadruple, boosted, these people tend to keep getting COVID inexplicably.
Salem Now Election Fraud Data 00:06:04
I'm not saying that I'm listening, I'm not a doctor.
I'm not going to make the direct correlation.
Other people like Dr. Naomi Wolf are certainly making the correlation.
I have not been vaccinated.
I have not gotten COVID since my original bout with the disease, with the virus.
And I know dozens and dozens of other anecdotal cases that would suggest that.
What Dr. Naomi Wolf is saying is that one of the side effects on top of death, infertility, myracarditis, herpes, it's COVID.
Folks, it's a massive, massive question.
It's a perfectly reasonable thing to debate.
And the fact-checkers want to shut us up.
And they want to shut us up about 2020, the November 3rd election, November 2020.
2000 Mules is an amazing new documentary out on Salem now.
Go check it out.
That also is worthy of debate, worthy of discussion.
Let's not let them shut us up, folks.
Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here.
You've known it in your gut, and something just wasn't right about the 2020 election.
Well, guess what?
You were right.
And here's the proof you've been waiting for.
In Dinesh D'Souza's explosive new documentary, 2000 Mules, executive produced by Salem Media Group, you'll see jaw-dropping evidence of exactly how the Democrats pulled off the biggest heist in American history.
Drawn on meticulous research from the election integrity group True the Vote, 2000 Mules uses both cell phone geotracking data and video evidence to uncover a massive network of illegal ballot trafficking in all five key swing states.
Enough election fraud to change the outcome of the 2020 election.
Thousands across the country attended the national theatrical release.
Now you can watch from the comfort of your home, watch on any device with a web browser, gather friends, families, and skeptics alike, but don't miss it.
Go to salemnow.com to watch it today.
See the movie that Donald Trump calls a real blockbuster.
Go to salemnow.com to watch today.
That's salemnow.com, executive produced by the Salem Media Group.
One of the fascinating storylines of the last, let's say, six years, since the rise of President Trump through 2020, through COVID, through all of these different periods, is the role of the fact checker.
And if you've been listening to the entire show today, you will see that point after point after point, whether we were talking about the cabal in 2020, Molly Ball from Time Magazine that saved democracy, that saved the election, how there was a note in that article about how the progressives leaned on the fact checkers,
leaned on big tech to rein in misinformation, as they would call it.
Now we have the advent of the Ministry of Truth, Nina Jankowitz.
We have the funding from the DHS to make that happen.
Now we have COVID fact-checkers going after these FISA docs saying that all this information is being skewed and misinterpreted, even though they say the data is genuine.
Even though there's massive red flags that are being raised, I believe rightly so from the data.
Fact checkers there.
And now we have 2,000 Mules.
2,000 Mules, a film out from Salem Now, produced and directed by Dinesh D'Souza, friend of the show, friend of Charlie's.
We were honored to be at the film premiere at Mar-a-Lago last week.
It was a tremendous event.
A lot of great people were there.
And what do you have?
We have fact-checkers galore saying that this is basically rubbish.
That what Dinesh D'Souza has come up with in this amazing film that's documenting True the Vote.
And what True the Vote is, it's a nonprofit group out of Georgia.
We had a tremendous conversation with them on the show with Catherine Engelbrecht that are behind that effort.
And they walked through everything.
They walked through exactly what it took to get this project off the ground.
What did they do?
They spent millions of dollars.
They had supercomputers.
They crunched data.
They overlaid cell phone data with FOIA requested Dropbox video surveillance footage to see where ballot harvesters and mules that were trafficking data, like a cartel of drug smugglers would do.
And they cross-referenced and they came up with over 2,000 of these people that were illegally harvesting votes in the five key swing states.
And they determined that it was determinative, meaning that had these people not been cheating, that the outcome of the 2020 election would be different.
Now, you can disagree with that.
That's fine.
But what we're seeing is a concerted and coordinated effort to debunk it.
And what do we have on Twitter?
Of course, U.S. National News five minutes ago, film claiming the 2020 election voting scheme uses faulty assumptions and improper analysis of data, fact-checkers report.
So, a project that took them two years, the fact-checkers have already looked at and told you it's nothing to see here.
