Last night Elon Musk and Bari Weiss released part two of the Twitter Files, and who was at the very center? None other than Charlie Kirk. The suspicions of Charlie and thousands of other conservatives were confirmed last night with the revelation that Charlie's Twitter was placed on a secret “Do Not Amplify” list for years. Charlie speaks publicly for the first time about his meeting with Jack Dorsey, how he knew he was being censored, and what it’s like to be validated, but not yet vindicated.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
Twitter's Viral Turning Point00:09:46
Hey everybody, today in the Charlie Kirk show, I go through the breaking news of how I was one of the top stories on the planet and Twitter targeted me personally.
Talk about why and what can be done.
Email me your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
That's freedom at charliekirk.com.
Subscribe to the Charlie Kirk Show podcast and get your tickets to AmericaFest today at amfest.com, A-M-F-E-S-T.com.
That is amfest.com.
Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, and more, amfest.com.
Buckle up, everybody.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country.
He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.
Turning point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandTodd.com.
I had an interesting evening last night.
I was working out, and all of a sudden, my phone starts lighting up, and it was 5:42 Arizona time.
And producer Andrew called me.
He said, Hey, Tucker wants you to come on the program.
I said, For what?
Because I had no idea I wasn't paying attention.
They said, Well, you were just mentioned in the latest Twitter files under a threat tag, do not amplify.
So then I scrambled and made it work and talked about this recent piece of news on Tucker's program.
But I want to take a step back and tell you my history with Twitter and why Twitter felt it was necessary to categorize my personal Twitter account with a do not amplify threat tag.
I first started my Twitter when I was a junior in high school.
I remember the class that I was sitting in.
I remember exactly what was going on with some teacher droning on about something that was largely irrelevant.
And we all had computers in this class, and we were supposed to listen to this teacher, nice person, but a bunch of nonsense.
And I remember days prior in high school, people were talking about this new website called Twitter, where people like Oprah Winfrey and LeBron James could verifiably communicate with their audience.
So I started my Twitter in 2011.
I remember exactly where I was sitting, and I was like, oh, this website's kind of fun.
And oh, wow, I could follow political people.
And throughout the growth of Turning Point USA, Twitter was an attachment of mine.
I actually have a tweet back in 2011 saying that Donald Trump should run for president.
That's how long my history with Twitter goes.
It goes back 11 years.
And so I started to study the platform.
In 2012, 2013, and 14, I became a master of Twitter.
I understood what would go viral.
I understood what messaging would work.
I understood how to get things trending.
And there was a small community of us that would do the same, Jack Pesobic as well.
And then in 2016, all of that work I put into Twitter actually started to pay off.
I got verified on Twitter in the fall of 2016.
And then Donald Trump, of course, won the presidency.
And Donald Trump legitimized the platform of Twitter beyond our wildest imagination.
In the spring of 17, in the summer of 17, I started to really lean in and say, oh, wow, okay, if you tweet every 25 minutes, if you word them in a certain way, if you're able to capture the spiciness of the messaging while also getting into the news cycle, you can really start to make things go viral.
And so then in 2018 and 2019, my Twitter became more than just kind of a an annoyance for the Democrat Party.
It started to materialize as a legitimate threat to the regime.
In fact, I was so focused, so I'll use the word obsessed with Twitter that it got to the point where I was averaging 115 to 120,000 retweets a day.
Now, for those of you that aren't familiar with the platform, you're like, oh, what is Twitter?
I'll get that.
That's big.
Okay.
In fact, I remember a piece written by Jonathan Swan came out by Axios where they did an objective analytical analysis of all the Twitter accounts in the world.
And they concluded that my Twitter account, the kid that didn't go to college, at the time was 23, 24 years old.
Turning point was a fraction of the size that it is now.
I would go to college campuses and go debate communists.
That my Twitter account was the fourth largest Twitter account on the planet.
I remember Donald Trump was so struck, President Trump was so struck by that article that he had his staff printed out and he signed it and sent it.
I still have it.
And he says, Charlie, don't catch me.
He was number one and I was number four or five.
And that was just based not on followers, but on engagement, on likes, retweets, shares, comments.
