Scrap or Salvage? Dan Crenshaw and Anthony Sabatini Sound Off on the FBI
On what some are calling a "controversial" episode of The Charlie Kirk Show, Jack Posobiec—continuing in his role as Guest Host with Charlie out on assignment—is joined by two members of the Republican Party: Congressman Dan Crenshaw and, in Jack's words, "Future Congressman" Anthony Sabatini, a Turning Point Action-Endorsed candidate for Congress from the great state of Florida, to discuss the continued fallout from the FBI Raid on Mar-A-Lago and where we should go from here. First up, Texas Congressman Dan Crenshaw sits with Jack to unpack his recent interview with Jake Tapper on CNN where he, rightfully so, called the FBI's actions "very unprecedented." He gives his diagnosis on the pulse of the Conservative Movement when it comes to defunding the Bureau shares what he thinks we should do moving forward. They also discuss Davos, the WEF, and much more throughout the first half of this episode. Next, Anthony Sabatini calls in from the campaign trail, on the day of his contentious Republican Party Primary, to offer his own perspective on the FBI's recent actions in his home state. He also provides his prescription for the embattled agency—which includes holding up any potential Congressional Budget that includes funding for the feds without adequate reform and oversight. In the words of this program's full-time host and namesake, Buckle Up—this episode is a true rollercoaster throughout. 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
Criminal Justice and Documents00:11:45
This is Jack Posobiec sitting in for Charlie Kirk.
Huge episode, a controversial episode of the Charlie Kirk Show.
We interview Congressman Dan Crenshaw and future Congressman Anthony Sabatini.
The question is, what should we do with the FBI?
Can they be reformed or should we abolish it and defund it completely?
Sit down, listen to the whole thing.
Tell us what you think.
Freedomcharlykirk.com.
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 the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandTodd.com.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard Jack Posobiec, your guest hosting.
Charlie Kirk is on assignment, but we are holding down the fort because we've got so much going on today.
We've got so much news breaking.
A new Twitter whistleblower has stepped forward, and this might actually change the entire game when it comes to the lawsuit with Elon Musk.
We're going to be breaking that down throughout the show.
We're also going to be looking at, we're on Verdict Watch, Verdict Watch up in Michigan.
We're going to have Julie Kelly on later for American Greatness to talk about this latest case, the FBI and Michigan, this supposed plot against Governor Whitmore.
So we're on verdict watch for that.
We're keeping an eye on it 24-7.
But we have to get into, we absolutely have to get into the latest bombshell disclosures out of the FBI, the latest in the fallout of this Mar-a-Lago raid.
And in order to do so, I've got John Solomon, who broke the story last night.
He's going to be coming on, joining me here live in studio on the Charlie Kirk show to explain everything that's gone through on this.
Because you just heard Congressman Crenshaw earlier on CNN, goes on with Jake Tapper.
And he went on and said, look, this thing is egregious.
It's not something that we normally do as a country.
And because of that, you're seeing a huge coalescing of people against the DOJ and then for President Trump.
So much is breaking.
So much is happening.
We've got the new John Solomon report that's come out about the DOJ, the communications between the FBI, the NARA, between the White House counsel's office about executive privilege and essentially the scoop that the Biden White House is not going to invoke executive privilege for President Trump.
A huge break in precedent there over these documents that were found at Mar-a-Lago, the documents that President Trump claims he declassified, and then the raid that we all saw.
Well, one congressman went on, Republican congressman, went on CNN this weekend, and I caught the clip and people were just going nuts about this.
Liberal blue check Twitter was going nuts about this interview with Jake Tapper.
And so I wanted to bring on Congressman Dan Crenshaw here on the program, who was in that clip that went toe-to-toe with Tapper on this and said, this is not something we do.
Congressman Crenshaw, welcome to the show.
Hey, Jack, good to see you.
And thanks for having me.
So you're somebody who, you know, it's, it's, you, you seem like you can get both sides of the blue check Twitter and both sides of Twitter just going.
And this one with They were just raining bombs on you because you had the tenacity and the temerity and the audacity to say that the Mar-a-Lago raid was egregious and it looked egregious.