It's all bunk and garbage and rubbish.
That sorry, Twitter's letting you know that there's nothing here.
So, for all of you out there, I'm glad that you went and saw the movie, and I'm glad that you thought this might be a big thing.
Well, it's not, it's not.
The fact-checkers have spoken.
Never mind your lying eyes with that you can actually see people delivering multiple, multiple ballots.
Never mind the fact that once upon a time, now, see, one of the things that they're doing, New York Times watching you post, they're debunking this based on cell phone data.
They said that you they could tell if you had an abortion based on your cell phone pings, but not now.
Ballot Harvesting Night Boxes 00:17:05
Look, did you get hit with a big tax spill you were not expecting with rates still being very low and home equity being high?
It's the perfect time to refinance and get some cash out of your home.
Look, you could go to one of these woke banks, Citibank, Chase, where they hate you, they hate the country, and they hate Christianity, or you could refinance right now all of your mortgage needs with my friends.
Guess what?
It's so easy to remember the website, andrewandodd.com.
Just write it down: andrewandTodd.com.
They're with Sierra Pacific Mortgage.
They're people I know and trust and work with them, and you should too.
Just go to andrewandtodd.com.
It takes 30 seconds to answer a couple of questions.
This gives them the information they need to give you valuable information, often on the first call.
Andrew and Todd, they are not brokers, they are bankers, which means they handle your loan from start to finish.
So, you always have someone in your corner.
Take that first step towards getting that cash you need today.
AndrewandTodd.com.
That's AndrewandTodd.com or called 888-888-1172, 888, 888, 1172.
Do not use the banks that hate you.
Use Andrew and Todd.
They will do a great job for you, everybody.
AndrewandTodd.com.
That's AndrewandTodd.com.
I am incredibly honored to have a friend of mine, fellow communist California native, stuck in the People's Republic as myself.
Jennifer Van Laar, she is the managing editor of Red State, a phenomenal website.
You guys need to check it out.
They do just a tremendous job.
And a large part of that is owed to Jennifer's work here.
Jennifer, welcome to the Charlie Kirk.
Welcome back.
Welcome back.
Right.
It's been a while.
Yeah, it's been a while, but I saw you recently.
I saw you at CPAC, I believe, actually.
Yes.
And you had a tweet that was cracking me up the other day as another self-loathing California resident.
You said you were looking at properties in other states, and you said, I probably won't move ever, but there's an Eeyore vibe over this whole state.
And I was like, that's pretty well said.
So we all kind of feel it over here on the left coast, don't we?
Oh, my goodness.
All right.
Well, so we are not here to talk about California's misery, although we could probably go on.
Maybe we'll get there.
But we're here talking about 2,000 mules, okay?
This is a tremendous effort by True the Vote out of Georgia, nonprofit Katherine Inglebrack, and now Dinesh D'Souza took their information in this investigation they've been leading for two years now, turned it into a document, well, almost two years, and turned it into a documentary that has now taken the grassroots by storm.
Finally, the mainstream news media gatekeepers are waking up and they're like, oh, gosh, there's all these message boards and the telegrams and the they're all talking about this 2,000 mules.
We have to debunk it.
I saw that you had a great thread debunking the debunkers.
So I knew I had to have you on to talk about it.
Jennifer, break it down for us.
What are they attacking this movie for?
Twitter's got it right on their masthead saying this is out of context or whatever.
What is the main attack thread against 2000 mules?
And we can go from there why it's silly.
There's a couple main attack threads.
The first one is that the researchers with True the Vote and Greg Phillips in particular improperly used cell phone geotracking data.
And they were saying, oh, there's no way that it could be that precise to know if these people went to multiple ballot drop boxes and certain nonprofits within this month-long-ish timeframe.
You know, you could tell if they were a little bit away from it, but it's not precise in any way.
That's what their experts say.
They also say that there could be delivery drivers that go to multiple places in a day.
There could be election workers that repeatedly go to these ballot drop boxes, or they're placed in high traffic areas.
Or hey, people might have been taking it for their family, might have been taking a stack of ballots for their family.
And all of it is just BS.
Well, so you shared an article here from Washington Post, which I teased before the break.