And so if you were trying to stop the MAGA movement, if you were trying to stop the conservative movement, if you were trying to thwart or stunt our momentum, to their great surprise, the kid that doesn't have a cable television show at the time did not have a radio program, at the time did not have a podcast, at the time did not have a live stream, but just a Twitter account, he became a problem.
Now, mind you, I understood the Twitter rules very well.
I studied them.
I grew up with them.
So I was a tough case for Twitter.
I was a tough case in more ways than one because I knew the line and I was very careful not to cross it.
Now, the rules were Soviet.
The rules were not fair, but I knew them.
And despite the unfair rules, I knew not to cross them because, you know, some people say, well, Charlie, why didn't they just ban you?
Because I never gave them an outright reason to ban me because I knew the rules.
And I played under their silly rules, despite the fact that they're totalitarian in nature, because I never wanted to be a martyr and lose my Twitter account because I knew that it actually was helpful in reaching millions of the unconverted and persuadable people.
And so then 2020 came along and the virus spread across our land.
And here I am with the fourth or fifth largest Twitter account, 115, 120, 125,000 retweets a day.
And you might think that I'm exaggerating these numbers.
They're all there in my Twitter dashboard.
That history is all saved.
You can go back and you could see what my engagement was in the calendar year of 2019.
And when I mean I was obsessed with Twitter, I would just be continually refreshing.
And when you study it for six or seven hours sometimes a day of what is working and what messaging is flying and what is getting retweets and what is getting likes, eventually you get good at it.
If you want to get good at something in life, focus on it and put energy towards it.
But then 2020 happened.
And in 2020, the New York Times reached out to our team and they wanted to write a story.
When they reached out, our Twitter account was one of the largest on the planet, as I mentioned.
But I was a legitimate threat to the narrative.
And looking back, the New York Times article might have seemed kind of innocent.
They did an okay job writing it.
But it was interesting: they placed me on 1A, the front page of the New York Times.
Now, this was April 19th, 2020, during the height of the lockdowns, the height of the virus.
And what they were doing, what the New York Times was doing that I didn't quite appreciate at the time, is they were laying the foundation.
They were setting the basis, the groundwork for my censorship, for the censorship of my account.
You see, they wrote in the New York Times that my engagement was more than CNN and the New York Times, the own piece that they were writing.
And it gave them an ability for them to send this to Twitter and say, keep an eye out for this guy.
They couldn't kick me off the platform, but what happened next, thanks to Elon Musk, is shocking.
It is Maoist.
It is Soviet, and it should not be tolerated in a decent and civil society.
A kid from Chicago who didn't go to college, tweeting about current events without a national television program, became such a threat to the World Economic Forum, to Washington, D.C., that they had to assign a threat-level tag of do not amplify.
The Shocking Relief Factor00:05:34
Charlie Kirk here, look, I've told you about producer Andrew and how Relief Factor has really improved his life and relieved the pain in his knees and back.
Now, let me tell you about Yvonne in California.
She says this: quote, both my husband and I are in our 70s and so grateful to have found Relief Factor.
We tried so many other solutions, but none of them have given us the freedom from aches and pains like Relief Factor.
I hear Yvonne, Relief Factor works for me too.
Relief Factor is a 100% drug-free solution developed by doctors based on scientific research to help your body attack the underlying inflammation causing you pain.
Three weeks from now, you could be doing the things you enjoy doing.
Your first step to becoming pain-free could be just to order the three-week Quick Start for only $19.95.
After trying Relief Factor, over half a million people have gone on to order more.
Go to relieffactor.com or call 8004Relief to find out more about this offer.
That's relieffactor.com or call 8004Relief.
Live your best life and feel the difference with Relief Factor.
Somebody said, Charlie, don't brag that you were a master of Twitter.
It was a waste of time.
You see, this is where I disagree a little bit.
I was influencing millions of people every single day.
We were influencing so many people that Twitter went out of their way to censor us and to give us the threat assessment tag of do not amplify.
Now, in the summer of 2018, and I really have Candace Owens to thank for this, I sat down and met with Jack Dorsey.
