All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Jan. 17, 2023 - The Charlie Kirk Show
35:34
How the RNC is Like High School with Harmeet Dhillon and Darren Beattie
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Hiring Harmeet for the RNC 00:15:19
Hey everybody, today Charlie Kirk Show.
Email me your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
We have Harmeet Dylan and Darren Beatty to join us.
I meant to plug a website in favor of Harmeet and I didn't.
So here's the website.
It's hireharmeet.com, H-I-R-E-Harmeet.com.
If you want to support her candidacy for RNC chair, you can contact your state party chair, your national committeeman, or committeewoman, hireharmeet.com.
Buckle up, everybody, here.
We go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country, he's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage.
For personalized loan services, you can count on.
Go to andrewandtodd.com, the wonderfulandrewandtodd.com.
In 11 days, we will know who is going to run the RNC going into a very consequential election cycle.
I'm done saying it's the most important election of our lifetime.
It probably is.
But come on, we can't continue to be out of power, especially presidentially.
98% of attendees at our Turning Point Actions poll in Phoenix said they want a change.
A similar poll was done this last weekend by, I believe it was Trafalgar, and 86% want a change in leadership at the RNC.
So why is this such a difficult effort?
Why is it so difficult to have the RNC listen to voters and listen to grassroots and listen to citizens?
Joining us now is Harmeet Dylan, who is running for chair of the RNC.
This should not be difficult, but here we are.
Harmeet, welcome to the program.
Thanks for having me, Charlie.
Harmeet, I first want to compliment you for your courage and your willingness, because the people that are coming after you, they are so nasty.
They are so terrible.
In fact, I pounded the table last week of a Politico article where they were attacking your Sikh heritage.
And I grew up with Sikhs, and some of the most beautiful, amazing people that I were honored to call friends growing up were Sikh.
And obviously, it's leaked from people that want to attack you.
So the nastiness being thrown at you is incomprehensible.
And it's kudos to you for your courage for stepping up and your willingness.
Walk us through the state of the race.
11 days.
We have a failure as chair of the RNC.
We got to get rid of her.
What's the latest?
Well, thank you.
So the latest is I jumped into this race just a little over a month ago after our chair, Ronna McDaniel, basically is refusing to leave.
Normally after you lose a presidential race, you actually do leave.
So that was two years ago, but she promised us a final and third term.
And so now that I see all these members lining up behind her, we jumped in and I have now over a dozen members of the RNC actively making phone calls with me to help whip the votes.
There are only 168 voters in this election.
I'm one of them and I will be voting for change and voting for myself.
And so the job is to convince people who are supporting Rana as well as people who are undecided to support me.
And I'm happy to say that her numbers are going down and our numbers are going up.
And now that it's a competitive horse race, some folks who are willing to support her because there was no choice have kept an open mind and they want to see which way the wind blows.
That is, you know, it's not exactly profiles in courage in some way.
And so we're trying to encourage people to actually get off the fence because if you are supporting two more years of Rana's leadership, you are saying to the voters in your state, I accept failure.
Failure is fine.
This is fine.
And you should be happy with two more years of the same.
And I refuse to accept that for the voters in California who I represent, 5 million plus Republicans.
And two of the three members in Texas refused to accept it there.
The members in Arizona refused to accept it.
Two of the three members in Alabama as well have supported change.
And all over the country, state parties are organically voting for votes of no confidence and votes of support for my leadership.
I think that's encouraging.
But the question is, in the remaining 12 days, can we persuade enough of these folks who have been, you know, I mean, I know this is controversial and hurtful to some of them, but actually when the chair promises you committee appointments and sort of perks at the RNC, that is persuasive.
I'm not handing out perks.
I've not offered anybody a job.
I've not offered anybody cash transfers for their state party or to pay legal bills in the future.
What I've offered them is I will give 110% of my commitment to work with other RNC members to win elections.
And that is the only job, not photos and cocktail parties.
Just win, right?
Was it Al Davis that said that, who used to run the Oakland Raiders?
