All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Feb. 13, 2023 - The Charlie Kirk Show
34:12
Ask Charlie Anything 134: Fix Colleges, or Ditch Them? What is Stoicism? What Made 1776 So Remarkable?
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Project Veritas and James O'Keefe 00:15:15
Hey everybody, today on the Charlie Kirk show, an ask me anything episode where I take your questions about all sorts of different topics.
Project Veritas, the 1619 project.
We talk about stoicism.
We talk about Mark Cerilius and George Santos.
It's quite an episode.
Email me your thoughts, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Get involved with turningpointusa at tpusa.com.
That is tpusa.com.
Start a high school chapter or a college chapter today at tpusa.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 the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandTodd.com.
Amount of questions we're getting on the James O'Keefe thing is overwhelming.
I have mentioned this a couple times throughout the hours.
I'm going to do it again.
But email me, freedom at charliekirk.com.
We're going to go through that.
I'm also going to answer some questions on stoicism.
We have a fair amount of questions on that.
And there are other questions as well.
As well as should I go to college, we will address that.
Okay, so let's get into first and foremost.
Someone said this here.
Someone said it, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Charlie, I love your program.
Thank you.
And I'm going to get my kids involved with Turning Point USA.
Thank you.
And I love James O'Keefe.
I love when you have him on the show.
Have you spoken to James?
Is he okay, Brooke from Billings, Montana?
I have.
I spoke to James O'Keefe last evening.
I'm not going to divulge any private information from that call.
I can say, though, that he's going through a tough time, as you could possibly imagine.
And he needs your support.
He needs your prayers.
This is a rallying cry and should be for James O'Keefe.
James O'Keefe has been there on every tough fight.
And look, I don't want to be too speculative.
However, I do not think it is a coincidence that a lot of this activity bubbles up to the surface when James O'Keefe delivers a successful shot on target against Pfizer.
I'm not saying that Pfizer is behind it.
I'm not saying that.
It's just interesting.
It was the most successful video that Project Veritas has ever done.
Objectively said it is like 30 million views.
It was extraordinary.
It's suggested that Pfizer is now involved in gain of function research and has been.
It should result in massive congressional inquiries.
And then just days after that, all this drama with James O'Keefe.
Regardless of whether it some people are saying, well, Charlie, regardless of whether James O'Keefe is with Project Veritas or not, he has a bright future.
Of course, that is true.
But my position, and I've communicated this both publicly and privately, as someone that knows how difficult it is to build something from nothing, is absent federal crimes that were committed.
And I don't know if that happened.
And I certainly don't think so, because I've asked and I've asked, and that does not seem to be the case.
Of course, there's lines for everything, so it's not just a blank check.
But if it's true that James was cruel to people and mean to people, very subjective, but let's pretend he was, and that he was calling people names and that he was spending money to bring people to a theater production, then there should be some sort of path to restoration.
That's not a reason to kick somebody out of their own organization.
And, you know, people say, well, Charlie, there are two separate things, James O'Keeffe and Project Veritas.
I mean, come on.
It is not unheard of for a founder to be kicked out of a company that they started.
It's also not unheard of for the person to be kicked out of the company that they started and then they brought back in, like Steve Jobs.
Steve Jobs was kicked out and then he was brought back in.
And so the saga with O'Keeffe is this, is that I truly believe that unless there's some massive smoke and gun revelation that comes to the surface, that there needs to be a path for restoration and reinstitution for James O'Keefe to continue to run Project Veritas.
And at breaking at the time of the board meeting, there was this cease and desist letter sent to Project Veritas' board by many major donors.
I know some of those donors, and I'm not privy to say the details behind that, but I've been looped in on this.
And James O'Keefe's future with the company is in peril.
Now, I have been told by Project Veritas insiders that there's more to the story, and you're going to learn about it, and you're going to see that we're doing everything we possibly can to comply with state and federal law.
I sure hope the reason is good enough to kick somebody out of the organization that they founded.
That's a very high threshold.
It's not impossible.
And obviously, no one is above accountability.
But look, it takes a lot of energy and intensity to build an organization from scratch.
It's not easy.
I travel 300 days a year.
I did that for nine years.
Not to mention get the podcast and the radio program, speaking, deal with the press, the media, hire staff, manage staff.
I have a great team and all that.
But just knowing, because it was kind of very interesting, James was a fellow traveler in building Turning Point USA Project Veritas.
We were almost kind of in harmony, right?
And James is a very good person.
And so some of this just seems very inconsistent with the person I know that he is.