Met with Jack Dorsey at the Twitter headquarters in San Francisco.
Candace Owens arranged the meeting.
And Candace and I were both very concerned about shadow banning.
Again, it was the summer of 2018.
See, when I sat down with Jack Dorsey, we were talking about how they were using or our concern that Twitter was suppressing dissident voices, kicking people needlessly off of social media, and shadow banning people.
Jack at the time appeared very transparent.
Jack said, No, the technology doesn't even allow us to do this, and there's all these different checks and balances.
And he had some of his tech guys walk us through it.
That was a little bit above my head.
He had a legal representative there saying they're not even legally allowed to censor people based on viewpoint or shadow ban them based on viewpoint or based on information.
And I'm not going to say that Candace and I were satisfied.
I'll allow her to tell her memory of events.
It was five years.
It was almost four and a half years ago.
But I would say that Candace and I didn't leave the meeting necessarily with an overwhelmingly negative sentiment.
I appreciated Jack for his time, for his willingness to meet with us, because Candace and I together had two of the most powerful Twitter accounts out there.
But then as things started to change, and I obviously took the contact information and stayed in contact with some of the people there at Twitter, as things started to change, I started to email them.
I said, hey, guys, things are changing.
And my Twitter account and my Twitter engagement is really kind of going off a cliff.
And my ability to talk to millions of people is disappearing.
Radio silence.
And then the New York Times article comes out in April of 2020.
Now, you pair that New York Times article with the Axios study that showed that I had the second largest conservative Twitter presence behind Donald Trump and the ninth largest Twitter account.
So this is what this is the whole world.
This is international as well.
So K-pop had the largest Twitter account with 407 million interactions.
Donald Trump, the second largest, with 104 million.
Then Ariana Grande.
Then BTS Big Hit, which I don't know, but I could only assume it's pop culture.
Then Bleacher Report, which is sports, then Alexandria Casio-Cotez with 36.9 million engagements.
Then GOT7.
Don't know what they are, but I'm guessing it's pop culture.
And then Miley Cyrus and then Charlie Kirk at number nine.
Oh, so BTS is K-pop.
So K-pop is not exactly a competitor of mine and very popular in certain circles.
Not exactly my thing.
So number nine was our Twitter account, my Twitter account.
And so looking through this list, you can pair that then with the New York Times article that the information that we were spreading on the Charlie Kirk Twitter had to be stopped.
You see, in a kind of a weird way, I carved out a niche that a few others did.
Jack Pasobic did, Mike Cernovich did, and others did as well.
But I saw that Twitter was this place for elite thought to be incubated.
We went from 115 to 120,000 retweets a day down to 800 retweets a day.
And when I started to complain about this and started to try to tell news and media anchors about this, they'd roll their eyes and call me a conspiracy theorist.
Like, okay, Charlie, there's no evidence of this.
Or you kind of then end up indulging in their game because you kind of sound really narcissistic.
Why Twitter Means Nothing00:11:24
Like, look at me.
I used to get 120,000 retweets and now I only get 800.
So I just kind of said, all right, they're censoring me.
And I just kind of said, we'll keep tweeting for the spirit of it.
But they basically obliterated our ability to trend, to push back against consensus ideas.
And it gets even deeper than this because I do not believe that Twitter acted alone.
Based on my conversations and my meetings with Jack Dorsey, I believe that Twitter was influenced by somebody or something to shut me up and label me as Do Not Amplify.
Are you tired of feeling tired?
I've never experienced anything quite like the new Strong Cell product.
I take it right before every single show.
It's so easy.
And you've got to read up on everything that has been packed into these tiny bottles.
You see, Strong Cell is a new scientific cocktail of cellular level replenishment.
It's so simple.
Just drink one small bottle of strong cell liquid per day, and boom, you guys get NADH.
NAD is something I've been studying for a while.
And before I got to know Strong Cell, I said, boy, I really would love to take it every day.
It's a crucial coenzyme for creating natural energy and restoration in your bodily cells.
It also contains collagen, well documented for its vast health benefits.
Your body should experience a big energy boost the first week.
Then within 15 days, you'll start noticing even more benefits.
