All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
June 1, 2023 - The Charlie Kirk Show
36:01
The Summer of Indictments + The Start of Pride Month with Alina Habba and Col. Douglas Macgregor
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Summer of Indictments Coming 00:14:58
Hey, everybody, today on the Charlie Kirk Show.
A summer of indictments is coming.
We go through the debt ceiling bill, and Colonel Douglas McGregor walks us through why Republicans are so unwilling to cut that pesky defense budget.
Email us freedom at charliekirk.com.
Subscribe to our podcast.
Open up your podcast app and type in Charlie Kirk Show.
That's right, Charlie Kirk Show.
And email me as always, freedom at charliekirk.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.
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.
Debt ceiling fight, the bill passed.
We'll talk about that.
A lot of anger and frustration out there.
Palpable.
But I want to make sure you're also equally as prepared for what is going to be happening now the first day of June.
Happy Pride Month, everybody.
What a country we live in.
June, July, and August.
This is going to be the hot summer of indictments where they're going to try to take Donald Trump off the political chessboard.
They are going to try to use extra-constitutional, non-democratic means to interfere with the election to try to baselessly indict him either in Georgia or the Department of Justice.
They already have the New York City one brewing.
And yesterday was a little bit of a warning shot.
It was a harbinger, a canary in the coal mine.
Exclusive from CNN.com.
Trump captured on tape talking about classified documents he kept after leaving the White House.
Make no mistake, they're going to try to interfere with your voice in the Republican primary by using indictments, half-baked legal theories.
And to help us understand this and to respond as Alina Haba, one of President Trump's attorneys, does a wonderful job.
Alina, welcome to the program.
Your response to CNN's article that was published yesterday.
Thanks for having me, Charlie.
It's always a pleasure.
My response is that the leaks kind of indicate exactly what you said, that they're gearing up to, again, figure out a way to keep him out of the race to make sure that the American people don't get an option and to interfere with an election.
This is something that we've seen happen.
You know, the whole boxes hoax, for lack of a better word, is something that we've seen happen through numerous presidents and, you know, Obama, Clintons.
But with Donald Trump and an election brewing, we're seeing something completely different and unheard of.
So I haven't heard the tape.
I can guess what it says, and I'm assuming it's nothing highly relevant, but they'll make it that way.
Yeah, I mean, they're going to try to misrepresent things.
Can you just talk about more broadly about a legal strategy that is being embraced right now?
Because it feels as if they're trying to take the president out from every direction.
You got New York City, Georgia, the DOJ deal, and who leaked this.
I mean, look, that's who they are.
They leak things for a reason.
They're trying to move the Overton window.
What is the posture and the plan right now that you're taking in the defense of the presidents?
Unfortunately, you know, well, I should say fortunately.
They've come at him so hard and they are coming after the president so obviously, right, Charlie?
That it's hard for the American people to not see what they're doing.
So in terms of PR, that bit is a little bit easier.
You know, left-wing media is obvious and we have a conflicting storyline.
In terms of legal strategy, we have to deal with each and every one of them differently.
We are given indictments, as you saw with the DA in New York, that are vague intentionally, that take something that is not a felony and crank it up to a felony.
We have something like declassifying documents, which, you know, we have the Presidential Records Act.
We've had every president come in and out and have this issue, but they'll, again, crank it up.
So it's about making new case law and going after each and every one of them individually.
We're going to, like you said, they're going to try and indict.
They're going to try and keep indicting and just make sure our job is to make sure that we keep him out of any serious trouble.
And the truth of the matter is there are trials.
Indictments don't mean you're guilty.
It's a charge and then you have to go to trial and the evidence will speak for itself.
So here's a question, Alina.
Who has the ultimate authority on classifications?
That seems to be at the essence of this.
President, the president is the only person that can declassify a document without, and you know, this is not my case.
I should always say that.
You know, I'm a lawyer.
You know, I'm going to give you my waiver and caveat, but this is not my case.
Obviously, I'm close to the president and I handle many cases for him, but it's common knowledge that the president does have the ability to declassify documents single-handedly.
Yeah, so basically just by a decree, he could declassify anything, right?
And so, and he could, the case law is a little bit, you know, opaque here.
He could just say, oh, this is declassified.
There's really not a committee.
There's not a process.
No.
