All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
June 1, 2023 - The Charlie Kirk Show
32:24
Eat Less Chikin? with Citizen Kane and Rep. Dan Bishop
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Bishop Opposes Debt Ceiling Bill 00:15:02
Hey, everybody.
Today at the Charlie Kirk Show, Citizen Kane joins us to talk debt ceiling and corporate boycotts.
And also, Congressman Dan Bishop joins the program to voice his opposition to the debt ceiling bill.
As always, you can email us your thoughts, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Get involved with TurningPointUSA at tpusa.com.
That is tpusa.com.
Start a high school or college chapter today or come to our event in Dallas, Texas.
That is tpusa.com/slash ywls.
That is tpusa.com/slash ywls.
Buckle up, everybody.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country.
He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandTodd.com.
Welcome back, everybody.
Email us freedom at charliekirk.com.
Receiving lots of emails on the Chick-fil-A thing.
We have Congressman Dan Bishop in just a second.
There was one other point I wanted to reemphasize.
We're going to do a series of podcasts explaining the treachery of DEI.
Diversity, equity, inclusion is a Marxist project.
It comes from Marxist power dynamics.
You do not have to apologize for the color of your skin.
Dividing people based on the color of their skin, like black-only dormitories or black-only graduation ceremonies, is abhorrent and it's wrong.
One of our team members wrote this in the chat.
He said, if you want to wash somebody's feet or shine their shoes, that's good Christian behavior.
But to do it because of a race or a tribe or a sect or immutable characteristics, acting as a representative of your own race because of melanin content, it's abhorrent and it's against the truth of the gospel.
So make your own decisions with Chick-fil-A.
I personally, some people say, oh, Charlie, you're being unfair.
It's too harsh.
I hold organizations, companies that purport to be on our side to a higher standard than Whole Foods or even Target.
If you have earned the trust of the public by being a Christian conservative company, then I'm going to hold you to a higher standard than Starbucks.
Be clear about your values, and having a DEI director or mission statement, I think, is inconsistent.
Congressman Dan Bishop, you're from the South, Congressman, really quick.
What's your thoughts on the Chick-fil-A situation?
I totally agree with what you said, and I think the principle you just outlined probably has some applicability to the subject we're going to discuss.
Perfect.
But you're absolutely right.
We cannot change or depart.
In fact, that's where we've got to certainly stand up for the principle and the truth where the abhorrent conduct comes from a putative ally, someone we've relied on.
It's very disappointing, but you cannot make it better by papering it over and letting it roll.
Ride that segue.
Connect it straight to the topic we're here to talk about.
So we're talking about the debt ceiling bill that is on the floor today.
And I've been very outfront and very critical of it and done everything I could to bring condemnation down upon it because it violates every principle that we should stand for.
The biggest problem, frankly, is that it has been advocated for and sold by untruths across the board, cosmetic provisions contained therein sold as being good gets for the Republicans that are fake.
And then worst of, you know, as bad, but then gets to be a detail of the bill.
Very, very important one, biggest one of all is instead of where you had Republicans come together with 218 votes, they said we couldn't do that, pass a bill on the floor.
I'm not saying that had to be the bill, but you got all these conservatives to agree in response to significant cuts, changing the direction of government, we would agree to put our, you know, cast a vote in favor of letting the debt ceiling rise another trillion and a half.
Kevin McCarthy in the conference last night said it was his call to take that out another year with an unlimited amount over that two-year period, probably going to be $4 trillion, maybe more, $5 or $6 trillion of additional debt on our children and grandchildren.
And he said he made that.
I mean, I was, that one just sort of left me speechless in conference last night.
He said he made that call because he thought that Biden would be more aggressive with demands for tax increases and other liberal crazy ideas if they had another negotiation next year as we otherwise had anticipated.
I still don't know what to make of that, except that it's just, I can't believe it.
So, Congressman, look, we're reading the bill and the legislative details.
It takes a lot of time.
And so I want you to address some of the talking points that are being disseminated by House leadership, right?
They say that it defunds the IRS through a billion dollars and deprives them of it this year.
And I know that there's huge disagreement there.
They say this is a $2 trillion cut.
So what are we missing here?
Because you got Thomas Massey, who I really love, and Marjorie Taylor Greene and Jim Jordan.
And again, we're here.
There's some things that I will fully acknowledge I'm an expert on.
There's some things I'm not an expert on.