Just win, baby.
This is not hard.
And if you don't win, then get out.
I mean, again, I'm a big football fan.
And if you go 500, if you're Cliff Kingsbury and you don't make the playoffs, sorry, you got to go to Thailand, which is where he is right now.
Like enough.
Okay, you're a nice person.
Wish you well.
Here's a settlement.
Get out.
So Harmeet, I just, I want you to reemphasize this, though, because the number one piece of feedback I receive from our audience is confusion.
They don't quite get it because they hear the polls, they talk to their friends, they're angry, and they don't even understand why this is competitive.
So can you just kind of go through some of the clubbiness here?
I think that's important.
Okay, so for those of you who have PTSD about high school, I have PTSD about high school.
I was one of the geeks.
I was like, you know, reading Alexander Souls and Itson and everybody else was worrying about what they're going to wear to the prom.
The RNC is kind of like that in a way.
And it's, you know, explained to me as a high school, a small high school.
And so it is like that.
And so there's a clique of popular kids and there's a prom queen and there's, you know, jocks.
And then there's like, you know, the rest of us.
And so the reality is that a lot of people want to be that click of the most popular and the most the people with the with the titles and the perks.
Head of this committee, head of that committee, head of a third committee, part of the site selection committee, part of the committee on arrangements.
Now, these are obscure.
And, you know, frankly, I didn't go there to be on any of these committees.
I went there to help win elections for Republicans and then, you know, do my day job.
But those are the things that actually sway a lot of members.
Now, the other dynamic is we're in the middle of a cycle.
And so two of the three members from every state were elected at the beginning of the cycle.
That is a national committee, woman, and committee man.
So they're not up for election for another two years.
They're not up for election until the year of 2024, the presidential race.
And so as a result of that, you know, they're not feeling any pressure if they vote the wrong way.
So for the next two years, I'd like to enjoy their perks.
And, you know, they're sort of impervious to political influence.
Chairs of the parties, on the other hand, are not because they're typically elected right around this time.
Some of them are being elected this week and this month.
Some of them are being elected the day of or the day after the election for my position.
And so they're more susceptible to change.
But on the other hand, when the chair of the RNC has handed out cash to your party, which is the job of the RNC and done it recently, you remember that.
That's natural.
And I appreciate that loyalty.
The analysis should not be what has the chair done for me lately, but what is the next chair or the chair for the next two years going to do for our party and our country?
And so, you know, I hear a lot of defense of the current chair of things like, well, it's not her fault, candidate selection, Trump made bad endorsements, Dobbs, you know, like there's a series of things we are blaming for not winning.
And then there's a series of things that we did.
Okay, we had more voter-attempted contacts in this last cycle.
But like you gave the football analogy, it's not enough to say, well, I made four plays, right?
But I didn't, you know, move the ball down the field.
No, like who made the touchdown?
The other side made the touchdown.
The other side is playing capture the flag.
And we are, you know, like counting how many doors we knocked on, whether we contacted voters and updated our databases with hard information or not.
So these, so some of the things I'd like to do at the RNC is number one, this is something that I'm just announcing this week after giving a lot of thought to the organization.
We need a director level of election operations at the RNC.
So currently, so-called election day operations, which is anybody keeping up knows we don't have election day anymore in America.
For the most part, we have election month.
We have election two months in many states in my state in California.
So we used to hire election workers as seasonal workers, like farmhands for like three months around the election time and then lay them off right afterwards.
This needs to be a year-round effort of professionals whose job it is to keep up with innovations in the states on voting, develop strategies and help the states do that.
So this will be a new director-level position at the RNC, equivalent to the comms, the legal, the political, the data, the digital.
That's critical.
We have to invest in that and we have to help states keep up with that.
And the Democrats, by the way, they do this.
I also want to have some of that other work that we do, engagement with new communities, young people.
That has to be a year-round job, not a gimmick that you do around elections with fake coalitions.
It has to be done on a sustained and ongoing basis.
I want to cut the fat out of the RNC.