But if he's really intense, okay, fine.
I've never experienced that.
I'm sure that anybody who is a creator at that time, I know this, anyone who's a creator at the top level tends to kind of be high octane.
And, you know, producer Andrews said, you're a wild man too, Charlie.
Then he says, but your faith in your wife and your team keep you in a solid spot.
Thank you.
No, that's actually very true.
Left to my own devices, I would be Julius Caesar and it would not end well.
And so the sequence of events that's unfolding at Project Veritas, I hope ends in a place where James O'Keefe is more empowered than ever before to hold tyranny accountable, more empowered than ever before to be able to hold the worst aspects of society kennel.
My fear is that now the fabulous work that has been achieved by Project Veritas, the amazing success that they have been able to achieve is now being put in jeopardy.
That is my fear.
And that's not good for anybody.
So we're going to keep a close eye on this.
The cease and desist letter was sent to the Project Veritas board by major donors as James O'Keefe's future with the company is now in peril.
And look, people say that he was an awful person to work for, some of the employees, but he demanded excellence and he certainly got it.
Look, the old expression is if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen.
Everyone can improve, right?
Everyone can become a better person and all that.
That's not a reason to send him to ALBA.
Okay?
It's not a reason to put him into exile.
If you don't get the ALBA reference, it was, I think it was an island in the Mediterranean.
Blake would know.
And Napoleon was just kind of sent out into exile.
Yes, of course it's Napoleon reference.
I'm saying, though, that where the actual island was is a mystery to me.
It's actually where Napoleon did most of his Bible reading, became a much more spiritual person.
We need James O'Keefe.
The movement needs James O'Keefe.
I have not yet seen a piece of evidence that makes me believe that this is irreconcilable.
I have not seen a piece of data or heard something where I say, send him out to pasture.
And of course, those lines exist.
Trust me, those lines exist.
I have not seen it get near that.
They say, oh, financial mismanagement.
Well, be precise with your language.
Is it financial mismanagement?
Is it abuse?
Is it neglect?
Is it embezzlement?
Mismanagement is an incredibly subjective term.
Okay, then get him in to a better process with a chief of staff, with a CFO, have him restore or repay any questionable finances or expenses, make him chairman of the board, give him a team, make him a buffer from the staff.
All this is solvable.
But potentially putting him in exile and having his future in jeopardy, unless there's something else.
Look, those lines exist.
Look, kind of at this point, you got to start giving us the proof, right?
Or restore James O'Keefe in his position.
Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here.
Thanks to your support, Patriot Mobile has emerged as one of the leaders in the parallel economy, and they have big news.
Patriot Mobile now offers services with all three major networks.
This means if you're with the big three and like the service but hate their values, you can access them with Patriot Mobile.
They also offer a performance guarantee.
If you're not happy with your coverage, then you could switch between the three major carriers for free.
Patriot Mobile, America's only Christian conservative wireless provider, offers nationwide coverage of the best 4G and 5G networks.
So you get the same great service while supporting a company that fights to preserve our God-given rights and freedoms.
This new year, resolve to stop supporting companies that don't align with your values.
Their 100% U.S.-based customer support team helps make switching easy.
Just go to patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call them an 878-Patriot.
I think very highly of Patriot Mobile.
I love their team.
Glenn and all of them, they do a wonderful job.
Get free activation today with offer code Charlie.
That is patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 878Patriot, patriotmobile.com slash Charlie.
I just want to have one final thought on the James O'Keefe thing.
And I understand nonprofit law pretty well.
I understand structure of organizations and people say, well, Charlie, it's not his.
He was just a board member.
Let's not fool ourselves.
He was the life source of that successful organization.
I think that my favorite word in the English language, earn, that earns you a chance not to be exiled.
All right, let's get to some questions here.
Okay, I want to make sure I get the tweet pulled up that references.
Yes, hey, Charlie, did you see Christopher Rufo's take on college?
It's obviously something I'd love to get your opinions on.
Thanks so much.
Aha, this is a great, I actually hadn't looked at the tweet till now.
Okay, the conservative don't go to college meme is a mistake, Christopher Rufo says, driven by a sense of fatalism and inferiority.
The right attitude is to quote make colleges better so we can send our children to the kind of institution they deserve.
I think Christopher Ruffo is a special person, but I think he's totally wrong here.
And smart people can disagree.
So, and I actually had this, I had a robust conversation about this with Dennis Prager and Alan Estrin from Prager University.