And I think that that's exactly it.
You know, I think that if we were Americans again, we would say, look, this has happened so many times between so many presidents.
We keep seeing these hiccups and then NARA has to come back and do this.
To me, that's a waste of resources.
So I think as Americans, instead of trying to indict people that are leading in the polls, what we should be doing is saying, okay, this is a consistent issue.
We want to obviously preserve records.
We want to make sure that there's nothing classified that we don't want out there, out there, even though the president has this right.
Maybe we need to reevaluate the fact that every president has gotten into a situation where NARA has a back and forth and a communication, right?
And that's what we need to do.
So I think that's a little bit more productive, frankly, than going after an election integrity situation in this country.
But there are not so many like-minded people for our country right now that are leading the charge in DAs and AGs offices.
Yeah.
So the Presidential Records Act, I mean, you look at Obama, you look at Biden, you look at all these people, and they just say, oh, yeah, we declassify.
We're able to bring boxes and stuff.
And I mean, the DOJ is, they're looking for everything they possibly can, either the January 6th stuff, which again, you very well might.
And Alina, I want your just broad big picture here.
I want to make sure the audience is ready.
We might see separate federal indictments.
Yeah.
January 6th stuff.
What should we prepare for?
Because to take the surprise element off the table is important.
What do you think we should prepare for?
I think you should prepare for exactly what we saw in the New York DA.
I think that if we sit here and we think they're going to have a moment of, wow, this might not be good for the country.
Wow, you know, we're kind of exacerbating.
Let's not do this.
Let's not hold our breath for that.
I think your listeners are very well educated thanks to you and the guests you bring on.
And I think we have to be realistic.
We are in a situation where the Republican Party, where right-wing, conservative, religious minds or anything of that like are under siege in this country, whether it be what we're seeing with children, with the woke generation, with Target, with all of these things.
And I can't sit here and tell your people, hey, we're good.
Everything's fine.
We're not fine.
The country is seeing a very serious dual system of justice.
And if we don't start thinking that this is what's happening, like you said, we're not going to be prepared.
But I can tell you one thing, Charlie, you know, his legal team is prepared.
We always expect the worst because that's how they treat him very unfairly and very different, frankly, like you said, than any other president.
So they should expect that the DOJ is going to continue to be weaponized until he gets back in office if he can.
And look, the only way he's not going to get back in is if there's corruption because his poll numbers say it all, you know?
So we really need him to come in and save the country.
Otherwise, we're in big trouble.
We're in big trouble.
It is conceivable that at President Trump's convention speech, 14 months from now in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, that he could be under four separate indictments.
Yes.
And I just, is that realistic, Alina?
In the world that we're in, in the culture we're in, unfortunately, I could see that, you know, I'm not on these cases and I could never say something.
But yeah, look at what happened in the DA case.
I mean, of course.
He's already under indictment.
One's enough.
It's ridiculous.
So yeah, no, I'm not going to tell you.
It's impossible.
You can't imagine that it would happen.
It already did.
And it should just charge up the voters more, frankly, and people should be waking up.
No, we're leading with the story for a reason.
And we're going to get into the debt stuff because the audience is fired up about this.
We're leading this for a reason, Alina, because we're entering into the summer where we have a very pro-Trump audience, very MAGA, and you cannot be taken by surprise to understand that there is this extra-constitutional creature out there of the Leviathan that uses the ability to indict political opponents, Soviet style, to their advantage.
This is going to be the summer of law fair.
This is the summer of lawfair.
It's not the summer of love, the summer of lawfair.
They're going to go after Trump in a very serious way by Labor Day.
Summer, quote unquote, it usually goes from Memorial Day to Labor Day.
It is my anticipation, and I say this with great disappointment in our legal system that by Labor Day, Donald Trump could be experiencing some incredibly unfair, unconstitutional, and quite honestly pernicious indictments.
Alina, great job.
Thank you so much.
Thank you so much, Charlie.
I want to talk about relieffactor.com.
I want you guys to check out relieffactor.com, 100% drug-free, knee pain, back pain, joint pain, elbow pain.
Check out Relief Factor Energy help makes your body make nutrients readily available.
Relief Factor Sleep.
I know a lot of you are probably having trouble sleeping.
Relief Factor Sleep could be the best solution for you.