No matter whether you use my number of 40% overhead of fundraising or more, or the number that we saw from the treasurer of the party yesterday come out saying it's really harming only 33% overhead.
Too much overhead.
We really have to be cutting the fat and then taking the savings and investing it.
Walk us through the math.
Where do you think we're at right now, realistically?
I mean, Rana says she has 110 votes.
I think that's a bunch of nonsense.
I think it's probably within 10 to 15 swing voters.
Is that about right?
Yeah, I think that's right.
And so there are quite a few members.
We continue to work on them and call them quite a few.
I had a great conversation this morning with one member who said, you know, had been previously committed to Rana, who said, I like what I heard.
I'm going to keep an open mind and we should talk more in new in Dana Point.
You mentioned Dana Point.
We have these meetings that are at these lavish $1,000 resorts.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Now that's going to end if I'm the chair of the RNC.
I think one of our last meeting where we elected Rana two years ago was at Amelia Island and it was a sort of a leftover booking that somehow we couldn't cancel, but we blew $3 million on that meeting, which is ridiculous.
And we need better negotiations on these things so that we don't get stuck with contracts we can't get out of.
So, you know, yeah, I mean, I think we should be focusing on raising money from donors and then not blowing it on ourselves, but actually using it to win elections.
And, you know, there was the joke back in the day that Republicans would wear the red cloth, the cloth coat, the sturdy cloth coat, and be economical and hard-nosed about it.
That's how our party needs to run too, not like, you know, Beverly Hills divorce age.
That's well said.
But look, the thing is, though, with you said Beverly Hills divorcees, I think that's hilarious and totally true.
Beverly Hills divorcees are allowed to receive more than $750,000 per person per year.
So there's two things, right, that are important to remind ourselves about the RNC.
The RNC can do things that only the RNC can do.
So let's pretend that we get so disgusted and we say, let's go start a bunch of 527s.
Let's go a bunch of super PACs.
It cannot, those super PACs can't coordinate with state committees.
They can't coordinate with campaigns.
They can't share data.
The way the federal election code is written, you and I have talked about this on air before, but it's important to reemphasize.
The RNC is able to do certain things that no other organization can do.
Second thing, frugality is imperative because the RNC is not able to receive a $5 million contribution, a $10 million contribution, a $20 million contribution.
They're capped at $750,000 per person per year.
Now, that's a lot of money.
However, it really isn't when we're talking about $2 billion election cycle.
Therefore, if the RNC can only do what the RNC can do and it can't receive these massive $25 million, $50 million contributions that Mitch McConnell can get or Kevin McCarthy can get, those two things mean that every dollar matters more.
The pressure on the spending needs to be under way more scrutiny than that of even Rick Scott Super PAC or the Congressional Leadership Fund.
Your thoughts, Harmeen.
You're absolutely right.
And so I had a couple of sad conversations during this race with two presidential candidates, expected presidential candidates for 2024.
Both of them said, you know, unfortunately, the RNC is kind of, you know, we have to work around them.
They're kind of an obstacle, which was really sad to me as somebody who spent six years at the RNC.
And I want to change that perception amongst candidates.
But you're absolutely right for those members in the public who say, well, I'm quitting and I don't like the way it runs and we don't need the RNC anymore.
We're just going to give to candidates.
You're exactly right.
Those candidates cannot run their campaigns without the data that the RNC has invested through data trust.
And, you know, we're supposed to be supplementing well with annotations and creating voter scores and then getting feedback from our field workers.
We're not doing the best job of that.
We think we can improve it, though.
We have a start.
So the RNC is necessary, but not sufficient to win elections.
It is a necessary foundation.
And then candidates have to build up.
That's right.
There's no substitute for it.
You just can't win without that data, without that air cover, without that network of support, without that field program that helps the state.
I mean, you know, you don't win a presidential election in a vacuum.
The RNC should be raising money and spending most of that money, in my opinion, back into the states.
Instead, over this last cycle, for all the money we raised, half of it was in 2020, so focused on the presidential.