And so I just see two different universes playing out here.
So what is the truth?
And help me understand why there's almost these completely opposite narratives stemming from the House conference on this bill.
And I'm going to do it the best I can understand it, Charlie, because it left me, but I'm going to be specific and let me take one at a time.
And let me begin it before I do it, link it back to what you just said about the Chick-fil-A situation.
If we incinerate our credibility as Republicans by our leadership coming out and no two ways about it, lying about provisions that are in there that aren't, how can you expect people out there, you represent, you have viewers and people who look to you for information.
If you can't discern it, and I can't discern, well, I can discern it because I've read the bill.
But, you know, what are we to make?
What are our supporters supposed to make of that?
Take the IRS thing.
They said, Kevin said when he entered the same, he said, we're taking a billion nine from the IRS, and that nixes their staffing activity for fiscal year 2023 in terms of adding new agents.
Remember, you have to know that they got an $80 billion appropriation.
It lasts through 2031.
They can spend it anytime they want to.
But what we were told was they had countered that for at least the year fiscal year 2023.
Kevin said, and we didn't get it all.
We couldn't get it all, but we can fight again next year on next year's.
Well, Charlie, that's just not true.
There's one paragraph in the bill that addresses this.
The figure is not $1.9 billion.
It's $1.4, but that's kind of just, frankly, a minor point, if you think $500 million.
So they only took $1.4 billion out of the entire appropriation of $80 billion, leaving $78.6 billion.
There's nothing else in the language that says they can't hire more IRS agents in fiscal year 2023.
Now, Garrett Graves, McCarthy's negotiator from the podium in conference last night, said, I can tell you they haven't started hiring people.
They're not going to hire people.
It's not in the language of the bill.
So the question then is begged, is this a handshake deal with the Biden administration?
Is that what we're doing?
How could that so and those things are repeated over and over?
Whatever we said about, I think the CBO first said $2.1 trillion in savings, then they got $1.3 trillion when they looked at it again.
But those savings numbers that are big, they're predicated on not legislative caps, legislative caps for two years, but then four more years of unenforceable targets.
And understand the legislative caps, we've done this before.
They were blown by agreement of Congress, because one Congress can't bind a future Congress.
They were dispensed with in years 2011 through 2021, every fiscal year except for one.
So to go sell that and say we really have turned the corner and we're going to have real cuts in government.
And if I go, you don't have enough time for me to do it because term after term after term, it is exactly the same.
Not one thing in there, with the possible exception of permitting improvements, which I can't speak to in great detail.
There's not one other thing in there that is true to what's been represented that we get.
I mean, I'm getting so many text messages and phone calls from a lot of different people and lawmakers, and I just listen, right?
Because you have to know, you know, you have to know what you know and keep the main thing the main thing.
Here's what I do know, the debt is an existential crisis to our country.
The amount we're spending is reckless.
The fiscal discipline has been completely thrown out the window.
I do know for a fact that Warhawks and the Senate especially got in the way of us making any changes to the defense budget, which I think was a major mistake and a missed opportunity.
And so I want to talk about what is the legislative future here.
And if you believe this is one of the defining votes, Steve Bannon believes that this will go down in the memory of kind of conservative lore as an Obamacare vote.
That could be true, or it could just be another one of these votes where we say, what was that, the Omna What bill of 2018?
So I want to ask you about it, or is it just going to be another vote where people roll their eyes and cynicism increases?
Here's my macro concern based on the emails I'm receiving.
I'm afraid this is going to deteriorate base turnout, volunteerism, and activism.
Congressman Bishop, there were some rumors going online.
I just want to hear from you.
Motion to vacate the chair.
Is that something you're prepared to proceed with?
What I said is it is inescapable to me that there must be a motion to vacate the chair.
And that's what I said.
I don't do that out of impulse, would never do it by myself and not do it to express some anger or something.
You see those kinds of moves up here are really genuinely dumb.
But what it does say is this is a fundamental breach of the agreement that we reached in January that has been successful in unifying the Republican Party.
That's the worst thing of all about this whole situation is that the Speaker decided to go in and blow up the unity of the Republican Conference.
It was unnecessary, or at least at that point it was unnecessary.
All avenues had not been exhausted.
And to the point that I made earlier, truth is essential.
You asked the question before the break.
Do we see the affinity for the Republican Party of Republican voters more challenge to disintegrate to nothing?
That is the challenge.
That's the issue.