You said your, it said your phone could reveal if you've had an abortion.
Internet searches, visits to clinics, and period tracking apps leave digital trail.
This is the first, this is hilarious because this article was written in May 4th.
Yeah, so this is updated.
Yeah, May 4th, 2022, and updated.
Yeah, so this week.
When someone gets an abortion, they may decide not to share information with friends and family members, but chances are their smartphone knows.
So their smartphone can know when they've had an abortion, but it can't track somebody if they go from Stash House to Stash House to Dropbox to Dropbox in the state of Georgia or Pennsylvania.
Apparently.
Apparently.
And in 2019, the New York Times did a big piece or a big series called The Privacy Project.
And it was the subhead was One Nation Tracked.
And showing, of course, then they were worried about Trump tracking all of the resistance people.
And so they wanted to raise fear about that.
But they showed in that that this precise data showed they had 12 million Americans and 50 billion location pings over a few month period.
And they were just telling everyone in that article, you never use your phone the same way again.
It can target who you slept with the night before if you went to a methadone clinic, all of these things.
So if it can do that, why can't you?
All the things.
Yeah.
All the things the left really cares about.
Did you do drugs and have sex with somebody that night and you don't want to tell anybody?
Right.
Yes.
Understood.
That's privacy.
Right.
According to the left.
Okay.
So let's just, I think it's important to kind of take one step back and kind of break down what we're actually talking about here.
So I said Greg Price earlier.
I apologize.
Greg Phillips and Catherine Engelbrecht from True the Vote.
So they took actual supercomputers.
They had supercomputers crunching data that they paid millions of dollars for the entire project.
And what they did was they tracked all these cell phone pings and then overlaid those cell phone pings on a map of the drop boxes.
Obviously, drop boxes were something new.
This was not some sort of drive-by night, you know, effort to kind of appease the itching ears of Donald Trump and say what he wanted to hear.
This was a very sophisticated effort to get to the bottom of whether or not they could prove their thesis, right?
Which was that maybe there was some illegal ballot harvesting.
You are a California resident.
We know ballot harvesting perhaps better than any state in the nation.
Jennifer, tell us what we know from our experience in the state of California.
How widespread can ballot harvesting get?
Is it effective?
Does it actually result in votes being moved?
And then reference what you're seeing in these videos from the movie.
So we know that it can be extremely effective in California.
That's why they made it actually legal.
The Democrats were doing it for years before it became legal.
And so, of course, with Lorena Gonzalez, one of our favorite assembly members, who's also a union show, they made that legal here.
And so, in 2018, we saw that blue wave of losing seven congressional seats in California and some pretty Republican areas.
And, like I told Ed Atzinger, who is former Salem CEO, just moved to a different position, but they helped to finance this movie.
And I told him, because he's another Californian, you know, we saw the dry run for this in California in 2018.
And I really believe that that's true.
So, how like what kind of, I mean, are we talking, and maybe you don't know it, and that's okay, but like when we're when we see ballot harvesting in a state like California, how many points can they move the vote?
Like, can they, is this like, can in the most sophisticated state here when it comes to ballot harvesting, the most track record, are they moving the vote three points, four points, five points, like a half point?
I mean, what's what are we actually working with here?
Well, I think it depends on what they need, right?
So, they do a lot of research to see exactly where they need to do things.
So, with California races, it's not as neighborhood specific, but nationally with the presidential race, they knew that they just had to get certain cities to tip the electoral college vote.
But within California, I think easily, you know, we saw what happened with the Katie Hill seat.
She won by what, seven points, I think it was in 18.
And then her, after she resigned, and then there was another election for that seat.
The first election after that, the Republican won by three or four points.
And then it was closer in the general.
But everyone was thinking that that district had really gone purple or perhaps blue, but that was just the effect of the ballot harvesting.
So, I mean, we're talking about Mike Garcia.
Obviously, he won back that seat.
And, you know, one of the things people don't realize is that the GOP in California, they ballot harvest now.
There was a big, they fought it, obviously, because I think intuitively, conservatives hate ballot harvesting, right?
I mean, it's one person, one vote.
I mean, I hate this voting month thing.