30 days, you'll be feeling so much different.
So do me a favor and consider giving the supplement the full four weeks versus just one bottle to realize the best results for you.
The formula is designed to generate long-term positive change, unlike energy drinks.
I take it every single day.
It's not an artificial boost of immediate energy like caffeine.
I'm talking about cellular level restoration.
Learn more right now at their website.
Visit strongcell.com forward slash Charlie and enter promo code Charlie for a 20% discount.
They have made me a believer.
NAD is a real thing.
You guys should check it out.
My special 20% discount for Kirk Show fans will apply whether you want to test it out for one week or for a month.
But I highly encourage you guys to try it for all four weeks.
You won't regret it.
There's a couple other thoughts I want to unpack with this.
I don't believe Twitter acted in isolation here.
Based on my meeting with Jack Dorsey and my conversation with Twitter employees and the limited knowledge I had from the outside, I believe Twitter was pressured or forced to do this.
Now, that doesn't mean it's an excuse for their incredibly should be illegal.
I'll talk about that in a second and unethical behavior.
But I believe that someone was telling them to put the threat tag of do not amplify on my Twitter account.
So some of you are saying, Charlie, I don't understand what do not amplify is.
Okay.
So this is what Barry Weiss leaked yesterday.
This is a picture of my Twitter account with certain descriptions or threat tags to it.
Now, Twitter went out of their way to say for my Twitter account, do not amplify.
Essentially, do not allow my tweets to go viral.
Do not allow the content that I am putting up, pictures, videos, one-liners, do not allow it to be seen by lots of people, despite retweets and likes, do not allow it to be boosted in the algorithm.
Instead of allowing the Twitter algorithm to grow, of which I understood intimately in 2014, 15, 16, 17, 18, they put their thumb on the scale and say, we are going to single out Charlie Kirk and say we are not going to allow his account to be seen by other people.
It is banning by a different name.
So they disallowed my personal ability to go viral, to challenge big ideas, to question authority.
Now, Jack Dorsey, at the very same time that I met with Jack Dorsey, also said this to the great Sean Hannity.
He said, We don't shadow ban according to political ideology or viewpoint or content, period.
Play cut 77.
We do not shadow ban according to political ideology or viewpoint or content, period.
Every model that we have on the network is really looking at the behaviors on the network.
We take those behaviors as signals.
And I do want to point out that these signals evolve minute by minute, hourly by hourly.
Behaviors of bad faith actors who intend to manipulate, distract, divide a conversation or to unfairly amplify their content, which they didn't earn.
So he says that they do not.
Do you notice that he said amplify in that?
He used the word amplify.
That's their word, not mine.
It's confirmation.
He says that they do not suppress people based on political affiliation or ideology.
But then he says that we are not going to allow people to amplify based on information they did not earn.
That's a really weird way to word it.
But essentially, what we learned from the Twitter files is this.
My Twitter account needed to be taken out to defeat Donald Trump in 2020.
That if my Twitter account, alongside others, Jack Posobic and Mike Cernovich and Candace Owens, if our Twitter accounts were allowed to be free, same with Dan Bongino, maybe the Hunter Biden laptop story would have gone viral.
You see, if I would have had access to a Twitter account that was getting 115,000 retweets a day, and according to Axios, was the second largest Twitter account out there when the Hunter Biden laptop story broke, I could have made sure it was seen by half of the Western hemisphere, and that's not an exaggeration.
People says right here, Charlie, I don't understand why Twitter is such a big deal.
Get off this topic.
Social media is ruining the relationship of people.
Get over Twitter success.
So sick of social media.
I'll be honest, you're so unbelievably wrong with that take.
I appreciate the sentiment.
Where do you think the reporters and the journalists get their information from?
If you're able to make things go viral on Twitter, you're able to meaningfully move the Overton window of which public policy is decided, of which elections are decided.
We're getting a couple emails here.
Charlie, Twitter means nothing.
Stop talking about it.
Well, if you think Twitter means nothing, what do you think?
How do you think Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016?
You don't have to like Twitter.
You don't have to enjoy Twitter.
