All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 13, 2024 - The Charlie Kirk Show
35:13
Will ABC Be Held Responsible? ft. Libby Emmons
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right everybody, welcome to the Charlie Kirk show.
Andrew Colvett here filling in for the one and only Charlie Kirk.
I'm joined by the great Libby Emmons, editor-in-chief of the Postmillennial and Human Events.
We go through a fact check.
We break down the debate and the new accusations from Mark Penn that ABC did something untoward and needs to be investigated.
We have all the details, and by the way, Libby thinks that Kamala's a bully, and she can say it.
She's a woman.
I can't say it, but she can.
She breaks down her analysis right here.
If this enriches your life in some way, please consider becoming a member at members.charliekirk.com.
That's members.charliekirk.com.
We give you a whole bunch of exclusive content.
And more than that, you help us keep the lights on and remain strong, proud, and resilient in the face of boycotts, censorship, people trying to cancel this show.
You guys mean the world to us.
That's members.charliekirk.com.
Buckle up.
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.
Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of The Charlie Kirk Show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals.
Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at noblegoldinvestments.com.
That is noblegoldinvestments.com.
It's where I buy all of my gold.
Go to noblegoldinvestments.com.
So much is going on this morning, and to help us navigate it, I just thought, you know, what the heck, let's bring Libby Evans in, Editor-in-Chief of the Postmillennial and also Editor-in-Chief of Human Events.
Libby, welcome to the show.
Thanks, Andrew.
Glad to be here.
Yeah, well, listen, I know I kind of put you on the spot this morning.
I said, Libby, We got lots to cover.
Let's do this together.
So you graciously popped on and got ready.
So thanks for being with us this morning.
Sure thing.
Never tell me a woman can't get ready fast.
So I want to start today.
I think I have 15.
So I want to start today.
There is a lot of controversy around still, in this post-debate fallout, it feels like the story is
actually gaining more traction right now.
Now, I want to address something that some of our audience has probably seen.
There's a post on TwitterX about somebody signing an affidavit alleging that ABC did all of these untoward things and that they had it pre-rigged, etc.
I acknowledge that that post exists.
It's unconfirmed at this point, okay?
We don't know what happened with ABC, if this was just the host expressing their bias in real time, or if this was a pre-planned setup rigging the debate.
That being said, We do have now Mark Penn, who was a former top Clinton advisor, who has gone on the record saying he wants an investigation because this was so overboard.
The fact-checking was so one-sided that something is untoward.
So Libby, I'm going to play this cut from Mark Penn.
I'm going to get your reaction on the other side.
Let's play cut 157.
When the refs put their finger on the scale, you've got to throw out the score of the game.
What would have happened in that debate had they challenged Harris and said, you know, that's not right what you said there about Charlottesville?
We don't know how she would have reacted.
And then Trump wouldn't have had to spend all his time on the debate.
I think they did a real disservice to the voters of America when they did that.
And they put in jeopardy the institutions of debate.
So this is not some anon account on social media.
This is a former Clinton advisor who's going on the record saying this was an egregious demonstration of media bias in real time on probably the most important stage in the country in the entire election.
Libby, give us your take as a journalist, as somebody who's watching this live.
Were you picking this up?
What was your analysis?
I do think that there was bias in the debate on behalf, um, by the moderators.
I think that was pretty clear the way that they fact checked Trump falsely and then did not fact check Kamala Harris, even as she spread rumor and gossip that has been debunked repeatedly, such as the lies about Charlottesville and the lies about Trump saying they're calling for a bloodbath after the election.
All of these things were false.
They have been provably false.
In the case of Charlottesville, that was debunked by Snopes.
And we all watched this debate.
We watched it being held on ABC.
We know that the head of ABC is actually one of Kamala Harris and Doug Emhoff's best friends.
This is a woman who actually introduced them on a date years ago that led to their marriage some 10 years ago.
It's a very good friend of the family.
We know that Lindsey Davis, one of the moderators, is a sorority sister in the same sorority where Kamala Harris is a sorority sister and she has spoken Kamala Harris at many of these sorority engagements including one recently where she decided not to attend the congressional address by Benjamin Netanyahu and then decided instead to hang out with her sorority sisters and give a speech to them.
So those are a couple of things that just off the top are already concerning Kamala Harris and her campaign have declined to Attend a debate hosted by Fox.