And you, by the way, you said that on Sunday.
And I want to give you credit here because you said before we even had the John Solomon report out that it looked like they were trying to comply with these requests.
Then we get the John Solomon story last night that has the whole email chain that yes, they were trying to comply.
But what they didn't realize was the White House counsel was coming in and they weren't invoking executive privilege and all of these things that the legal team thought they had were not being invoked for the first time in history.
Judge Reinhertt himself comes out and says unprecedented.
So from my um from where I sit, it looks kind of like you were exactly right when you were talking on Tapper about that.
Yeah, well, I'm glad those documents have come out recently because I know PolitiFact was trying to contact our office and dispute this idea.
And of course, it's indisputable because look, if they had asked repeatedly that Trump return certain documents, then they would have said so by now, right?
They would have used that in the justification for the raid, just in public statements.
So I think it was a pretty safe assumption.
And then you look at further context, where back in June, look, they carried dozens of boxes out of Mar-a-Law and Go, but with the full cooperation of the Trump team.
And look, that's how normally things should be done.
All right.
Mistakes are made.
Staff is backing up dozens of boxes full of documents.
You know, if you were Trump and you had a letter from Kim Jong-un or a letter from Barack Obama, which were some of the things that were taken out, you would probably assume that you're allowed to have those.
That would seem to me like a personal memo or memento to have from your presidency.
So you have to have some element of good faith in dealing with these situations.
And if you're going to do an FBI raid and use the Espionage Act as your basis for that, well, you better be able to prove some kind of malicious intent here.
That's another big part of the investigation that they're just leaving out.
Well, I'm not sure they would publicize it if they had it, but this is an unprecedented event, and we would want transparency on these things.
We want answers.
You cannot just say, well, it's a legal matter.
It's a criminal justice matter.
It's not.
It's automatically immersed in the political atmosphere just by the nature of it being with Trump and it being a former president and the potential future candidate.
And I tell it, here's what I would sum it up as.
When the left is mad about this, I'm like, look, just please put the shoe on the other foot for a second and think about the following comparison, a very comparable situation wherein in 20, let's say in 2017, President Trump ordered the FBI to raid Hillary Clinton's home to get servers that he believes have classified information on them.
It's almost the exact same situation because former political opponent, potential future political opponent, how would the left react to that?
We need to have the same standards by which we react to things in our country.
And that was the point I was making on CNN.
I don't think you can refute that point.
No, I think that's exactly right.
And when you're looking at this from that perspective, it's obviously political.
And yet here we have, and I believe we have the Newsweek piece had up the poll last week, and the poll is from The Economist YouGov that said more Republicans have a favorable view of Trump after the FBI raid.
Rasmussen had the poll that showed independents are starting to look at this raid as if they are, that the FBI is acting sort of as like a personal guard for Biden rather than simply being the FBI that protects our citizens, protects children, protects classified information.
Doesn't seem like they're trying to protect that.
It seems like they're trying to protect Joe Biden.
Yeah, and look, I lay blame at the feet of our political appointees.
I think that's when we direct our anger at someone, I think it should be political appointees who are really calling the shots here.
Merrick Garland signed off on this.
Okay, it's like Kevin McCarthy said, better have your parking spot ready and save all your documents because there's going to be a lot of oversight in the House when we retake the majority on this particular issue and a whole plethora of other issues.
And because that's where it happened.
The White House says they didn't know about that.
I find that impossible to believe.
I find it impossible to believe that the White House didn't know about it.
This is the kind of, it's such a sensitive matter that it would be a dereliction of duty not to tell the White House.
I'm sure they knew.
I'm sure they had a heads up at least.
And they probably could have squashed it if they wanted to.
And they should have because this makes them look bad.
Again, the fact that they didn't even ask Trump for these documents ahead of time and just assume that this was some malicious intent here.
And I joked about it on the show.
I was like, does any of us really think that President Trump is just reading his nuclear secrets every night by his bedside?
It's just like what he likes to go to bed to.
And it's like, that's his last prize possession.
Does any of us really believe that?
I really don't think so.
You know, it's highly likely this was a mistake made by staffers packing up boxes and it could be easily rectified.