I mean, it's, if anything, it's exposed, this movie's exposed that, you know, when you when you give people a month to vote, uh, you're giving them a month of opportunity to cheat, right?
So when the GOP comes out in like the state of Georgia and we're saying, oh, you know, they passed this voter integrity measure, right?
Which is why they moved the all-star game from Atlanta, which was, you know, which had a larger black population because, you know, they're saying it was Jim Crow 2.0 or whatever.
And then they move it to Denver, which is, yeah, exactly right.
So, so, but, you know, they passed this voter measure, this voter integrity measure, and their argument, the GOP in Georgia, was like, hey, we're making it easier to vote.
Actually, we have more time to vote.
And I'm thinking to myself, it's like, you're, I mean, not only like, I'm glad there's signature verification in the Georgia vote, but like as conservatives, we should not be pushing things in the like longer time period to vote.
This is exposed.
It's not because we don't want people to vote.
We want people to vote.
But there is this much more room for shenanigans like we're seeing in 2000 Mules to play out.
We've seen it in California.
We know that it has a determinative impact in many cases.
And now, Jen, when you see the videos that are coming out of places like Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania that you see in 2000 Mules, does that pass the smell test?
I mean, when you, you are a California expert.
You really are.
I mean, anybody who wants to know what's going on in California, follow Jennifer Van Law on Twitter.
I mean, it's critical.
But does this pass the smell test?
Like what you're seeing in these videos, is this what you've seen?
Yeah.
Not at all.
I mean, in the AP fact check, they're saying they talked to one person.
So of course they use this anecdotal evidence from one person in Michigan who says, oh, I took six ballots from my family members to the Dropbox.
So they could have caught me on this film.
Well, no, in Georgia, these people went to an average of 24 drop boxes to take ballots.
So, unless this guy that's taking his family's ballots also goes to a bunch of other drop boxes, or he has a huge family, which that doesn't pass the spell test either.
You're not going to have 20 relatives who are too old to get to the ballot box, and you're going to be the one person that takes it.
I don't think so.
So, the videos that we see, the people are in the middle of the night.
They're taking pictures of the ballot drop box because that's how, according to True the Vote, they get paid.
They're wearing the blue gloves, the latex gloves, after a certain date because they after people were indicted for ballot fraud and fingerprints were what took them down.
So, then you start seeing the mules wearing these blue gloves.
And they ate the it's hilarious.
They said because it was cold in late December, because this was for the Georgia runoff.
Okay, everyone wears blue latex gloves because it's cold and then turns around and puts them in the trash can when they after they're done with the ballot box.
Sure, yeah, yeah.
Well, and I, and I, it's a really important point what you just brought up.
The point being that actually, Greg Phillips and Catherine Engelbreck, when they walked through this, how they chose the data sets that they were actually going to analyze, they set the threshold really high.
So, the name of the movie is 2,000 mules, but realistically, there's way more than 2,000 because this only focused on the swing states.
But, secondly, they set the criteria for who would get flagged in their searches so high because they didn't want false positives.
To your point, they wanted at least like 10 ballots, they wanted 10 different visits.
I forget the details, but they had to go to five of these nonprofits that were identified.
Now, True the Vote's going to release that information of what these nonprofits were.
We think it's things like unions or some of these Soros-funded orgs with the sunshiny names that Stacey Abrams, maybe.
What was that?
Stacey Abrams, maybe might be, yeah, all these orgs that are just supposed to be educating people.
And yet, they were out there being stash houses for these ballots once they were collected.
And then they were assigned out to these mules to take to various drop boxes.
Yeah, so I want to say cartels use these languages, this language, stash houses, mules.
There's a reason for this.
So, Jennifer, they're saying that we don't know for which candidate they're actually dropping off ballots, right?
So, they could have been, this could have been all ballot laundering for Trump.
So, what's the big deal?
Sure, yeah, okay, it could have been.
The point being, and someone on Twitter raised this last night to me, you know, well, you know, we don't know, blah, blah, blah.
But the point is, the numbers were there.
And this, like you said earlier, in this very narrow universe that True the Vote identified, there probably were a lot more of these mules taking part in the election.
Just within that universe, there were more than enough ballots illegally taken to these ballot boxes to have swung the election.