But the rest of it, we only spent 20% of that money back to the states.
The other 80%, you know, there's 40% overhead of fundraising, and then there's a bunch of other stuff.
And there's a handful of about half a dozen consultants in the party who get literally tens of millions of dollars per cycle.
And like, I love money as much as any other Republican capitalist out there.
But if you have crony capitalism, that is non-competitive spending, you have monopoly, which is inefficient, and you have poor quality of outcome.
And so if you're going to get paid, regardless of results, whether you're the chair of the RNC, whether you're a vendor, you're not going to be improving.
In fact, you're going to be clinging to your failure and economies of scale mean you won't do a very good job.
And I'm not saying that any that, by the way, I want to be clear.
I'm sure Ronda wanted to win these elections.
Switch to Good Ranchers Meat 00:02:01
But the question is, is capability and frankly, humility and willingness to say, I did it wrong.
I got to do it better or somebody else can do it better.
Former Arizona Cardinals football coach Cliff Kingsbury, I'm sure he wanted to win the Super Bowl.
Completely irrelevant.
He's in Thailand now, just like trying to get his mind straight.
Fire leaders that don't perform.
Harmeet, you're going to be one of the leaders that does perform.
We're behind you.
Hope you are successful in 11 days.
We got our eyes on it.
Thanks so much.
You it's a new year, and there's one resolution you can easily tackle to do some serious good in your life.
Change the way you buy meat with good ranchers.
Good Ranchers is the 100% American meat company that delivers the best cuts of beef, chicken, and seafood right to your door.
I just got a whole box of good ranchers.
I was blown away.
We had it for Christmas.
It's amazing.
I had people asking me, Charlie, how can I get more of this?
I told them goodranchers.com.
But look, over 85% of all the grass-fed beef in America is imported from overseas.
So stop buying imported goods at the store and get American-made meat, meat from Good Ranchers.
So right now, you can get over two pounds of chicken free in every box for a year when you subscribe.
So let me tell you, Good Ranchers chicken will change what you know about chicken.
It's pasture-raised, triple-trimmed by butchers, so you don't have to prep it.
And it's so tender and juicy, you won't believe it's the same meat you've been eating most of your life.
You can get a year's worth of America's best chicken for free, a $149 value when you subscribe to anybox at goodranchers.com today.
That's healthy protein to stock your fridge with all year long.
Plus, you can get a bonus $20 off with my code Kirk at checkout.
If you want to start your year off right, then change the way you buy meat by switching to Good Ranchers.
Make sure to subscribe today and use my code Kirk to claim your free chicken for a year for $20 off your first box.
New year, new me, more like New Year, new meat with Good Ranchers, American meat delivered.
I love Good Ranchers.
I really enjoyed it this Christmas.
Check it out right now: goodranchers.com.
That is goodranchers.com and goodranchers.com, promo code Kirk.
Church Committee Historical Parallels 00:09:40
Joining us now is Darren Beattie from Revolver.news.
Darren, I want to give you credit.
And I remember you were on a Tucker Carlson interview and you said something.
And this is the power of kind of spoken truth and the power of going on people's shows.
And I remember I saw it and I rewound it and I rewound it like four or five times.
It was the first person I heard that said it so clearly.
And we're actually trying to find the tape, but it just pops in my memory.
You said, Tucker, we need to bring these Intel agencies to heal and we need a Church Committee 2.0.
I said, ooh, I like that.
And so I started to repeat it.
I started to tweet it and other people did as well.
But we kind of made it a central shtick on this program.
And now, Darren, from a Tucker Carlson interview to policy, there is now a church committee.
Congratulations, Darren.
You were the first one to mention it.
Walk us through.
Well, absolutely.
I think we all did a great job in sort of meming this into reality, as it were.
And it's funny you mentioned that because I remember that Tucker clip and I looked for that exact clip and I couldn't find it either.
So it's all in our memory.
It's somewhere in our consciousness.
It definitely happened.
It definitely happened.
I just couldn't find the clip, but no, I think we've all done a great job in pushing this through.