There was even one scheduled and we saw Donald Trump have a town hall during that event instead because Kamala Harris refused to show up.
Why is it that she feels entitled to not show up on a network where she thinks she might get some potentially difficult questions and she only will appear on ones where she's super tight with the people who are handling it?
We saw this with Dana Bash as well at CNN during the one interview.
And I think that it's also fair to say that we're going to get one interview and one debate, and that's it before the American people have to make a decision about who should lead the country.
Yeah, I mean, you mentioned Dana Walden.
This is basically Kamala's best friend.
We have a picture of Dana Walden.
Let's go ahead and throw that up.
Dana Walden, she runs ABC News.
And then we also have a picture of Dana Walden and Kamala Harris together in the next image.
Let's go ahead and float that over.
Yeah, so it is very telling, as you said, Libby, that this would be the one opportunity that we
get, the one interview, or rather the debate that she was willing to do with President Trump.
Now she's coming out saying she wants to do another. Trump has said he's not going to do it,
and the Harris campaign is turning this into a, look, we won, we beat him so bad,
he doesn't want to do this again. And Trump's saying, listen, we won that debate. Trump's
doing his spin, she's doing her spin. But it is interesting, and I covered this actually a couple
of days ago in the day after the debate, that the undecideds do seem to be going in Trump's direction.
A lot of the the analysis seems to be Kamala won the debate, but she was ineffective at convincing anybody that she should be president, which is a very interesting dynamic.
It really is.
And she certainly had some great vibe out there.
And we know that that is the key component of her campaign is the feels and the vibe and the euphoria.
She had some great little smirking smiles that she delivered.
And she very clearly seemed confident and on top of her game.
The only place where she really faltered was that she didn't have any actual answers to any of the questions that she was asked.
And this was sort of a problem if you were to, perhaps, read the transcript as opposed to listening to the debate itself.
The Kamala campaign, her and Tim Waltz and, you know, whoever else is actually pulling the strings there, they are really, really good at appearances.
She comes out wearing, you know, some Converse All-Stars.
She's got a great Tiffany necklace.
You know, she looks like she's having a lot of fun out there.
She's got some dance moves.
I don't think they're better than Trump's dance moves, however.
But this is what that campaign is all about.
And that's why when you have interviews, little man-on-the-street things, where somebody will walk up and say, hey, why do you support Kamala Harris?
There was one the other day, offhand, I don't remember who put it up on Twitter, but the interviewer says, why do you support Kamala Harris?
And the young lady says, you know, she mugs for the camera and then she says, because she's Brat.
And then she describes what Brat is, essentially a party girl who's having a great time.
And when asked about her policies, she cannot name a single one.
So even for the Euphoria fans who are out there vibing on Brat, they don't actually have any answers.
And they're not listening either to, you know, some of the communist proposals that have come across or noting where Kamala Harris has outright stolen some of Donald Trump's ideas.
These are big problems.
I would recommend to all listeners, That they should read what Kamala Harris says and not listen to what she says.
Go for the substance, and that's something we can find certainly in the written word if it's there at all.
Yeah, and I think you're spot on highlighting the lack of substance.
And actually, Turning Point has done some of these videos, these Man on the Street videos, and Charlie's debated people saying, why do you support Kamala?
But the lack of substance is a big issue.
But where we do have substance, and we can actually highlight this in the debate, is that Kamala was not fact-checked in real time. Trump was
fact-checked five times, often inaccurately, actually, when we dive into it, and Kamala
was fact-checked zero times.
And so this goes back to where we started. Mark Penn calling for an investigation of ABC News.
Charlie Kirk here.
Consider this.
Without God, can we ever have a free society?
And if religion is removed from Washington, who pays the ultimate price?
There's a new movie out called God's Not Dead, In God We Trust.
The story of a small-town pastor pushed into the political arena to run against a powerful regime, forcing faith and religion out of American politics.
There's no better time for this movie.
In today's divided culture, all of this upheaval and yearning for spiritual leadership is America's collective scream to keep God in the forefront.
God's Not Dead challenges mainstream liberals in the battle for spiritual leadership, hope, and faith in America.
Watch it with your family and friends.
And remember the words of Ronald Reagan, without God, democracy will not and cannot long endure.
Folks, we are one nation under God.
God's Not Dead challenges mainstream liberals in the battle for spiritual leadership and hope and faith in America.