Congressman, I've received 5,000 emails, and there is certainly a perception that there's a disconnect between the spending discipline that people are now exercising.
They're taking, let's just say, shorter road trips, less vacations.
They are shrinking their family budgets right now.
That is the attitude amongst moderate, ordinary, conservative America.
I know you see that in North Carolina right now.
And I think what they want is a parallel attitude in their government.
The last thing that they want to see is people telling us how great we're moving in a certain direction while we are simultaneously locking in the higher-level post-COVID bureaucracy by the woke and weaponized bureaucracy.
That spending continuing a pace, and someone to say this is the best thing that's happened is historic.
No, what's historic is that, you know, in the New Deal, we had the massive increase in government.
We've seen another massive increase coming out of COVID, and this locks it in.
And so I do, you asked the question, what Steve Bannon said.
I definitely believe this is a defining vote, but obviously, you know, I want to say that I'm in the middle of all this up here, and it often things look that way, and you judge them differently as time passes.
But given the things that I've articulated, and everybody will get mad at me for saying them, and they circle the wagons tighter and insist they're going to vote for the thing more.
That's a reflex up here.
But nobody can refute me point for point.
Speaker Gingrich tried it on Fox or on Hannity radio and then TV last night.
The emperor has no clothes on this bill.
Just one, I'm sorry to interrupt, Congressman.
We're short on time.
And this is where I'm, Speaker Gingrich, who I really respect, says this is a massive win.
And so I feel as if, you know, we have Neptune and Saturn here, and there's a lot of difference between the two of different universes that are going on.
So just closing argument for the audience, because Wall Street Journal is coming out in favor of this.
New York Post is coming out in favor of this.
So just, I'm sure it must animate you and frustrate you, right?
And again, our position on this program is keep the main thing, the main thing, know what you know, and then listen to the experts.
Congressman, final thoughts, 30 seconds remaining.
Giving you, and two quick examples.
They say we got work requirements and food stamps and TANF.
The CDO said last night, no, we're going to spend more because we created new three new exemptions to the work requirements that will overwhelm everything.
That's false.
We said that there's a new administrative pay code that's going to restrict the regulatory advance, but the Biden administration can waive it, and they said you can't challenge it in court.
Everything in there is a falsehood.
That is a tremendous, we are incinerating our own credibility.
That is the last thing that we can afford to do.
Congressman Dan Bishop, thank you so much.
The vote is scheduled tonight at 8 p.m. Eastern.
We will be watching with great curiosity.
Congressman, thank you so much.
Appreciate it.
Hey, everybody.
Look, if you're pro-life, listen carefully.
It's important to advocate for pro-life laws.
I'm all in favor of that.
Pro-life legislation, supporting pro-life candidates.
But you have to simultaneously do the other thing.
I believe you actually have an obligation, which is to support women in need and babies in need that are at risk of being aborted.
Investing in Pro-Life Advocacy 00:11:31
Look, when you introduce a girl to her baby by providing an ultrasound, you're giving her the truth at the most critical and important time in her life.
85% of the time when they actually see the baby, they choose life.
Now, mind you, pre-born provides resources.
They provide diapers, baby clothes.
And I encourage you, if you're pro-life, to pray about this, are you giving money to actually support the unborn if you are voting for pro-life?
Look, $140 gives five mothers a free ultrasound and saves babies.
$280 can save 10 babies, and just $28 a month can save a baby a month for less than a dollar a day.
I'm a donor to this organization, and you should be too.
A $15,000 gift will provide an ultrasound machine that will save lives for years to come.
Whether you want to save one baby or five or hundreds, this opportunity is just a phone call or click away.
I think the world of pre-born, I give money financially.
And every one of you that are pro-life, I believe you have a duty and an obligation to go to preborn.org/slash Kirk and give as you can.
Give your best gift or call 833-850-2229.
That is 833-850 baby.
Go to preborn.org/slash Kirk.
That is preborn.org/slash Kirk.
Okay.
Joining us now is Citizen Kane.
Do we have Citizen Kane?
The man, the myth, the legend.
Now, Citizen Kane, I would put you on the spot.
Coffee with cream or no cream?
What do you say?
All right.
So I quit coffee 30 years ago when I was working for Alex Brown and sons in Baltimore, but heavy cream and heavy sugar.
That's the right answer.
You haven't had a cup of coffee in 30 years?
I've had a 14-hour drive to a Minnesota wedding.