And it certainly seems like that.
Now, Congressman, you also said, you know, you think that 99% of GOP or Republican voters that necessarily on the train of defund the FBI.
But I can understand why people would be, rightfully so, have that righteous outrage and indignation at a response like this.
And so sure, you're going to see those responses.
That's different than saying, let's just abolish all law enforcement because you don't like the way that, you know, you don't like the way that some criminal, some criminal case went down.
So what would your, I guess, advice be or what would your bid be when it comes to what you're talking about here, the congressional oversight?
It looks like you'll be in the majority coming through the next Congress.
How do you respond to this?
And how should conservatives be talking about this from your perspective?
I think we should be talking about it the way I say we have to make the arguments.
We have to make the arguments correctly.
It's unrealistic.
And I think when politicians say, we're going to take it to the whole institution, we're going to defund the whole thing.
I mean, it's not realistic.
And I think it's a little cheap, right?
It means that we're not really telling our constituents the truth about what is in the realm of the possible.
And I like to just be truthful with people and tell them what's in the realm of the possible.
How should we be talking about this so that we continue to win the public debate?
And that's what wins us majorities.
And that's what eventually wins us the ability to enact change and to enact that oversight.
You know, politics is a long, hard slog.
And it often feels good to just like whip into a frenzy and say certain things.
But in the end, we won't win that way.
And I'm into winning.
And winning takes a little bit longer than we would like in politics.
Again, we got to win elections.
We're going to conduct that oversight.
And you'll see that change.
I think quietly, and I hear this all the time, quietly, there's a lot of FBI agents who are really angry about what they see and the decisions made by their leadership.
And that's, I think, where we need to focus and ask for those whistleblowers.
We set up those whistleblower pages and like I've done with the military in the past over their woke nonsense.
And what that does is gives us the ability to take that to leadership and say, this better change, or you're not going to like the kind of oversight that we conduct and the kind of changes that we have to make from the top.
That's how you do it.
Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here.
Millions of Americans are waking up to a country that they don't recognize.
And while they struggle to raise their families and pay the bills, the media and corporations are telling them what's wrong with the country.
Thankfully, there are still some companies that believe in America and our beautiful Constitution.
Patriot Mobile, great people, are America's only Christian conservative cell phone company.
They're on the front lines fighting for sanctity of life, religious liberty, and the Second Amendment.
Police Reform and Accountability00:15:13
This is why Patriot Mobile is different from every other provider out there.
Inflation has made it really hard on many Americans.
Thankfully, Patriot Mobile has plans for almost any budget, and they offer the same nationwide coverage as the major carriers.
Get the same great service, plus the knowledge that your money is supporting the values that made America great and will again.
Go to patriotmobile.com/slash Charlie or call 972-Patriot.
Use offer code Charlie and get a free activation.
Special discounts are available for veterans and first responders.
Join our movement, make the switch today.
That is patriotmobile.com/slash Charlie, patriotmobile.com/slash Charlie, or call 972-Patriot, patriotmobile.com/slash Charlie.
Last time we chatted, I remember what did I say?
I questioned to make sure that Klaus Schwab was okay with the comments that you were making today.
If you had checked with your World Economic Forum handler, remember we were joking about that.
But then I went over to Davos.
I don't know if you saw this.
I went to Davos.
I actually got by the World Economic Forum Police.
I kid you not for the World Economic Forum Police.
Okay.
PolitiFacts are getting mad at me for this again because they had a patch that said World Economic Forum Police.
And I said, Oh, I think I've been detained by the World Economic Forum Police.
But then it says, My whole crew, by the way.
And PolitiFact comes out and I say, Okay, here come the journalists.
They're going to come out and say, Hey, we can't be detaining somebody just for, you know, I was just shooting the show from the side of the street outside of Davos.
And they come out and say, False.
Jack Pacific was not detained by the World Economic Forum Police.
They were actually Swiss police assigned to the World Economic Forum.
So you see, it's completely different.
So false.
So I just want to-totally different.
Put in a word with Klaus about that.
You know, if we're going to do the frisk, at least take me out to dinner next time.
You know, maybe, you know, maybe do something a little nicer.