Don't miss God's Not Dead in God We Trust, a Pinnacle Peak production in theaters September 12th.
He said, the baby will be born and we will decide what to do with the baby.
In other words, we'll execute the baby.
There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it's born.
In Springfield, they're eating the dogs, the people that came in.
They're eating the cats.
They're eating...
They're eating the pets of the people that live there.
I hear you bring up Springfield, Ohio, and ABC News did reach out to the city manager there.
He told us there had been no credible reports of specific claims of pets being harmed.
You repeatedly falsely claimed that you won, many times saying you won in a landslide.
Crime here is up and through the roof, despite their fraudulent statements that they made.
Crime in this country is through the roof.
President Trump, as you know, the FBI says overall violent crime is actually coming down in this country.
Excuse me, the FBI, they were defrauding statements.
They didn't include the worst cities.
They didn't include the cities with the worst crime.
Alright, just a little taste of ABC fact-checking Donald Trump in real time.
We have multiple examples of Kamala Harris getting away with whoppers and not getting challenged at all.
So, I'm going to play one of these examples.
Charlottesville.
Very fine people hoax.
It's been debunked multiple times.
You mentioned Snopes.
If you play the whole clip, it's very clear he's not saying that.
He says specifically, I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists.
But, you know, ABC couldn't be bothered.
Let's play 162.
Let's remember Charlottesville, where there was a mob of people carrying tiki torches, spewing anti-Semitic hate.
And what did the president then at the time say?
There were fine people on each side.
And you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were Very, very clear debunking right there from President Trump.
And yet, we didn't get to see anything from ABC in that way.
the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.
But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay?
Very, very clear debunking right there from President Trump and yet
we didn't get to see anything from ABC in that way. Libby, your reaction?
Yeah, I thought that that was particularly egregious, especially the Charlottesville thing
which has been debunked.
That Charlottesville event back in 2017, there was a horrible white supremacist thing going on, but the entire thing had begun because there were residents in Charlottesville who did not want Confederate statues to be torn down, and there were activists who were saying that those statues should be torn down.
And those are the fine people that Donald Trump was talking about.
The residents who did not want their city statues to be removed and the activists who wanted them to be removed.
Those were the very fine people.
The rest, as he said in detail, which you can go back and listen to those clips if you want to, are where he said, you know, the white supremacists were bad and the violent people on the left were bad.
Those are all bad people.
And I think that everyone can agree on that.
Anyone who's committing that kind of violence for ideological purposes, is not someone that you want to have on your team.
That's not a good person.
And that's what he was talking about there.
You have the abortion thing, which right after that happened, and he was, you know, fact checked on that.
Charlie Kirk actually posted a story that I think was from Axios talking about how there were there are eight states in the country that has absolutely no limits on abortion.
And we see that one of those I think is Minnesota.
And these are states where You can have abortion at any point during the pregnancy, and all you have to do is say that it's for the life of the mother, by which you mean mental health.
So this is something also that Chuck Schumer has proposed to be a federal abortion legalization law, and the caveat is that it says, yeah, for the life of the mother.
It's a genocide, Libby.
Yeah, exactly.
But that's what they talk about.
The way that they get it through is they say, you know, for the health of the mother, including mental health.
And so then you have this issue.
There was a story that Andy Noh reported on a couple of years ago, and I was talking to him about it during the debate when this all came up.
And there was an Antifa activist in Portland who bragged about having an abortion in the seventh month, which is just entirely unconscionable and is not something that anyone should consider even remotely.
Worthy of humanity to do something like that.
Yeah, well, it's even worse than that.
I mean, Tim Walz got rid of a reporting requirement when a baby survived an abortion, a botched abortion.
So you don't even need to report that now, according to Tim Walz, his own state, Minnesota.
And so, you know, all of these things are in the public domain and yet ABC couldn't be bothered.
But Libby, you've written a great piece for Human Events.
You're saying that we've all known a bully like Kamala Harris.
Explain what you mean.
Yeah, so Kamala Harris goes out there.
She gives a lot of vibe and energy like we were talking about before.
And for some of us, it really resembles those bullies that we had in middle school or high school.
For me, mostly it was middle school.
There were these horrible girls and they would walk around and they would laugh and they would look at you like you were beneath them and they would push past you in the hall and ignore you and cut in the lunch line.
Just these horrible girls.
And Kamala Harris seems just like that.
And so I tracked through that in my article this morning in my column.