I think I may have sucked down a few coffees, but probably, you know, whatever.
I get my caffeine from tea.
No, no, that's very smart.
No, that's what I should do.
All right.
So, Kane, I'm looking at the stack, Citizen Kane, citizenfreepress.com.
I love the stack.
It is the new Drudge.
By the way, Drudge has just been attacking us like crazy.
Do you have any top-line thoughts on that, Kane?
By the way, Drudge has been obsessed with me the last couple of days in Turning Point USA.
Is there a reason for that, you think?
You're a threat.
You know, I noticed it.
The first one was seven days ago or so, and it was Drudge twisting a headline when you talked about people boycotting Target with force.
I think you talked about financial force.
Drudge left the word financial out of his headline, but he had a nice photo of you.
And the Mediaite story, you know, the word financial was in the Mediate story, but they went along with Drudge's game.
And then, and then two or three days later, you know, a similar thing happened.
So obviously, you know, Drudge reads Citizen Free Press.
He gets headlines, he gets stories, substacks, certain things that I post that he wouldn't see anywhere else.
And he also was including us in his traffic chart back when he was doing them.
So I know he reads the site.
So he sees your show on live every day.
So, you know, I feel like that's one of the things that CP, you know, that Citizen Free Press does secretly is bring things to the attention of Matt Drudge.
That is, that's an accurate hypothesis.
Turning point is really becoming a big player in this space.
All right.
So, Kane, I really want to talk here because you have a stack on all this.
What is CFP Nation, the grassroots, the MAGA base, saying about the debt ceiling debate and the looming debt ceiling bill tonight at 8 p.m. Eastern?
They're livid.
They're furious.
You know, I'll add really quickly: I've got a link up to the running United States debt clock.
So every 24 seconds, we're adding a million dollars to the national debt.
So in this 10 or 15-minute discussion, you and I will have, that's going to be 25 or 30 million.
And that's, you know, I say that because that is why people are livid.
You know, as you know, your audience, my audience, they're super clued in.
They're super intelligent.
They know.
They're an absorbable amount of wisdom.
I got to tell you.
I mean, the wisdom in our audience, keep going, Kane.
These are better read than people that do this for a living.
Yeah, well, what it is is they've discovered us, right?
They found CFP.
They found Charlie Kirk.
They found War Room because these are the shows that are getting into it every single day.
And that's the audience we both had.
So I've got, so my audience knows everything that's going on.
They know the full list of who's going to vote no.
They realize that it passed 7.6 last night out of the rules committee.
They're upset with Massey.
They're upset with, you know, they're upset with a lot of people.
But to answer your question, they are livid.
They're furious because to them, it's about the debt.
And anytime you discuss spending cuts, when we know that these spending cuts are actually just reductions in future growth, right?
Nothing is really a spending cut.
And I pulled up on Wikipedia because this reminded me of what happened in 2008 when we had the bailout.
The budget in 2008 was about 2.8 or 2.9 trillion.
We had the $700 billion bank bailout, right?
So we jumped to 3.5 and 3.6.
And the same thing happened as it's happening now, meaning they decided, okay, that's the new baseline.
So 3.6 trillion was the new baseline starting in 2009, even though that was a one-year 25% jump in the federal budget.
And the same thing has happened here.
So you wouldn't believe if you pull up the budget on Wikipedia, in 2016, the federal budget was $4 trillion.
It was $4.2 trillion the next year under Trump, $4.1 trillion, then $4.4.
Then in 2020, because of COVID, it jumped to 6.5 trillion.
So that is essentially, you know, that's what Chip Roy is screaming about.
That's what we're pissed off about.
How did the federal budget suddenly grow 50%?
And that is the new baseline.
So, Kane, here's an element I want to explore with you, which I'm constantly trying to push back against: cynicism and disengagement, cynicism and disengagement.
And I think you agree, Kane.
We cannot stop getting involved, engaged, activism, voting, regardless of some of the disagreements or disappointments.
Kane, are you seeing that in the grassroots?
Are you seeing chatter of, I'm no longer going to be involved?
I'm no longer going to be engaged.
I'm not going to donate.
What's the point in voting?
I'm starting to see that bubble up, Kane, and it's starting to really concern me on a serious and material level.
Yeah, you asked me a really good question several appearances ago, asking if it was 10%, if it was 20% of the base.
There's, you know, there's no doubt people are angry.