But man, that was just, that was rough.
I bet it was.
Like, there's some crazy people.
Should I address that conspiracy about myself since we're talking about it?
I mean, you're on the bus roll.
You're getting the handlers.
You're getting the talking points.
Oh, yeah.
Manchurian candidate, Manchurian candidate from the World Economic Forum funding.
Like basically, they put me on their website three years ago as on a long list.
They do like a kind of like a Forbes 30 under 30 thing every year.
And they put me on the list because I had just gotten famous after Saturday Night Live.
And they're like, look, another young leader.
And I'm like, okay.
I saw it blow up on the internet.
So I asked them to take it down.
And it has followed us ever since.
I'm sure there's going to be a new conspiracy soon.
Maybe it's like Klaus Schwab and Hillary Clinton had an affair back in the 80s and had all these children, these Manchurian candidates that are rising up in the Republican Party.
It's not true.
I was never part of it.
Never interacted with them.
But there we go.
Correctly, right here, live on the Charlie Kirk show, you're telling us that you are not the illegitimate love child of Klaus Schwab and Hillary Clinton.
For the record.
I promise you.
For the record, that's my statement.
What about Justin?
Could Justin Trudeau possibly be maybe like an illegitimate half-brother or something?
Is that, could we explore that?
We could explore it.
I think Justin Trudeau might be an alien from a woke planet where the entire language is centered around identity politics and pandering.
I think that's where Justin Trudeau's origins come from.
And by the way, you do speak Spanish.
Maybe, I don't know, the whole Castro thing.
I don't know.
Oh, God.
We could add that one to the mix, I bet.
I don't speak Cuban Spanish, though, so you can't.
I speak Colombian Spanish.
It's a little different.
You can tell.
No, it doesn't.
It doesn't.
It doesn't.
That's okay.
We can fix that in post.
But, you know, just a couple of minutes left.
And here's what I want to get into because it looks like we're going to have, if everything goes right, a conservative majority, Republican majority in the House coming up next term.
You're going to be in there.
We're going to have McCarthy more than likely in leadership.
We're also going to have people that probably are more on that train of defund the FBI and break this thing open and what do we do with it?
So, where do you come between?
How do you work with people like that?
Where do you actually go so that we can make money as a movement and as a country to get past this kind of stuff?
Yeah, look, I mean, even the people who are like, defund the FBI.
And then you ask them, wait, really?
Like, I'll just abolish the whole thing.
They're like, no, why don't you want to hold it accountable?
Dan, like, I do want to hold it accountable, but you just said defund the FBI.
And so you start talking past each other.
And in the end, you're like, wait, do we disagree or do we actually agree?
Because we're all on the same page here.
But on the right, what tends to happen is these manufactured divisions and these manufactured fights.
And I think that's really silly.
Like, we need to get on the same page here.
There's going to be some heavy oversight.
Jim Jordan will likely be the chairman of judiciary, which has direct oversight over the DOJ and FBI.
That's where we're going to fight this battle.
And then you have to actually have some hard questions.
Okay, so what legislatively needs to be done and passed through that committee so that proper oversight occurs.
And there's probably a lot of options for that.
Can I get them out the next minute while we're here?
No.
And they need to be looked into.
You need to conduct hearings.
You need to ask those questions.
You need to hear from whistleblowers in these institutions that are willing to come forward and say, look, this is what we've seen from our leadership is wrong and biased.
And in fact, Chuck Grassley, Senator Grassley, has done this report and indeed did find bias and explained us to the FBI director.
That's going to happen times 100 on steroids when the House is retaken by Republicans in November.
And I think that's what you can expect.
Reforming the FBI.
Let's work together.
I think that's something the conservatives, MAGA, church committee talking about, we can all get down on.
Congressman Dan Crenshaw, Texas 2nd District.
Thank you so much for coming on, joining us today here on the Charlie Kirk Road.
Folks, that's how we do it.
Uncle Tom 2 offers a compelling and brave analysis of the true story of Black America.
Uncle Tom 2 is the eye-opening documentary everyone in America should see.
The cultural shift from prosperity, integrity, and faith to the current perceived state of anger, discontent, and victimhood.