Dennis and I were speaking at Arizona State University together, and I'll kind of give you an update on that because that was that was really interesting and illuminating in some regards.
So, Alan and I got to talking, and Alan's a very learned man, and Dennis is beyond a learned man.
And he prompted that all three of us were talking out of nowhere.
I said, Alan, what is the solution?
He said, It's very simple, and he's very stoic, and he's very serious.
Burn it all down.
I was like, What?
I was like, I agree, obviously.
He said, You just got to burn it to a crisp.
There is no redeeming value to these institutions.
And I mean, I, it's not a shock.
I sympathize with that sentiment.
However, here's, and I'm, I do outline this in my book, The College Scam.
You guys can check it out in great detail.
What's been interesting, as a side note, to the publication of my book, I have not had a snobbish response to my book, The College Scam.
The MAGA doctrine, tons of snobbery of responding.
Campus Battleground, a ton of snobbery, time for a turning point, you know, all these like kinds of people.
Interestingly enough, the college scam was just largely ignored.
So, there's two ways to take that.
I don't want to act as if, you know, take myself too seriously, but one take is like, okay, Charlie, just keep saying the same thing over and over again, not worth our time.
The other take is that it's a hard argument to refute.
And because I did source it so comprehensively, the data is there.
It's a very, very deep book.
It is the most comprehensive indictment of the college industry that exists.
I spent a lot of time on it.
Our team was fabulous in researching it and were able to distill it together.
And so, but I do wonder, Christopher Rufo says that we should make colleges better.
How?
Where has that ever worked?
Now, building new colleges totally supports that.
Supporting the ones that are already good, like Hillsdale College, yes.
But where has there been a meaningful recapturing of the institution?
Now, to Christopher Rufo's credit, and again, we're just disagreeing.
I think he's a fabulous person.
He's trying to do that at New College in Sarasota, Florida.
He's testing out this premise, and I am going to be his most enthusiastic cheerleader.
But just color me a fair more cynical in this regard: that you're talking about the same thing as saying, Well, we need to make the FBI better, we need to make the IRS better.
It's the same type of personnel, same sort of attitude, that same sort of deep state character or lack thereof that exists within a college that also exists in the inner agencies of our government.
And so, people ask me all the time, they say, Charlie, do you think I should send my kid to college?
The answer is it's kind of a lawyerly answer.
It depends, right?
But the answer is usually no.
We have way too many kids that go to college.
It's, of course, a scam.
If you go to college, you have to check the right boxes.
I talk about it in my book, but I'll just kind of conclude on this.
At Arizona State University, where 37 out of 47 of the professors signed a letter saying they don't want Dennis Prager and I to speak on campus, I was very moved at the pre-speech reception where a mother of four came up to me and she was really, really sweet.
Deciding When History Begins 00:13:49
And she said, Charlie, none of my four sons speak to me anymore.
We have five grandkids.
We're not allowed to see them.
I said, Why?
She said, Well, they went to college and we regret that.
I said, You regret sending them to college?
Oh, yeah, if we would do it again, we would never do it again.
I hear this frequently, I hear this quite often.
And they say until we change our politics and our beliefs and our views and our worldview, we're not allowed to see our grandkids.
So holding grandkids hostage for political views, yes, that comes directly from college.
That is not normal.
That is a learned sociopathic evil behavior that somehow you should disconnect from your family because you view politics differently.
I want to tell you guys about COVID tax relief.
COVID Tax Relief is an amazing service that exists for you because of Washington, D.C.'s addiction to overspending.
Again, I'm not a fan that this money exists or that's out there or that it's available, but as they say, it is what it is.
Look, COVIDtaxRelief.org got a small retail business, almost $80,000.
COVIDtaxRelief.org got a manufacturing business, nearly $250,000.
COVIDTaxRelief.org got a large distribution business, almost $900,000.
If you run a business, church or nonprofit, and paid your employees through all or part of the pandemic, you could qualify for up to $26,000 per employee through the Government Cares Act.
COVIDTaxRelief.org receives a low commission, very reasonable, only after you receive the money.
So go to covidtaxrelief.org.
That is covidtaxrelief.org, covidtaxrelief.org.
Check it out right now, covidtaxrelief.org.
So I do mention here and there Stoicism, which needs to be taken very carefully, especially if you're a Christian.
However, if it's properly employed, I think it actually can be fabulously enriching to your life because I actually think it's consistent with Christian values, part of Stoicism.
Charlie, Mr. Kirk, today you made a comment about the Stoics.
Can you tell us about the Stoics and your opinion of them?
God bless.