They feel they feel abandoned, and they, and a certain element, a certain part of this group doesn't want to participate.
But that's why it's, you know, that's our role.
That's Bannon's role, your role, my role.
We got to keep, we got to keep people looking forward and focusing on, you know, if we don't want something like this to happen again, let's have all three, you know, let's control all three chambers.
Let's have the House, the Senate, and the presidency.
So, so, yes, people are disillusioned.
It's going to be an issue for us, but we just have to stay positive.
That's how I look at it.
So, let's just start to acknowledge that this thing's probably going to pass.
Is that correct, Kane?
It looks like that.
So, and we just got an email right here: Charlie, I've never been so demoralized.
I knocked on thousands of doors.
I donated the most money I could.
I prayed and I fasted.
And I feel like we're always just slipping through the cracks.
So, Kane, then how is the proper way to respond?
The proper way to respond, it's how I look at life, man.
You feel sorry for yourself for an hour and then you get yourself off the mat and figure out how you can solve this.
And we've discussed it.
I linked to a tweet of yours.
It was actually someone commenting on a tweet of yours, but it's about the ground operation for 2024.
For me, that's immediately where my mind goes.
Okay, how do we win?
You know, the next elections are 2024.
So, how do we win those?
And we went up through ballot harvesting and doing all of the things that the Democrats have done and doing things that Harmit Dylan did very successfully in California in the last two cycles.
So, whatever, I'm an optimist.
So, I always jump to what we can do to win.
We have to always go towards our agency, our ability to change things.
Kane, are you?
I mean, we're doing what we can at turning point action.
We are going to really come with a public rollout, articulating our ballot chasing.
We're going to do what we can do.
My question, though, Kane, is: are you seeing the RNC or other groups start to invest in that?
Because here's my concern, Kane.
We've talked about it before.
Now, DeSantis is in, Tim Scott is in.
This is going to be a $1 billion primary, almost guaranteed.
A $1 billion primary.
Are we even spending a fraction on that on margin-determinative infrastructure?
Yeah, think about it.
Add the Zuckerbucks and all the other left-wing grassroots initiatives from the last election, and it's probably less than a billion dollars.
So, and we both know that's how they won, right?
In those swing states, those grassroots operations were how they won.
So, what is the RNC doing?
Well, as I said last time I was on your show, their big creation is a fact-checking website for Joe Biden.
So, I think the RNC is a joke.
Your plan, you know, it's ambitious.
It's $100 million.
I know you guys are going to be rolling it out, you know, in a much bigger way this summer and this fall.
But this is where the money has to go.
We need organizations with boots on the ground in about 80 counties, right?
Three or four swing states, 80 counties, and we can win this thing.
And 100 million is, you know, to the many Republican, conservative billionaires out there, not mentioning you, Bernie Marcus, but to the many billionaires out there, you know, this is, you want to save the country for your grandchildren?
This is the best investment you can make.
And it is going, you're chasing ballots, doing the early voting thing.
You think about it, we're falling short.
I use this language.
I'm very specific with my vocabulary.
We are falling short: 8,000 ballots, 10,000 ballots, 12,000 ballots.
And we are doing zero early voting.
We're doing zero.
Imagine what we could do in Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin with even a little bit of this investment.
We need 1,000 Scott Presslers.
Let me say it again.
We need 1,000 Scott Presslers.
I want the money to be spent on Scott Presslers, not Ron DeSantis versus Donald Trump television advertisements.
1,000 Scott Presslers.
We're going to waste $1 billion on a primary where $100 million, $50 million, whatever could make the difference.
Hey, everybody, making the commitment to yourself to lose weight is very hard, but doing it alone is even harder.
Did you know that 95% of diets fail?
The number one reason is because they lack support.
I was very lucky when I started my trek towards a healthier life.
I found PhD weight loss and nutrition.
I've lost 17 pounds so far.
No joke.
It's a real thing.
The program is legit.
It's simple.
They tell you when to eat, what's eaten, and they have a coach.
Losing Weight Without Support 00:05:49
The coach is firm, but fair, compassionate, and caring, but she holds me accountable.
She pushes me to new lifestyle changes, challenges me when I need to be challenged.
Here's the thing: PhD weight loss and nutrition has an 85% success rate at getting the weight off.
They have some pretty unique ideas, I'm not going to lie, and they've been very effective to me.