Uncle Tom 2 offers historical footage, photos, correspondence, and data to reveal the genuine strides of Black America in the 20th century, the deliberate Marxist strategy to create racial tension and replace God with government, the NAACP sinister agenda, the fall of Black Harlem, the truth behind Black Lives Matter, and the demoralization of America for political power.
Don't miss Uncle Tom 2 from executive producer Larry Elder and director Justin Malone with Brandon Tatum, Vodie Bockam, and Chad O. Jackson.
Pre-order it today at SalemNow.com.
Watch the movie on demand or buy the DVD on Friday, August 26th at salemnow.com.
That's salemnow.com, salemnow.com.
We are going to have future Congressman Anthony Sabatini joining us.
And before we bring him on, I want to run, I believe it's clip 23, the future congressman talking about this very issue on CNN.
Clip 23.
In Florida, ultra-mega Republican, Florida State Representative Anthony Sabatini.
Shoot, if it was up to me, I would totally defund the FBI.
He's running for Congress in Florida's 7th district and has been making the rounds on far-right media after writing a tweet saying sever all ties with DOJ immediately.
And any FBI agent conducting law enforcement functions outside the purview of our state should be arrested upon sight.
Common sense.
Because?
Well, because what they're doing is unlawful.
It's time to actually start protecting the rights of Floridians under the 10th Amendment and push back against a lawless federal government.
Wow.
Future congressman, tell us what you really think.
Well, thanks for having me on, Jack.
I think it's common sense.
I was just hearing you speak about it a minute ago.
10th Amendment.
You know, when DOJ and FBI and all these federal law enforcement agencies were created 100 years ago, they were doing so because they were, you know, there was a thought that we needed them to prosecute interstate crimes.
Well, I think the best way to go about it is just have interstate compacts.
Let Republican states or blue states come up with compacts on how to stop the crimes that are happening among states.
We don't need a giant federal apparatus anymore.
I mean, the FBI was creating a sort of pre-technological age.
And, you know, obviously the whole thing was new.
There was a lot of stuff going on 100 years ago where they thought it was a necessity.
But I think we've outpaced that.
I think we can go back to letting states exercise their own police power.
So that's what we need to do at the federal level.
And of course, in that interview, I talked about a lot of what we need to do at the state level, which in my eyes is totally cut ties with DOJ, which has become so partisan and so corrupt and so unaccountable that Republican states should just cut ties with them until we can get it at least reformed.
Well, and if I remember correctly, part of the history was that with bank robbers, actually, and you're buying slide types.
And the idea was that, you know, you rob a bank in one state and then you take the money from there and you unite across states.
So how does one state have the jurisdiction to prosecute for a crime that was committed in another state?
They fled over.
Obviously, other states, you have this issue.
And to your point, it seems like that could be done through interstate compacts.
It seems like there could be legislation that would allow for this.
I mean, it almost sounds like what you're talking about is kind of like how Interpol works in Europe, right?
So you do have this overarching agency that's coordinating between the different local agencies.
And that would be something.
And look, we just had Congressman Crenshaw on before you.
And the one thing, and I was busting his shops a little bit and I asked him if he was the illegitimate love child of Claus Robin, Hillary Clinton.
He denied it.
He denied it, but no.
And I brought up Justin Trudeau as well in Castro.
And but what he committed to, in all seriousness, was federal reform of the FBI.
And I think that the way you're talking about it, the idea of what, because what you're talking about isn't necessarily just abolish law enforcement.
What you're saying is empower local law enforcement, state-based law enforcement.
And then if there is a federal role, I think it makes more sense to have it, at least in lines with this framework, have that federal role be sort of just a coordinator between the different local and state agencies.
Is that what you're saying?
That's exactly right.
Perfect summary.
And that's really what the founding fathers originally imagined: that the states would work together on things.
If there was something that affected more than one state, we'd have compacts.
We'd have model legislation.
Nobody imagined you'd have this omnipotent government with endless amounts of three-letter agencies and alphabet soup that's totally unaccountable to the people.
I believe in the rule of law.
I believe in order.
I believe in the police.
But I want accountable police.