So yes, there are four major Stoics.
The kind of inventor of Stoicism, if you will, is a man by the name of Epietus.
He was a slave and obviously living in slavery and then being freed, he was able to live through all different parts of life by being in slavery and by being treated terribly.
He came really kind of, he came up with a philosophy for life, an operating system, regardless of your circumstance, regardless what's happening around you, need to identify what you can control, what you are able to do in that moment, and then release everything that is outside of your control.
So there's elements there of Christianity of do not worry about today, do not worry about tomorrow, don't worry about the future, but focus on the present.
There's elements of some Eastern philosophy there.
There are three other Stoic thinkers and writers that are quite interesting.
Zeno, which we'll talk very little about.
Seneca, as well, who I believe was a counselor to a Roman emperor.
Blake would know.
But the most famous, he was a counselor to Nero.
Okay, that's notable.
Yeah, he did a great job there.
Actually, you never know.
Bad emperors sometimes can have really good counselors.
That's a good rule for life.
They're not always listened to, and sometimes their heads are chopped off.
That's right.
Yes, that's correct.
Yeah, Seneca was forced to commit suicide because he was such a wise and learned man.
But the most famous Stoic of all, and there were other kind of quasi-Stoic thinkers, Cicero being the one-year Roman council who wrote extensively about separation of powers and has some of the greatest writings that later inspired the American founding.
But Marcus Aurelius, and I have a bust of Marcus Aurelius in my office because I really love studying about Marcus Aurelius.
Marcus Aurelius was the last of the good emperors of Rome.
He ruled, I think, between, Blake can look it up.
It's like 200 something, far after Christ.
It was right at the end of the Pax Romana and Marcus Aurelius.
He really was about 161 AD, thank you.
And so he ruled over more land, more geography than any other ruler or leader alive at the time.
And so it's a very interesting window of if you have absolute control of the earthly realm, which is what basically a Roman emperor did.
You could have any woman you want.
You could have any person you want.
You could cut somebody's head off.
You have full, complete dictatorial control because Rome ceased to be an empire and transitioned to a republic.
What would you believe?
What would you do?
And what was so fascinating about Marcus Aurelius.
We only know this because of his private journals that later got repurposed and published as a book that we call Meditations, is that Aurelius adopted Stoic philosophy to help him become a better ruler.
And so Aurelius wrote these private journals as emperor of Rome, and they're now called meditations.
I encourage you, if you're going to read meditations, get the modern translation done by Professor Gregory Hayes, who is a professor of ancient literature or great works at the University of Virginia.
Fabulous introduction.
It's done really well.
It's very readable.
Some of the older ones in Old English, I find to be difficult to read in this translation.
He spent a ton of time to find the right synonyms in the right modern language to be able to translate it.
But the window into what would you do if you had absolute power and the answer for Aurelius was the following.
There's a couple principles of Stoicism, which is, look, happiness is not found in things, but in virtue alone.
And it's about what we value and the choices we make.
We don't control external events.
We only control our thoughts, opinions, decisions, and duties.
That word duty is a massive deal.
You should think about your death every single day.
This is something Stoicism espouses.
It's this Latin phrase called memento mori, which is you're going to die.
And so what kind of life are you living today?
Are you living a full life?
Are you living a complete life?
Are you leaning in?
Are you actually going to acknowledge that every day you get closer to your death?
It can be very, very liberating, actually.
Now, people say, Charlie, is Stoicism a religion?
It can be.
I don't encourage it to be a religion for you.
I do think, though, that a Stoic view of life, if you are a secular person, is a lot better than just being secular postmodernist.
But there are some Stoic elements that I find to be incredibly helpful, especially when I'm trying to become a better Christian, a better believer, and a better fighter for liberty and freedom.
And one of those is this idea that the toxic emotions that permeate and pervade our life, fear and anger, are the worst strategies.
And for me, that has been incredibly helpful.
So Stoicism really is an it is a belief that you have a lot more power and free will than you recognize or realize.
And that the moment that you are currently in is the most important moment because you'll never get it back.
You'll never get the past back.
You can actually not go to the future.
So you must live exactly where you are now.
For more on that, you guys should check out this guy, The Daily Stoic.
It's dailystoic.com.
I don't know his, what is his name?
He's really, really, really smart.
I enjoy his YouTube videos and his writings on it.
And there's also another great book that I'm reading called Think Like a Roman Emperor.
If I piqued your curiosity on Stoicism at all, that is where to go.
Okay, let's go to another question here.