You don't have to think Twitter is good for society, but it is unmistakable that Twitter is critical to who is going to control the civilization.
It is undebatable.
It is not even up for dispute.
No Twitter, no Trump presidency, period.
And they found what we had to say to be such a legitimate threat that they had to say internally without ever telling me privately, suppress you.
Let's go to another piece of tape here.
I want to go to Trace Gallagher reporting on this, PlayCut 87.
The common denominators you point out in the early thread is that Twitter employees build these blacklists to prevent the disfavored tweets from trending.
And then they actively limit the visibility of the entire count or even trending topics.
And as you said, they do this all in secret without informing users, which is interesting because over time, they have said again and again that they do not do this.
And now we're learning that they do this all the time.
That's really well said by Trace Gallagher, where he said it was a way to thwart or stunt our distribution.
You see, as we reflect back on 2020 and 2022, you could only wonder what the election results would have been if we could have spoke freely about ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamin D, intravenous therapy, the danger of lockdowns, how we were creating the most suicidal, depressed, alcohol-addicted, and drug-addicted generation in history.
No, they had to make sure that we were not able to communicate, to do what we as human beings have a moral right to do, to speak.
Another person said right here, Charlie, Twitter means nothing.
Please get off the topic.
I got to be honest, you're wrong.
Every journalist, every person on television, every producer, every congressional staffer, people at major corporations are influenced by the chatter, the conversation, the news cycle.
As we have said before, it is the incubator for elite opinion.
And when Axios comes out and they say out of the top 10 Twitter accounts, the three that are political, Donald Trump, AOC, and Charlie Kirk, they had to, and guess what?
They took out Donald Trump.
They just banned him from the account altogether, and then they suppressed me.
They knew exactly what they were doing.
And this is a big word that I know many of you are comfortable with, but the media hates when I say it.
This is cheating.
This is unadulterated cheating, using the power of a social media platform to, without ever telling me, without any of my knowledge, obviously without my consent, I would have given consent, without my knowledge, suppressing this.
Someone says here, Charlie, I find all of this very boring.
I don't understand any of it.
Well, I encourage you to get right up on it.
This is the largest technology scandal probably ever that is unfolding.
Or now we have the smoking gun of a smoking gun where we now know that Twitter influenced and rigged the 2020 election, the COVID lockdowns.
And I'll be honest, some of the attitude of the people here that are emailing me is one of the reasons why the left gets away with it.
It's disappointing because this is the verifiable, irrefutable, evidence-based story where finally we have the direct files themselves that show that conservative ideas were so popular, that conservative perspectives were so viral that they had to cheat, rig our voice from being able to be spread.
Not to mention, I believe these censors have blood on their hands.
For those of you that say, oh, Charlie, what does this matter?
Well, tell that to the victims' families whose children committed suicide the last two years, where if we were able to push back on the lockdowns more effectively on the world's public square, maybe the lockdowns wouldn't have happened.
Don't tell me it doesn't matter.
Don't tell me it doesn't matter for the victims that had to die alone in a hospital where treatments that very well could have helped them were not allowed to be discussed on social media, where Jay Bacachara was not able to communicate or become trending on Twitter.
Saving Babies Online00:02:46
You think it doesn't matter.
We are all living in the ramifications of the winners of a debate of what happens on Twitter.
It's not just some silly social media platform like TikTok.
I'm not saying you have to like it.
But what happens on Twitter ends up happening in your child's classroom, in the halls of Congress.
What happens on Twitter ends up becoming law.
What happens on Twitter ends up becoming president.
And now we know that Twitter cheated.
There's no question that they interfered with our elections, our ability to debate and have dialogue.
What if I told you you could save a baby's life for just $28?
Well, it's true.
Pre-born is a ministry doing just that with the help of people just like you by offering free ultrasound sessions to pregnant women and girls who might otherwise choose to end their pregnancies.
We know that pregnant girls and women who can see their babies on ultrasound are far more likely to choose life.
Your gift today can save babies' lives.
Just $28 can give a money who is abortion-minded the chance to see the truth of the baby that is growing inside her.
$140 can do this for five girls and women.