And now it looks like we've got what we wanted.
We do have a church-style committee, and there are a lot of efforts undertaken to make that happen.
And so now what we need to do is we need to make the most of the opportunity.
That's the next step.
And Revolver.news, we just put up a piece basically looking into the church committee as the most relevant historical parallel and seeing where things match up and where things don't with a view toward maximizing the impact of this committee.
And there are a number of important differences here that unfortunately will make the climb in this case a little bit tougher than it was for Senator Church and his colleagues in the 1970s.
Yeah.
And so one of the things that I think is important, and I want your thoughts because you're such a strategic thinker in this, and our team's actually trying to set up a time for you to come out here to Phoenix, Darren, where we have a long, extended exploratory conversation on some of the bigger topics here.
So walk me through the wisdom that you have to share of how Jim Jordan and Thomas Massey, and I think the world of Thomas Massey, I think he's a man of integrity and courage.
I think he really believes in this effort.
I couldn't be more enthusiastic about his placement on this committee.
But what is your wisdom on how they can successfully navigate the labyrinth?
Because right now, Christopher Wray is setting up a series of trapdoors and smokescreens and double-edged mirrors where they're going to get a series of classified documents and series of runarounds and series of dead ends and committees and go to box 302.
And once they get to box 302, it says go to box 44812.
You get what I'm saying here, Darren.
What do they have to do?
What could they learn from the Church and Pike Committee to be able to quickly and effectively navigate the Intel Fourth Branch of Government Labyrinth?
Well, that is a great question.
And I agree that Congressman Massey is probably one of the best people to do it.
Congressman Massey, in conjunction with a lawyer, would be a dream team.
But Massey has incredible courage.
He understands the problem of the national security state.
I just had a pretty long and productive conversation with him earlier today.
And, you know, without getting into the details of that, I think I'm very optimistic about his approach to it.
And so, insofar as we're beset by limitations, it's not due to Massey or the other people involved.
It's due to the structural conditions.
I want to lay some of those out and what they were in the church committee versus what they are here.
You know, first of all, you mentioned church and pike, which is interesting because Pike was coming out of the House of Representatives.
It was the church committee, it was a Senate committee that had the cooperation, albeit reluctant cooperation, not only of the White House, of a different party.
So, you know, Frank Church and his team had multiple meetings with President Ford in the White House.
In fact, I've been reading up on this.
There are some fascinating meetings.
One meeting with church, church committee staff members are in there in the White House with Gerald Ford, Pat Buchanan, who was a speechwriter at the time.
Henry Kissinger, like some of these scenes from the church committee are actually like a blast from the past.
One of the main legal staffers on the church committee was this guy called Schwartz, who's the heir to the famous FAO Schwartz toy dynasty.
There are a lot of interesting characters.
Barry Goldwater was on the church committee.
It is a very fascinating question.
How has no one done a Netflix series answer because they don't want people to think about the Intel agencies?
Continue.
Right.
No, it's fascinating.
But the thing is, already we see where the analogy breaks down when we have the bipartisan church committee, senior staffers meeting in the White House.
It's not like Ford is saying, I'm going to give you everything you want, but it's a friendly meeting where Ford acknowledges the importance of it and wants to cooperate.
They're meeting with counterparts in the Department of Justice, in the CIA, and other places.
Can you imagine Jim Jordan and Thomas Massey getting a friendly audience in the Biden White House and in the CIA and other places with people, you know, even paying lip service to it is kind of unimaginable.
No, you can't do that.
They stonewalled in many cases, but they did get documents related to assassination files and so forth.
And so long story short, the church committee, the public pressure leading to the church committee was greatly assisted by a cooperative media and a left-wing media.
And the political environment was just right in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal, which again, you know, the public perception of the reality of Watergate are two very different things, but that's a conversation for another day.
The important thing here is that the left-wing media was very much on board with the spirit of the church committee investigation because ultimately it was perceived as an investigation of abuses against the left by a more or less right-wing rogue intelligence apparatus.