Everybody goes to bed.
Not everybody sleeps.
We're all about helping people live lives that are filled with connection, exploration, passion, and emotion.
That is what his life is all about.
Make sure you guys are sleeping well.
It's a major part of life.
Check it out right now, relieffactor.com, relieffactor.com.
A summer of law fair.
It's coming.
It is coming.
And look, the reason why Trump is attractive to so many of you, and certainly to me, is that he's under attack by all these institutions.
I have a very serious concern right now.
And I see it in your emails, freedom at charliekirk.com.
And keep them coming.
I mean, this is one of the more, let's just say, and by the way, I take zero offense.
Salty language email inboxes I think I've received in the history of the Charlie Kirk show.
Not towards me, just F this and F that and swear words I've never heard of, invented swear words.
Very, I can't, I don't even think I could read them.
I think the FCC would raid my home if I read some of these.
And that's fine.
People are mad.
Get it.
You're mad because you feel as if you work hard, you get chambers of power, and the debt ceiling bill is not what you expected.
So let's go through the facts.
Last evening, the bill passed the House of Representatives and passed with a majority of Republicans voting for it, but a lot of Republicans voted against it.
I could name every single Republican that voted against it, but it would monopolize far too much time.
I will say some Republicans that voted for it that are starting to make some headlines.
Marjorie Taylor Greene voted for it.
And I think the world of Marjorie Taylor Greene, I want to have her come on the show and defend it.
Jim Jordan voted for it.
I believe I want to check the roll call to make sure I'm being precise.
Thomas Massey voted for it.
We can get the exact roll call.
The people who voted against it, you'd expect, but there are some surprise people that voted against it.
Here, Byron Donald voted against it.
That's not a huge surprise.
Bob Goode voted against it.
Dan Bishop, Andy Biggs, Ana Paulina, turning point graduate, voted against it.
Matt Rosendale, Chip Roy.
Again, I'm not just cherry-picking here.
I don't mean Nancy Mace voted against it.
Greg Stubig, Jeff Van Drew, Ryan Zinke, Beth Van Dyne, all three.
So we have the whole list.
We're going to publish it at charliekirk.com.
You can also get it at the roll call.
It is interesting and confusing to many of you and infuriating Marjorie Taylor Greene, Jim Jordan, Thomas Massey.
I'm going to let them defend themselves on this.
I think the world of all three of those people, I agree with them on this stuff.
I'm not in the legislative weeds of this.
I could tell you that you guys do not approve of it.
Based on your emails, based on what I'm receiving, there is widespread condemnation of this.
Oh, did George Santos vote against it?
That's so interesting.
Is that right?
Let me see it here.
I got the roll call here.
George Santos under federal indictment.
He votes against the debt ceiling.
Let me play a couple pieces of tape here.
And I think it all ties together.
Let's play this tape.
Last evening, Kevin McCarthy speaking about the debt deal.
Let's go to Cut 39, please.
I want to know your reaction.
Email me freedom at charliekirk.com.
Play cut 39.
Tonight, we're going to do something we haven't done before.
Tonight, we're going to give America hope.
Tonight, we are going to vote for the largest savings in American history, over $2.1 trillion.
And play Cut 42.
Most of the votes against the legislation came from members on the ideological ends of both parties, the House Progressive Caucus and the House Freedom Caucus.
While both groups were vocal in the lead-up to the vote, moderate congressional members quietly ended up with a win, showcasing the reshuffled power structure in this new era of divided government.
Flawed Bank Negotiations Exposed 00:05:11
Look, this whole deal from the beginning had a flawed negotiation.
I got to tell you, what am I most fired up about this and why I'm most angry about all this?
Is that we were hobbled horrifically by the continued war addiction.
The whole negotiation process, we did not get more domestic concessions.
We did not get more cuts because we were not able to cut the quote-unquote sacred cow that is consuming one-fourth of our budget because we have military bases in Peru.
That is a major factor to this.
If we're talking about fiscal discipline, we're talking about balancing the budget where debt is the slavery of the free.
We are becoming a debtor nation Where it is an existential threat to our currency, an existential threat to our sovereignty, an existential threat to fiscal discipline, which is driving you furious while you are not able to go on vacation, while you are not able to live a life of luxury.