So if you're looking to lose weight and make a change, which is good for your overall health, call 864-644-1900 to get started today.
Go to myphdweightloss.com, make your consultation today and take the first step through your better health.
The phone number is 864-644-1900 or myphdweightloss.com.
So, Kane, I have a theory.
I have a hypothesis that our base feels so betrayed by their leaders and by the uniparty that they're understandably now looking for places where they can feel that they're making a difference, that they're exercising a check-in balance.
For example, Target, Bud Light, what's going on right now with Chick-fil-A?
Are you seeing that right now in your comments, Kane?
Are you seeing that with your audience?
A kind of out of nowhere desire to all of a sudden hold bad companies accountable and reward good ones?
Yes, and success breeds success.
You know, this is the Bud Light thing was the first time we really, you know, had some, well, the first time we had success sort of in the boycott arena.
And Target has followed right on the heels.
And, you know, they're in full retreat.
I've been linking to stuff showing that they're removing these homosexual-friendly displays, transgender-friendly displays from stores, not just in the South now.
And the stock price, right?
It's at a 52-week low.
So it's an area we're winning.
And just look at right now on Drudge, which I'm sure you've seen.
He's his lead headline or lead story.
It's five headlines talking about how gay activists are having to, you know, sort of go back to the books and figure out a new way because they're losing these corporate battles.
And so, yeah, it's nice to get a win there.
And, you know, I think we'll keep it up.
I don't see anything.
You know, look, again, once you get a taste of success and you get sites like mine talking every week, you know, Bud Light sales were down 30% this week.
And just so people understand that, when they keep seeing those figures, 24, 26, 30, what it is is these are every week you're getting a year-over-year comparison.
So when I put up the headline yesterday, down 30%, that is versus sales a year ago.
And the last part of this that a beer distributor on my site added is a lot of these sales for Bud Light are booked automatically to stadiums, to events.
And so the real number for actual, you know, can sales and bottle sales is likely much worse than down 30%.
And before I throw it back to you, I missed, I wanted to comment in your last section.
You made such a great point about let's waste a million, you know, a billion dollars on stupid television ads where Republicans and really fringe Republicans are attacking each other.
Let's let's save $100 billion to actually win.
So Larry Ellison, you know, let's mention him really quickly.
He's going to give $60 million to Tim Scott.
Tim Scott is a great individual.
I love the guy.
I think he's a great representative for our party, but he's never going to, he's not going to win.
And that's $60 million wasted.
So that's 30, you know, Ellison should at least cut his ego in half and cut that donation in half and send the other 30 million to TPUSA's effort to, you know, ground harvest.
So I'll throw it back there.
I just wanted to add that.
Well, I appreciate that.
And anybody who wants to support our effort, we love it.
I want to get your thoughts here, Kane.
A little bit of a curveball, but you can handle it.
We're getting some chatter in our emails about Donald Trump attacking Kaylee McEnaney.
I personally am perplexed by this.
Is this going to hurt him?
What's your take on this, Kane?
People reacted immediately.
It was the number one trending item on Twitter last night.
Yeah, I mean, especially, you know, CFB has a big female readership, and these are people who love Trump.
And they weren't happy about it.
I mean, it sounds like she just misread the teleprompter and stated that Trump was leading by 25 points over DeSantis instead of 32 points or 34.
And yeah, it seems whatever.
I try to ignore things.
I mean, I posted the links.
I want people to know what happened.
But personally, I try to ignore that stuff because it bothers me.
I just think it's dumb.
I think it's an unforced error.
Kaylee supported Trump in 2016 when no one else did.
She stuck her neck out for him.
And I believe in loyalty.
And I know Trump does too.
And that's why he, you know, he reacted this way, because he feels like she's disloyal because she has dared to say that she also likes Governor DeSantis.
And I think we have to get over that binary, you know, thing that you can't like Trump and that you can't like DeSantis.
So, yeah, I don't know how much time we have, but I'll wrap it up.
Yeah, I think it was an unforced error.
I don't think it's going to win him any votes.
Who's going to be like, oh, yeah, Trump is attacking Kayla?
You know, it's not going to help him.
It's not going to help him.
Kane from Citizen Free Press.
You do a terrific job.
Please come back.
Our teams will work on it next week.
You have your finger on the pulse.
Unlike anybody else.
I enjoyed it, Charlie.
I enjoy it.
I always do.
You do a great job.
And thank you for always having our back.
Thank you.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email us 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