And now we're in a totally different situation where the CIA is woke.
You know, the FBI is kneeling for Black Lives Matter.
And the media is definitely not on the side of the investigative agenda of Thomas Massey and Jim Jordan.
You have to wonder that some of the Democrats that were on the church committee, the takeaway was, oh, let's take this over.
The takeaway was not that this needs to be reformed to a place of neutrality.
The takeaway was, hey, let's go on a 40-year campaign so that by the year of 2020 or 2010, our ideological cohort is running the agencies, not people that are actually more kind of sympathetic to the strong nuclear family and Western values.
Do you think there's something to that?
Or is that just kind of...
Absolutely.
I mean, I think this was right around, at least chronologically, the inflection point where the left started to really begin its capture, not only of the sort of academic institutions, but of the national security institutions.
There was another important inflection point in the way that these operations, these government operations were structured.
Because back then, all of the dirty deeds were effectively done in-house.
And partially as a response to the church committee's findings, they said, well, we don't want another church-style committee to expose all this stuff going on in-house.
So for a lot of our dirty stuff, we're effectively going to outsource it to these NGOs and cutout organizations that are formally part of the private sector, but are more or less doing our dirty work.
And that's where you see a lot of, for instance, the censorship industry, the whole disinformation industry.
Yes, a lot of it is still taking place in-house, but I would say the lion's share is actually happening outside of the formal structure of the government and taking place in university-affiliated institutions, NGOs, organizations like the Atlantic Council's DFR lab and so forth.
And so that basic structural transformation would have to be taken into account in order to have an effective church-style committee for the present era.
Gold as the Safe Asset 00:02:17
That's such a smart point.
And I'll be honest, I'm not really sure how we navigate that in the short or distant future because what they've done, as you say, through a series of NGOs, sympathetic for-profit corporations, Fortune 100 companies, celebrities, influencers, universities, they outsource the unconstitutional actions.
They're also able to keep some of their communication that will now be investigated to seem kind of more vanilla or they could just, ah, you know, we don't, that's not us.
That's Stanford.
I mean, that's not us.
That is Peter Dasik.
That's not us.
That is Twitter.
That's not us.
That is the Center for Censorship Pullet Bureau.
Noble Gold Investments is pleased to let you know that gold was the best investment class for 2022.
Through all our record-breaking inflation, crashing stock market, the crypto scams, there is one asset that has held its own, gold.
According to longtermtrends.net, gold has actually outperformed the S ⁇ P 500, DAO, and Bitcoin for 2022.
Had you invested in the S ⁇ P 500 a year ago, you would be down more than 20%.
If you invested in Bitcoin a year ago, you'd be down more than 65%.
If you invested in the Dow a year ago, you'd be down almost 10%.
Yes, gold has outperformed them all in 2022, and silver is not far behind.
Yes, while the world was busy hailing other assets as the real hedge, gold and silver are the only assets that would have protected your wealth.
So join the thousands of others by opening a gold IRA or silver IRA with Noble Gold Investments.
Get in right now and you'll bag a free one-fourth of an ounce American gold Eagle coin with every qualified IRA of $50,000 or more.
You can't go wrong with Noble Gold Investments and their thousands of five-star reviews.
All right, Darren, we got a surprise for you.
Enjoy CUT 27.
Does the national security apparatus do anything but conspire against the American people?
I'm led to conclude that we cannot have a democracy.
Everything in our politics will be fake and performative until we bring the national security state, including the FBI, to heel.
It's not a left issue.
It's not a right issue.
Demand a Church Committee 2.0 00:06:16
Every politician who cares about our country should demand a Church Committee 2.0.
Darren, you did it, man.
That was the 15th of June.
We'll send that to you because I'm sure you'll want to publicize it.
That is the 15th of June, 2021.
A year and a half ago, Darren.
This is so important, everybody.
This is the Overton window at work.
This is the Overton theory window, which I think is one of the most incredible lenses that you could view politics, where you move something from that is unthinkable to all of a sudden something that is policy.