Your leaders are living a life of oligarchs saying, yeah, whatever, we're going to keep on spending money.
And they can't say, you know what, maybe we should not send all that money to Ukraine.
The number one priority of Washington, D.C. should be balancing the budget, balancing the budget, penny plan, zero-based budgeting.
And I'm just going to keep on reiterating this point because I do not think this message has really entered the zeitgeist the way it should.
We cannot be the party of fiscal discipline, of balanced budgets, while we have a fascination with declaring war and invading other countries nonstop.
I want to tell you guys about something every single one of you can benefit from, and you guys need to change.
It's who we use when we go to get mortgages.
Look, I balance a lot of stuff.
I'm traveling all the time, my show, and I recently needed to get a mortgage to get something figured out.
And it was a tough one.
And I didn't want to go to those woke banks.
I, you know, I did previous, my last mortgage we did, it was with a woke bank, and they were just, they were bureaucratic and they donate the BLM and the gay agenda and all that stuff.
And I said, what can I do to actually, and I said, of course, duh, hello, andrewandtodd.com.
They're Christian.
They're conservative.
Our worldviews are aligned.
They're fabulous people.
When I needed a mortgage, of course, I went to my friends, Andrew Delray and Todd of Akin at Sierra Pacific.
And look, this is the first time I used them because, you know, we were just recently started doing stuff on the show and partners.
I said, okay, let's see how it is.
You know, we do a lot of things together.
It's blown away.
They respond within minutes.
They walked me through everything.
They took care of all those details I didn't have time for.
And I said, Boy, guys, I now see how great you guys actually are.
Responsive.
And yes, no more of this woke stuff.
Stop using the woke banks.
Oh, I want to refinance my home and I'm going to go to a bank that hates me.
Stop doing that.
Instead, go to AndrewNTodd.com.
So if you or someone you know is moving from blue states to red states, AndrewandTodd.com.
Have an aging family member that needs financial relief because you maybe are reverse mortgage, AndrewNTodd.com.
Are you self-employed and finding it hard to qualify?
Or first-time homebuyer?
AndrewandTodd.com.
Again, what I love, again, I'm just friends with them.
So I could tell you, I have no other reason to say this except that it's true.
They're fabulous.
They work hard.
We go out to dinner together.
They're great people.
So don't depend on those woke banks, the big banks.
They do a terrible job, by the way.
They're funding all the destructive stuff.
They want centralized bank digital currency.
They're all part of the great reset.
This is a group of guys.
They do a great job.
And stop depending on woke banks.
For what I needed, I saw it firsthand.
They got it done for me.
And it was very complicated.
It was a ficket.
It was a maze.
It was a labyrinth.
And they said, oh, you got to do this and this.
And I'll make this phone call.
We'll do this and this paperwork.
And again, these other banks that I deal with, it's like, here's 955,000 pages to sign, and they don't call you back and they don't work weekends.
I had a problem with one of the things on the process because it was one thing that wasn't filled out.
And they respond on a Sunday within minutes.
You're trying to get a response from a woke bank on a Sunday.
You'll say, sorry, no response.
So check it out.
It's AndrewandTodd.com, 888, 888, 1172.
That's how you call them.
And say Charlie Kirk sent you.
You might actually get them on the phone.
Again, they're value-aligned, honest, trustworthy, wonderful people.
I use them.
You should use them too.
Super responsive, blown away.
And I could say, if they're good for me, they're good for you.
Love these guys.
AndrewandTodd.com, 888, 888, 1172.
And finally, some of you might say, oh, Charlie, bad time to buy a home.
I don't know about that.
You should look what's happening.
Commercial real estate is one thing.
Private single-family home ownership, it might actually stabilize and go up in the next year.
If you're young, it might be the time to get in.
Think about it, pray about it.
But most importantly, go to andrewandodd.com for all your mortgage needs.
Great guys, andrewandtodd.com.
Joining us now is Colonel Douglas McGregor.
Colonel, thank you for making time for us.
I have mentioned throughout the last week as this bill was passing through committee and passing through the House, and our audience is fired up about it, that based on everyone I've talked to, including the negotiation, people close to the negotiation, is that they were never allowed to talk about the defense budget.
In fact, Lindsey Graham said he was going to vote against it if he did not get a 3% automatic hike to the defense budget, the war machine.