I want people like my governor, Ron DeSantis, to have control over our police.
I don't want some roving law, so-called law enforcement agency that's just unaccountable to no one.
Let's be honest, the FBI is not really accountable to Congress.
They kind of do their own thing.
And they've just grown way, way, way too big and have way too much power.
And the initial reaction from sort of the anti-maga wing of the Republican Party was very telling because they kind of laughed at the idea of defunding or cutting down the authority of the FBI, but shows you how far they've come.
I mean, this is all common sense, old school conservatism.
Go back to states' rights and local control.
Well, earlier in the program, I said it quickly, but I want to point out that this is where I come to it on this.
You can be pro-police, but not pro-police state, right?
There's an obvious difference between this.
And I think it's ridiculous when I hear people, and you hear it from various entities, Get rid of all police, no have any police, abolish the entire agency.
No, no, no, no, that's what we're talking about.
We're saying we just don't want to live like we're in communist China.
We don't want the CCP running us even more than they've already infiltrated us.
And so, no, we don't want a police state.
We have police, sure.
We want our laws enforced.
But let me ask you, because I know obviously today is your primary day.
It does look like, you know, things look good.
And that's why we, you know, we said it's future Congressman Sappatini.
But let me ask you this because I'm trying to do some work here, Peacemaker Posto.
And we had Congressman Crenshaw on.
I got him to commit to federal FBI reform.
Will you commit to working with Congressman Crenshaw, leadership, and others when it comes to the issue of FBI reform?
100%.
I think the minimum we do is real reform and cut back on.
Well, I mean, start with actually looking at their mission statement and looking at how many crimes they're actually focused on.
I mean, how much drug interdiction or human trafficking are they focused on versus partisan sort of silliness with Trump and school board parents at these sorts of meetings?
How many resources are going to sort of what pot?
That's the minimum.
So absolutely.
But I would go a step further and say, if we don't do it, I'm going to vote against any budget that continues to fully fund the DOJ at the levels that's being funded now until we see form reform because we got to have reform.
We can't just promise reform, keep funding the tyranny, and then never do anything about it.
So, but I absolutely agree and I commit that.
Well, and I think what you're saying there, obviously, is you got to ratchet up the pressure.
You can't just say that we're going to do something, we're going to do something, we're going to do something.
You can do something right now, and that's the power of the fur string.
And of course, Congress still has that.
And we're seeing, I'm going to talk about later about this raid with President Trump.
And that's obviously what predicated all of this discussion is that they're essentially stating that the Biden administration is not working with executive privilege, that we're not going through with these various forms of, you know, and John Solomon basically he's got the email chain.
He's got the entire email chain between the FBI, the National Archive, between Trump, between the White House.
He's got everything.
And so he's going to be coming up.
He's actually right over here, believe it or not, right now.
I see him working over there.
And the idea, though, is it's as if the federal bureaucracy is trying to usurp the Constitution, usurp the presidency, usurp the power of Congress, institute themselves as their own fourth branch of government that was never supposed to be.
And Congress, by and large, has abrogated its role in not only oversight, but as you say, funding.
And so I think that's something that directly Congress can be done on day one to say, if you want funding for these programs, we're going to have to open this thing up.
And I don't know, you know, let me ask your views on this.
Would you be for another version of a church committee to open up the entire thing and really dig into not only their operation, but remember, the original church committee was domestic surveillance operation of political 100%, Jack.
I think there's two sort of select committees we need to get up and going really quickly.
Obviously, we're not going to pass that many policy bills in the Congress with a Democrat-controlled White House and a toss-up Senate.
Election Security Measures00:04:54
So we should really, really be exercising the two primary functions of the House, which is the power of the purse, spending, and aka defunding things, and also the oversight.
And so, yeah, church-style committee from the late 70s that looks at the natural and national security agencies, looks at our domestic law enforcement agencies, and also I would suggest one for the military to review what's happened over our foreign wars over the last 20 years, look at which generals got rich, given bad advice when it came to the war on terror, and really spend two years digging into these things.
I mean, that's what Congress is supposed to do, not just sit around and campaign all the time.
So, absolutely, I think those are great suggestions, and I'll be pushing for that for sure.