Email us freedom at charliekirk.com.
That is freedom at charliekirk.com.
Let's go to this one here.
Charlie, do you see the recent comments from Nicole Hannah Jones?
I would love your take on them.
Thanks so much.
And I love the show.
Okay.
Well, thank you for the kind words and for subscribing.
All right, let's go to, I'm going to play both of them.
Let's play cut 10, Nicole Hannah-Jones.
The history of black Americans is so inconvenient to the narrative of America that there are, you know, powerful interests that haven't ever wanted us to grapple truthfully.
That is why DeSantis has to ban AP African American studies in Florida.
Play Cut 10.
The history of black Americans is so inconvenient to the narrative of America that there are powerful interests that haven't ever wanted us to grapple truthfully.
That's why we have Governor DeSantis banning AP African American studies.
If you acknowledge that, then you have to acknowledge that we were founded on these great ideals, but we have not lived up to them.
That's actually a little bit of a sea change.
I have to say that their pressure campaign on Miss Jones, I think, is working.
Did you hear her there?
That's a different idea.
She's changed her vocabulary.
She said we were founded on these great ideals.
She never used to say our foundational ideas were great.
So that's new.
Let's continue.
Play cut 11.
Is Nicole Hannah Jones trying to water down her message?
This one is definitely not watered down.
Play cut 11.
As you look at America, are people adjusting to thinking about being challenged by these ideas?
And are we moving in a positive direction, or do you see something that's frozen?
What I would argue is that the arc of the universe doesn't bend one way or another.
We bend it as Americans is which country do we want to be?
Do we want to be the country that begins in 1619 with the practice of slavery?
Or do we want to be the country that was conceived in 1776 with the ideas of liberty and equality?
I think that is unknown.
I think we always are seeing the tension and the fight between these two halves.
So I have several takes on this.
And I mean, who are you to decide?
We're going to decide when our history begins.
It's just so incredibly self-righteous and arrogant.
I'm going to decide our history.
History is.
History is not for your editing.
The pursuit of truth will bring you to whether what you're saying is right or incorrect.
There's no decision.
Okay.
Are we going to decide?
Okay.
So my first thought is this: the fact that pilgrims came to America with slaves is completely irrelevant because slavery was normalized in the ancient world and it still is normalized today.
Now, let me make sure my language is clear.
Just because it's irrelevant does not mean that it should be deemed morally acceptable, still evil, but it's not relevant as to why they were coming here.
Now, I'm a little bit rusty on my Mayflower Compact history, but I'm 99.9% sure that there were no slaves on the Mayflower.
You can fact-check me on that.
In fact, the Mayflower Compact does not mention slavery.
It's kind of the first social contract.
There's a ton of beautiful history behind the Mayflower Compact because they were out at sea and they weren't sure if they were going to get and be able to survive at all.
And they basically were like, are we going to be able to do this?
And if so, how are we going to govern ourselves?
Slavery and the advent of slaves coming to the mainland of America is largely a phenomenon not of the founding fathers.
Yeah, there were no slaves on the Mayflower.
Thank you.
I didn't want to speak out of turn there, but I was ready to take that to the bank.
Was only a custom of the moral flaws that existed during the time.
Every single person has this in common.
Every person that hears my voice right now has the following in common: you were born into a world you did not create, you were born into circumstances that you did not choose.
Every person also has this in common: that you're then able to make a series of choices to try to improve or weaken the world that you were born into.
Both of those things are simultaneously true.
So the founding fathers were born into a world they did not choose.
They were born into a world where slavery was widespread and it was ubiquitous.
They did not choose that.
They did not invent it.
They did not defend it.
They did not perfect it.
They reluctantly and begrudgingly grew up around it.
And yet it was Benjamin Franklin who chaired the anti-slavery convention in 1775.
It was Thomas Jefferson who admonished the king of England, King George, in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence that slavery was wrong and you are to blame for bringing the sin of slavery to our shores.
It was Vermont that abolished slavery in 1777.
Nine out of 13 colonies had independently abolished slavery by the time the United States Constitution was ratified in 1787.
So every single one of them was born into a world where slavery was acceptable, it was institutionalized, it was widespread, and it was codified into the rules and the regulations and the laws and the customs.
That is the world that they entered.
And by the time that they exited and by the time that they passed away, they left a world where slavery was on the way out.
We should probably ask the question, why?
What happened in 1776?
Well, the answer is that it did not happen in an isolated circumstance or it did not happen in a bubble.