So, we think that that deserves some kind of investigation, especially since in these states, it was legal for people to have like their son or daughter take a ballot for them, but it was not legal to just give it to someone off the street to take in your ballot.
So, this was a legal activity taking place that needs to be investigated.
Right.
And, you know, actually, producer Connor's just bringing up a good point that in a movie, they describe they describe a crossover between Antifa and GMGA, the Georgia mules, right?
So, they cross-referenced geolocation data that they had on Antifa in the 2020 riots with the mule data and found that a decent number of these mules were also at the riot, were also at the riot.
I think it would be a stretch to suggest that Antifa was voting for President Trump.
I don't know.
So they have an answer for that.
It's a fairly compelling data point.
Some of them were saying, well, why would it be wrong for these people to go and peacefully protest the killing of a black person by law enforcement?
Or maybe it was people who were there as first responders.
So, okay, what firefighter or law enforcement officer do you know who has time to go to 24 drop boxes in addition to whatever they're doing for work?
It's hilarious.
Yeah, none of this is at all reasonable, but that's, you know, so one of the things that we've been talking about, though, is just the absurd nature of the fact-checking industry, which, you know, they touch on, this touches on basically all of the main issues of our time, right?
We had fact checks against the Hunter Biden laptop, proven true.
We had fact checks against the Wuhan lab league.
Basically, it's the predominant theory, even though Bill Gates apparently still talking about that it came from a bat, tweeting about that just last week.
We have fact checks against all sorts of COVID data points, masks, whether it be Ivermect and HGQ.
There's a lot of controversy around this, but the fact checkers come in and they basically tell you what the truth is.
And now we have the Ministry of Truth, right?
The DHS is setting up Nina Jankowitz, and they're coming now top of Twitter, even with Elon Musk.
There, people don't understand Elon is not in control yet.
He hasn't, he just is under the hood.
We don't actually technically know if this is going to go through.
Now, we have every indication that it will go through.
But the fact checkers come in and they offer absurd rationale for so much.
They make themselves the arbiters of truth and not truth.
And then we come in here and we're blocked from saying these things or we get fact checks or we get strikes against our social media accounts.
What are you guys doing at Red State?
How do you navigate this with something as contentious as the 2020 election?
We're hearing indications that Newsmax is declining.
Dinesh tweeted about it.
Newsmax is declining to cover it.
How do you guys handle that at Red State?
Become A Monthly Supporter 00:02:00
Wow.
Well, I still am covering it.
I wrote a piece last night about how true the vote is going to release all of their data that they have.
And but the thing is, it's already had on Facebook.
Someone emailed me this morning saying they couldn't share it because I forget what terminology they used, but basically that it was hateful or not good information to share.
So that's cut.
We're still working on these things.
We're still bringing this out because you can't be intellectually consistent and ignore this.
But also we have a VIP program that we have at Red State where people can just subscribe and pay directly for our content so we can try to get around financial reliance on Facebook and other big tech groups.
Well, Jennifer, you do tremendous work at Red State.
You guys are some of the good guys.
Thank you for being courageous.
People who don't know Jennifer, she was instrumental in breaking the Katie Hill news.
We have Mike Garcia in large part thanks to your reporting.
You do tremendous work.
And so thank you for being brave.
Thank you for continuing to cover this story.
And thank you for staying on it, Jennifer.
We're grateful for all that you do.
Thanks so much, everybody, for tuning in.
It's an honor to be with you.
If you like what we do here, please go to charliekirk.com forward slash support, charliekirk.com forward slash support.
Help us out.
Pitch in.
Become a monthly supporter of the show.
It means the world to us when you do.
And if you do become a monthly supporter of the show, you get exclusive access to a private Zoom call with Charlie Kirk once a month, where he takes your questions.
It's very intimate.
We don't share anywhere else.
Guys, if you are not a part of that Zoom call, you are missing out.
That is the true behind the scenes, behind the scenes.
Go to charliekirk.com forward slash support.
Become a monthly supporter of the show and you get exclusive access to that.
Guys, we'll be back tomorrow.
Don't go anywhere.
Thanks so much.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.
Export Selection