Debt Threatens National Security 00:12:54
Look, I think we need a balanced budget.
We need severe cuts across the board, including in the Department of Defense.
So, Colonel, just riff on this for a second.
Is there waste fraud and abuse?
Are there things that we can specifically cut in the Department of Defense budget?
What a loaded question, Charlie.
Yeah, I think so.
The first is this so-called national military strategy, which you could rename the national interventionist strategy.
You don't really have a defense strategy.
So, the first thing you've got to do is you develop a new national military strategy.
Point number one, you declare that you are not going to be interventionist.
We're not going to interfere in the affairs of other people.
Secondly, we're not going to insist that our allies join us in future interventions.
We're going to tell you allies: look, in the event of war, you've got to be your own first responder.
This notion of maintaining huge forces overseas to reassure people on other continents is a disaster.
Technology has changed now.
If you put a lot of forces, particularly on the ground forward in any of the theaters, you're going to lose them because we have this thing called precision strike.
And the Russians, the Chinese, the Indians, you name it, everybody on the planet now has access to the micro circuitry for that.
And the next thing you've got to do is understand that this military establishment that Graham wants to desperately protect hasn't really been subject to fundamental overhaul and reform for 50 years.
So, you're staring at an enormous dinosaur.
And then, underpinning the dinosaur are hundreds, hundreds of programs that are supposed to provide more capability.
And in reality, these things haven't had much value since they were first conceived of.
And many of them have dragged on for 20 or 30 years.
They become feeding programs for people like Graham and his friends on the Hill.
So, the bottom line is: sure, you can do all of those things.
And then, after you've made the basic changes in your strategy, you've got to go after the overhead.
Charlie, we have 44 four-star generals and admirals for a force of only 1.1 million.
Now, during World War II, when we had 12.2 million men under arms, we only had seven four-stars.
Seven point two million.
Today we have 44 miles.
That's such a powerful point.
And that is, sorry to interrupt, but that is parallel to exactly what's happened in our education system where we have, we're so heavy on administrators.
And it actually, the administrative state, the bureaucracy, far outweighs the actual rank and file boots that are actually doing the work.
It's a fabulous, it's a really powerful point.
Oh, no, absolutely.
Then you have to also ask the question: how many of the people that we have on active duty can actually deploy and fight if they have to do it?
But, you know, the top issue is this first issue, which is you stop the interventionism, and then you make it clear that we are going to defend the United States, particularly in the Western Hemisphere.
You know, we've got people all over the world.
Why?
We're not under immediate threat of invasion.
We should be concerned about what's happening in our own hemisphere.
And the only place where there is an invasion ongoing, as you know, is down on the southern border.
That's the one place where we don't have troops.
We have military bases in every nook and cranny you can imagine, but 10,000 illegals are able to waltz into our country every day.
Yeah, absolutely.
And this is something else that we need to keep in mind.
People like Lindsey Graham and all of his supporters, everybody on the Hill, in fact, all the four stars all understand that the bloated force establishment, the bloated overhead, the bloated budget is all tied to overseas expenditure.
That's the problem.
In other words, you try to get an Army general interested in protecting the southern border of the United States.
He looks at you, why?
How do I finance extravagant modernization programs of questionable value if all I'm doing is defending America?
I mean, that's what you're going to get from these people.
How do I justify my bloated rank structure and all these useless headquarters unless I'm fighting somebody overseas?
One of the people I talked to that was involved, it was a U.S. senator, and I called him.
I said, what is going on with this?
He said, Charlie, you know, off the record, don't say my name, but you could say the essence of this, is that the people involved, Lindsey Graham and his allies in the Senate, were telling McCarthy and were telling him we're not going to vote for this.
And Colonel, they were saying we don't have ammunition.
We do not have missiles, that our stockpiles are depleted, that we need new everything.
And I just, without actually having been in the military, just looking at this as a civilian taxpayer, I know this is rubbish.
This is, we spend the chart you could put up on screen, we spend about $800 billion for our defense budget, $732, but it's probably more than that.
And that is more than Brazil, South Korea, Japan, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Saudi Arabia, Russia, India, and China combined.
I mean, Colonel, I refuse to believe that we need an $800 billion spend every single year.
And somehow Lindsey Graham is able to convince people that our munition stockpiles are being depleted.