And a $15,000 gift will provide an ultrasound machine that will save lives for years to come.
Whether you want to save one baby or five or hundreds, that opportunity is just a phone call or click away.
So check it out right now at charliekirk.com.
That's right, charliekirk.com and click the pre-born banner.
That is charliekirk.com and click on the pre-born banner.
Call 833-850-BABY, 833-850-2229 or give online at charliekirk.com.
That is the pre-born banner at charliekirk.com.
And the banner is right there.
Your gift saves lives.
And look, you guys can help out, save five babies today at preborin.com.
Preborin.com.
The money goes where it matters.
Save babies and souls.
Don't just be pro-life, but act on those pro-life beliefs.
It's very important at Christmastime to save babies' lives.
So check it out right now at charliekirk.com.
That's charliekirk.com.
Your gift of $140 provides a free ultrasound session for five young women in unplanned pregnancies.
80% of these women will choose life when they see the ultrasound image of their babies.
Give the gift of life this Christmas season.
CharlieKirk.com and click on the banner.
Private Power vs Government00:05:23
What we have seen with Twitter and what we are learning, in my personal opinion, is the fatal flaw of the Chamber of Commerce, overly libertarian slant of the Republican Party.
For years we were told that private companies need to be treated with zero oversight and zero regulation.
And I used to buy into this nonsense.
That private companies through competition will be able to improve and get better.
Now, in defense of that argument, Elon Musk buying Twitter actually does strengthen their very weak argument only slightly, only slightly.
It is in many ways an unexpected development that we should not count on.
However, with that being said, for years we were told and said, just go to a different platform, just go to a different one.
So the principles of why we are conservative are as follows.
We believe that people are made in the image of God.
We believe there's something special about a human being.
At the very least, you believe the human being is more than just a combination of chemicals and cells.
You believe there is a soul in the human being.
The founding fathers believed this when they yielded to the laws of nature and nature's God.
We believe that human beings have natural rights given to them by their creator, life, speech, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the pursuit of virtue, not licentiousness.
We also believe that human beings, the raw material we're dealing with, we have a heart, we have an operational programming, you could say, that tilts towards greed, avarice, deceit, arrogance, corruption.
As Lord Acton famously said, and you'll hear it repeated, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Therefore, we as conservatives have an apprehension towards centralized government.
But the proper way of looking at it is a slightly different way of wording it: it's not centralized government, it is centralized power, centralized power, because we do not want one person or one group of people to be able to do something without a check and a balance.
This is why we talk about separation of powers, separating the power so that people can be free, free to flourish, free to speak, free to explore different ideas.
And yet, when all of those things manifest into a private company, centralized power, the ability to shut people up, suppress other ideas, influence our elections.
Too many Republicans say, well, it's a private company.
How do you act then when a private company starts to possess all of the attributes of the very government that you also feel?
How do you handle that?
Well, for traditional Republicans that are purchased by big tech, which is far too many of them, they say, well, it's a free market and we can't do anything.
That is nonsense.
That is balderdash.
That is horsepucky.
Instead, it should be when our principles of human freedom are violated either by a Politburo, the FBI, the CIA, or Twitter, we're not going to put up with it.
And the byproduct of that was an interfered with, rigged 2020 election that we are just still starting to grapple with.
And we don't even know the impact of this last midterms.
Dr. Robert Epstein was just on our podcast and he says Google rigged the midterm elections in favor of the Democrats.
We don't even, we can't even comprehend how much power these tech companies actually have.
And so the question is: will Republicans and conservatives and this new Republican House have the courage to say we are not going to only execute oversight over the FBI and the Department of Justice and DHS and Maorcus and all the nonsense happening,
but we are going to offer a check and a balance and oversight over a private company, private company that acted in a more tyrannical, authoritarian, and damaging way than even our government did in 2020.
And then the even sicker question is: was Twitter acting at the behest of our government?
Was Twitter colluding?
Were they partners?
Were they in a joint partnership agreement?
Did they execute a merger and acquisition with the federal government against the American people also suppressing my Twitter account?
I hope Republicans in January have the courage to get those answers.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email me your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thank you so much for listening.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.