But you must first introduce the idea into the zeitgeist.
You must make an argument for it.
And then all of a sudden it spreads with virality.
And Darren Beattie deserves credit for that.
Okay, so Darren, let me ask you just really quickly.
Let's kind of a lightning round because I want to play a piece from Senator Church way back when.
What can we do, the audience, to support this committee?
Because they're going to need support.
I think they're going to get intimidation threats.
That's what I love, Thomas Massey, the guy's from like 1794.
He's been like loyally married to his wife since high school, basically.
He makes his own power, his own energy.
He's like the most boring person ever.
He's perfect to put on, you know, he's not someone who's just kind of involved in scandalous affairs and laundering money from Zambia.
I mean, the guy is as ethical as it gets.
What can we do to support this committee really quick?
Well, public pressure is our only hope because the media isn't going to provide much assistance as it did with the church committee in the 70s.
Public pressure is the only way we can make this happen.
Massey can't do it alone.
He needs the pressure because that's going to be his leverage.
So that's number one, the public pressure that comes from knowledge and understanding.
And secondly, we need specificity and persistence.
We can't do a full broad range kind of things because we don't have that level of cooperation.
We need to find the easiest and most impactful asks, keep them specific, and just hammer them over and over and over.
And based on what comes out of those, that might generate more pressure to find more, but it has to be very strategic, laid out, has to be very specific.
If we get bogged down in an avalanche of material, that could be counterproductive.
I think we need to really be targeted about what we're asking for.
In relation to January 6th, I keep it simple.
We want the surveillance footage of the pipe bomb and the chain of custody of that footage.
That's it.
I would keep it that simple because that's what's going to lead to everything else.
If we ask for a million things and get distracted everywhere, I'm worried that nothing is going to come of it.
That's right.
We must be precise and we must be focused.
I want to play a piece of tape here.
Senator Church, play cut 26.
This is back from 1975.
At the same time, that capability at any time could be turned around on the American people.
And no American would have any privacy left, such as the capability to monitor everything, telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn't matter.
There would be no place to hide if this government ever became a tyranny.
If a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny.
And there would be no way to fight back.
1975, Darren.
Incredible.
Very, very prescient.
And, you know, it's Church was a very impressive guy.
He was a very impressive senator.
You know, a lot of his life history was very interesting.
It's sort of going, digging into the church committee is a nostalgic element to see just the quality of representatives that existed at that time.
It's definitely a standard to look up to.
Again, Thomas Massey's job is a lot more difficult than what Church's job was for the reasons described.
But I think if we keep it narrow, we keep it focused and we stay persistent, something very meaningful can come out of this.
I asked this question to Jim Jordan and Thomas Massey, but we got to keep on saying this publicly to hopefully thwart their plans.
They're going to come after the members of this committee.
They're going to come after them personally.
They're going to come after them with a series of black propaganda tactics.
Darren, how can we help in that regard?
And what do you anticipate the intel agencies doing as even a preemptive measure?
Well, I hope they come after because that's a signal that they're actually, you know, rocking the boat.
I have every confidence that Massey is capable and willing to rock the boat.
I hope Jim Jordan is as well.
We'll just have to see.
And obviously, if they get attacked, I think they should hold that up as a banner of pride, especially if they're getting attacked by the regime media or their intelligence proxies.
They should just focus on doing the right thing with this committee and getting to the bottom of it because it truly could have historic results if done the right way.
And I also think they should ignore Joe Biden.
I have a contrarian view here.
I know you agree, but I think that some of this could be, and I think there's an element to everything, but an element of this classified document thing could be a massive, like, hey, come on, take the treat.
Come do this.
Exactly.
It has every indication of being sort of a cattle raid and Durham style stuff.
Don't be fooled by the mirage.
Focus on January 6th.
Focus on that pipe bomb and revolver.news, Darren Beattie, move the Overton window from idea to reality.
Congratulations.
See you, Darren.
Thank you.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email me your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thanks so much for listening, and God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.
Export Selection