What is the truth?
Well, he's right.
But the reason our stockpiles are depleted is that for a very long time, we haven't had to prepare for a real war.
Everyone forgets that the opponents that we face since 2001 have all been weak.
Haven't had any armies or air forces or navies or real capability at all.
You're facing people with AK-47s and automated mines and so forth.
In other words, there's nothing organized out there to fight.
Now, we've depleted what stocks we had because we've shipped them over to Europe for use by the Ukrainians.
And we've rapidly run out because we were never prepared to begin with to fight a real war.
Remember, the whole defense budget is predicated on the notion that somehow or another, there's no one in the world that can challenge us, that we're the best, we're the toughest.
And by the way, we are going to spend lavishly on all sorts of wonder weapons, miracle weapons that will do wonderful things against any enemy.
All of that is nonsense, but it puts a lot of money into people's pockets on the hill.
Remember, you support the defense industries.
Their lobbyists are going to reward you.
Your political action committees that support you for re-election, they're going to have millions of dollars at their disposal.
And there are also foreign lobbies involved in this because there are foreign lobbies that don't want you to leave the area because they're interested in leveraging us for their own strategic purposes.
It's the old tail wags the dog problem.
We've got that problem all over the world right now.
Can you give some examples of some re, I mean, Ukraine and Russia is an obvious one, but we showed the picture of how many military bases we have.
These are military.
These are not embassies.
These are military bases.
I mean, for example, we have 25,000 troops in South Korea.
Okay, you might be able to make an argument, but the troops in Peru or the troops in Africa, and we have them scattered all across the country, across the planet, I should say.
And Republicans, Colonel, enter into these negotiations with zero willingness to consider any sort of cuts or any sort of adjustments.
Colonel, how do you think these negotiations should have been handled from just a leadership standpoint?
Well, let me give you two quick answers.
The first thing, you mentioned South Korea.
In the 1990s, after Desert Storm, people went back and looked at our war plans for the Korean Peninsula.
It was very clear that in the event of an attack, even though then it was very unlikely, all of the aid and assistance that we would provide to the Koreans would come largely from the Navy and the Air Force.
And so the question was, well, why are we going to use the Army then?
The Army was not terribly interested in Korea.
They had bigger fish to fry at the time, they thought, in the Middle East and elsewhere.
Finally, Colin Powell interrupted and said, well, we'll maintain a little army force there to maintain a foothold, and then we'll make the reinforcement for Korea the Marine Corps' mission, because nobody could find anything for the Marine Corps to do, which, by the way, is a problem right now.
So these are not new issues.
And the generals are always trying to find workarounds to satisfy both themselves and congressional interests to keep the money flowing.
So that's the first part of the question that needs to be answered.
Second is McCarthy and the so-called Republicans should have stood their ground.
They should say, fine, we're not going to vote for it.
They should have stonewalled.
And when everybody says, well, you know, if you do that, we might default.
Well, I've got news for everybody.
That's going to happen eventually anyway.
We cannot service a $31, $32, $33 trillion debt.
It can't be done over the long haul.
We might as well act now, make the hard cuts, make the hard decision, because postponing it means that there'll probably be an attempt to try and inflate our way out, which I don't think is going to work.
It could easily ruin and destroy our currency completely, which is already a threat.
And then we're in a far worse crisis than anything we face today.
Today, we could make prudent changes.
No one wants to do it.
No one wants the pain.
The American people don't want the pain.
And so their representatives say, look, I can't do that.
I'm going to make all my supporters unhappy.
It's remarkable.
And our audience is not having it.
I mean, regular, ordinary grassroots folks, they see it.
Admiral Mullen, who I've mixed opinions about 10 years ago, was correct.
He said the greatest national security risk is the national debt.
He said, and that was when the national debt was $10 or $11 trillion.
It is now triple that.
I mean, you can only imagine, not to mention the unfunded liabilities, the pension obligations, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security.
You can't touch the defense budget.
Boy, if you wanted to destroy the country, if you wanted to see America fall, this is what you would do.
You would turn on the guzzle of cheap money and erode the currency.
Welcome back, everybody.
Colonel Douglas McGregor is with us.
Colonel, I'd like to have you elaborate a little bit more on how the national debt is a serious threat to our national security, more so than Vladimir Putin.