You are in a primary battle today.
Things are looking good, but let us know what's the latest down there in the district.
Are you feeling confident that you have this thing?
Well, I will tell you this, Jack.
Two weeks ago, we had a seven-point lead, and then all of a sudden, $1.5 million of dark money popped up in the race with all of it trained right on me and a pattern very, very similar to what happened to my good friend Joe Kent in Washington a few weeks ago.
So, obviously, the swamp is not happy that I'm in the race.
On paper, it's an A-way race.
There's really three of us running.
Everybody's got a somewhat similar message, but the swamp looked at me and said, okay, this guy is on War Room with Steve Bennett every week.
He's endorsed by Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gates.
There's just something, we don't want this guy here.
So they're coming at me really hard.
The good news is their attacks on me have actually helped rise my profile in the race a bit and people have gotten more curious.
So we're looking good.
It's most recent poll from last week shows it a tie for first place.
So I'm tied for first place.
And I think we're going to bring it home because we do have the most grassroots energy.
And there's a historic downturn in early voting and mail-in voting in Florida.
So day of voting, election day voting is an all-time high.
And we're seeing it.
We're feeling it right now.
That's why I'm in the field right now out here working this voting site.
And if we can win the most hardcore conservative voters, my voters, over big and get them out here, we win.
Well, and I think that's right.
And we saw, by the way, we saw this with Carrie Lake when Charlie and I were running the election night in Phoenix because that night we were up till, and now for Charlie, it was midnight.
For me, I deployed from the East Coast, so I'm still in East Coast time like three in the morning.
They refused to allow the counting of those election day votes.
They held them over.
And then eventually, finally, at like four in the morning, five in the morning, they started flooding in.
And that's where you saw this.
So hopefully that your county out there is not doing the same kind of hijinks that Maricopa County was doing.
We had Tyler Boyer losing it on the live stream over that.
I can't even say in good company there, repeat what Tyler Boyer was saying about this.
Hopefully, though, that your votes in Florida, because I love the way Florida does it.
You have the election and then you have the result.
How fast do you think it'll be, actually, from when polls close to when you actually get the results from?
I think we're looking at two hours, Jack, because early voting and mail-in voting is going to be counted.
Actually, I'm sorry, it was counted yesterday.
So that's done.
That's one-third of the votes done.
A lot of the precincts are going to be automatically counted very quickly.
And then some of the more rural precincts will take a little bit later, but we should have the answer to everything by nine.
Florida is really probably the fastest state in the country.
And that's because we saw election fraud and attempts at fraud even before 2020.
For those who remember, Rick Scott, our governor at the time, had the deal with a woman named Brenda Snipes who had paper ballots sent out even after the election and stored for weeks afterwards down in Broward and Palm Beach counties.
And it was a disaster.
So we started ratcheting up our election laws going into 2020.
And then, of course, what happened in 2020, we came back again and passed two more election laws, one just a few months ago, that have really quickened and secured our elections even better.
I'd say we probably number one or number two best security in the country.
The ability to take those type of election laws and federalize them because I want to copy and paste that on every one of these states.
Absolutely.
I think the federal government can do that.
I think we can use the carrot and the stick on that.
We can really push and use all our power to try to get states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin to adopt these similar laws.
But we can also incentivize it too.
Tell them, you know, we'll do things if you just take it, you know, do election security in your states.
Here's what Congress will do to help make it happen at no cost.
I mean, that's what the liberals and the Dems have done forever is they've basically incentivized Republican states to buy into federal programs.
So we can use both carrot and stick to make sure states follow Florida's lead at the federal level.
Nationwide election integrity laws.
I absolutely love it.
Where can people go to follow you, to follow your fight, and then follow, of course, the results as they come in tonight?
Incentivizing State Laws00:00:29
Sabatini4Congress.com.
That's Sabatini4Congress.com.
And all social media handles at Anthony Sabatini.
Thanks, Chad.
I'm Anthony Sabatini.
An honor and good luck to you, sir.
I believe the next congressman from the district.
Thanks so much for listening.
We work hard to push the envelope here at the Charlie Kirk Show while Charlie's out on assignment.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.