It was many decades of work, Protestant ministers, Jonathan Mayhew, George Whitfield, Jonathan Edwards, the Black Robe Regimen, sowing the seeds of the foundation of a people that finally were ready to reject and expel a repugnant evil of slavery, of human beings owning human beings.
Why?
Rejecting the Evil of Slavery 00:05:07
I just got a kick out of these emails.
Someone says, Charlie, I don't support Trump because he can't win a general election.
He has won a general election.
Okay, it's such a silly argument.
He's the only person that will be running as a Republican primary nominee that has won a general election.
And so this idea that he can't, I mean, not only is it flawed, it's just on the surface, just not, it's just not true.
And I truly believe he would have won the second time if it wasn't for all the nonsense, the shenanigans, the ballot drop boxes, the tech interference, all of that.
I fully believe it.
So I find that to be the weakest of all the arguments, to be honest.
Electability, he did win.
I mean, it would be one thing if he never actually became president.
Then we can talk about that.
He served four great years.
So you got to try this different argument out there.
I hear all the time, Charlie, he can't win.
He can't win.
He can't win.
Any other candidates actually was ever president before?
I didn't think so.
Email us treated him at charliekirk.com.
Let's get to another story here.
This one says, Charlie, I see the NBC news piece, blah, blah, blah.
You know, so glad you're still supporting Trump today.
Of course I am.
It's unwavering.
You see, the media, they're very tricky.
You got to know how they work.
They're always trying to find a little bit of cracks or chink, you know, just kind of like little vulnerabilities.
And none such exists.
100% behind Trump, enthusiastically so.
And people say, oh, well, Charlie, you disagree on that.
Of course, disagreement is what makes this life fun and interesting.
I don't expect to agree with anybody 100% of the time.
But as far as the commitment to America, what he has done and will do, I mean, it's not even a question.
The debate is over at that point.
Let's go to, boy, we got a lot.
Freedom at CharlieKirk.com.
There were some here that we already addressed that he gets us stuff.
I think we did a comprehensive job on that.
So, okay, this one here, Charlie, what do you think of the Twitter hearings?
Let's play here, Cut 92, Ana Paulina Luna.
Have you communicated with government officials ever on a platform called JIRA?
Yes or no?
Real quick answer.
We're on the clock.
To the best of my recollection.
Not to your recollection?
Great.
If you did in the event communicate, who would have had access to this platform?
That's the nature of my confusion.
Okay.
Did you ever speak to government officials on JIRA regarding taking down social media posts?
Again, not to the best of my recollection.
Not to the best of my recollection.
These guys are so slippery.
Yo, Roth.
We know we have emails that show that Yoel Roth and Twitter had regular planned meetings with Twitter.
I mean, with the FBI, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with the intelligence agencies.
We know this.
Not to the best of my recollection.
That's probably not true.
There's got to be another way to get these people to extract the truth there and just memory loss.
Remember James Comey?
How many times did James Comey say I could not remember?
I think it was 100 times, 80 times.
We could look it up.
James Comey, when he was asked very direct questions when Republicans still controlled Congress, back when Republicans controlled Congress, now obviously we do now.
I don't remember.
I do not recall.
I don't remember.
I do not recall.
You can't be held accountable for lying to Congress if you just don't remember.
Now, if there's evidence to show that you actually do remember and you're lying about not remembering, but they've convinced themselves of that.
They're like, well, I'm not lying.
And as George Costanza would say, it's not a lie if you believe it.
I'm going to go to one more piece of tape here.
We got to get some questions about George Santos.
He's a perplexing fella.
I got to tell you, I really struggle to figure this guy out.
I really do.
Let's play Cut 109.
It's not the first time in history that I've been told to shut up and go to the back of the room, especially by people who come from a privileged background.
And it's not going to be the last.
And I'm never going to shut up and go to the back of the room.
And I think it's reprehensible that the senator would say such a thing to me in the demeaning way he said, but it wasn't very Mormon of him.
That's what I can tell you.
Yeah, look, I'll be very honest.
He's talking about his interaction with Mitt Romney.
I'm not one to like defend Mitt Romney.
Probably should sit this out, Mr. Santos, if that's really your name.
Not very Mormon of him.
Ooh, yeah, what a zinger.
Yeah, like, okay, how about you get your biography sorted out?
And also, from a privileged background, don't like it at all, actually.
How about you tell us, can you clear up one or two of the biographical details?
By the way, I don't think you should resign, but maybe you should just keep your mouth shut for like a month or two months or three months, four months, or the rest of your term.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email me your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thank you 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