I mean, I don't think Putin's much of a threat to America at all.
But the consensus in D.C. is Putin is far more of a threat than the lack of spending discipline, your reaction.
Well, if you have been spending recklessly for decades, you'll use whatever you can find to justify its continuation.
That's the sad truth right now.
That's why it was so important for the so-called Republicans to stand their ground and say, come what may, this is not going to go any further.
We're going to stop it.
Unfortunately, they let everybody down.
I think that the debt has always been threatening because it threatened to reduce the influx of dollars to defense.
And that's very true.
But it only works.
And it's only a threat if the people in charge will behave prudently.
And they're not going to behave prudently.
They're going to push us over the abyss.
I'm afraid that we're going to live in an environment very shortly that is close to 1929, 30, and 31, an environment we helped to create.
Right now in St. Petersburg, Russia, there is a plan to bring together 84 countries.
That's right.
All of whom want to adopt gold as the standard for currency.
They want to set up a new currency.
And Russia, China, and India, who quite frankly at this point control most of the world's gold, are leading the charge, and they're all going to join them because they want to get out from under us.
We're bankrupting everybody else.
When you spend dollars and you give other people your dollar, you're passing on our debt.
And they don't want to deal with it anymore.
If 84 countries come to an agreement on gold, and let's just say there's still a lot of steps in the middle, and they say, hey, we no longer want the dollar to be the world reserve currency.
Guess where those dollars go?
They immediately get set back to the United States.
You will have 20 to 30% inflation.
Is that correct, Colonel?
Oh, I think so.
And you're going to watch everybody dump the U.S. treasuries.
Bingo.
That's the fire sale that we should all be concerned about.
When the treasuries are sold off overseas, that's the beginning of the end for our financial domination.
And frankly, it probably should end at this point because we've bullied the Dickens out of the whole world for years.
Do what we say, or we're going to harm you.
We're going to sanction you.
We've got 35 countries under sanctions right now.
It's lunacy.
Ukraine War Diverts Focus 00:02:36
And I don't want to over-exaggerate, but the involvement of the war in eastern Ukraine seems to be the centerpiece that is putting this cause set in motion, right?
It's almost the cause set in motion is we involve ourselves in eastern Ukraine around a NATO project that then destabilizes the dollar that could create a retreat from our ability to have world reserve currency status.
Now, Colonel, this might be a bridge too far and feel free to disagree, but today's the first day of Pride Month.
And NATO and the military are embracing this, you know, with evangelistic zeal.
In fact, part of the mantra as to why NATO says we must defeat Putin is that we in the West embrace outward celebration of LGBTQIA plus values and Putin does not.
Is it fair to say that part of this war in eastern Ukraine is a proxy war over social values?
Well, I don't think there's any doubt about that.
But let's just remember something that Americans easily forget.
The United States military establishment exists for one reason, and that is to kill the enemies of the American people, to defend this country.
That's why we have it.
It is not there to spread equity, diversity, inclusiveness.
It's not there to establish equality all over the world.
It's not there to establish democracy, which quite frankly increasingly looks like a joke here at home to other countries.
Why don't we bring some democracy here?
Yeah, of course.
Well, good luck.
Not indicting former presidents, for example.
Well, yeah, but look, what are we going to do in future elections when everybody's filling out a ballot 16 times over and stuffing it into boxes?
I mean, how do you have free and fair elections when there's no election integrity?
This is the big issue.
So all the focus overseas diverts us, obviously.
But there's one other aspect of this thing.
There are people in Eastern Europe, like the Poles, for instance, who are very interested in leveraging our power to fight their old enemy, Russia.
The question I have is, why should we be interested?
Bingo.
Russia presents no threat to us.
Russia is a Russian Orthodox Christian country with a national identity and history.
It has nothing to do with why we should be there right now.
Colonel Douglas McGregor, with an incredibly clear and powerful analysis.
I wish we had more time.
By the way, there's a clip I wish we could play.
Senator Graham is saying that he's upset that this bill does not include more money for Zelensky.
You can't make this stuff up.
Colonel, we're out of time.
Why Russia Isn't a Threat 00:00:20
Thank you so much.
Very, very powerful interview.
Thank you.
Thank you, Charlie.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email us 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 dot com.
Export Selection