Talking about the different ways that she and the way that she behaves resembles those bullies from my past.
Well, so Libby, this is a very interesting dynamic because we heard this with Hillary Clinton, that she was treated unfairly because she's a woman and she was either being too firm or not firm enough, and that women struggle to navigate this.
There's a bunch of this going around online.
Throw up 182.
This is a sort of a mashup of all the facial expressions of Kamala Harris during the debate, right?
So people are analyzing this.
Is this double standard that women, is the Is it unfair for women in politics?
And is Kamala Harris just falling victim to this unfair lens that we place upon women in politics?
I don't think we place very much unfair lens on women in politics anymore.
I just don't think that that's true.
For example, when we had, I think the first woman who ran for president was Shirley Chisholm.
I might be wrong about that, but I think that that's true.
And I think back then there were unfair comparisons made.
I think that, you know, women were probably belittled.
And I think that that's true.
And we have a lot of writers who can discuss that at length from the days of yore.
But I think that that has pretty much gone.
We now are seeing our second highly contendable presidential candidate who is female.
We had Hillary Clinton Now we have Kamala Harris.
I do think that the American people are perfectly capable of electing a woman for president if they think that she is the best person for the job.
I don't think that there's a lot of unfair stuff going on with women in politics right now.
I do think that, you know, there's differences between men and women.
I don't think there's anything wrong with those differences or with pointing them out.
I think women and men typically do have different leadership styles and that's okay.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
Either.
But no, I don't think that calling Kamala Harris a bully has anything to do with her being female any more than my writing about it has to do with my being female, which I don't think it really does.
To a certain extent, you know, both of us being women, we have some understanding about how girls' social groups work.
That has been well documented in cinema, which I point out in the story.
There's heathers, there's mean girls.
You know, I prefer heathers because Shannen Doherty was the ultimate Mean girl, no one can really top her.
You know, rest in peace, Miss Doherty.
But yeah, so I don't think it really has to do with her being female.
I think that she comes off as rude and entitled, and I don't know why anyone would want to have a person like that trying to lead us on the world stage.
Well, you know, what's also interesting is that she does have this baggage with her staff turnover, right?
Over 92% of her staff as VP has left, which is an extraordinarily high number.
And we also have heard rumors about the way when she was attorney general in California, how the staff had to walk by.
If they were of a certain level, they had to look at the ground, not make eye contact with her.
And, you know, they had to call her general, which is very interesting.
But there is this baggage.
in this history that she has.
And I think fundamentally, most people can see that, you know, Kamala Harris is actually
kind of an insecure human.
I think she understands that she doesn't originate, she doesn't have a lot of original thoughts,
original policies, she's sort of like a weather vane of the progressive far left.
You know, she sticks her finger up in the air and she says, you know, what idea or policy is in vogue
at any given moment, and then she goes with it.
And then when she realizes that becomes unpopular, she tries to pivot away and say she's just a pragmatist.
But her values somehow haven't changed, Libby Evans.
I wanna- Yeah, I think that's why-
No, I think that's wild how she says her values haven't changed.
When you have other politicians who say stuff like that, I think when Josh Shapiro was perhaps going to be her running mate, there was a lot made of a column that he wrote when he was in college.
That was college.
That was like a very long time ago.
Kamala Harris is trying to pivot away from positions she had You know, four years ago when she was first trying to gain the White House on her own merit and could not, she had 3% of the Democrat vote before she was ousted from that primary process altogether.
And it's no wonder that she couldn't even tolerate a primary process this time around.
One thing that I admire about president Trump that I think is a far cry from the way that Kamala Harris behaves is you get the sense.
And I think you see it when you see Trump in action, he treats everybody the same.
He has as much respect.
For the janitor, as he does for the Pope, and that's to say an immense amount of respect.
He treats everyone with kindness and dignity, and I personally have a lot of respect for that.
That's not something you see with Kamala Harris, who can't take a reporter's question, who acts like everyone is beneath her and her converse all-stars, which I point out in the piece, and that's what she's about.
She is an elitist person who believes she is better than everyone else, even as much as perhaps she is insecure, you know?
We certainly don't need a president with imposter syndrome.
Yeah, imposter syndrome is spot on.
That's a word I've used to describe her as well.
Alright, I need to tell you guys about StrongCell.
It's amazing.
With nearly a million units bought by you, it is more clear than ever that StrongCell works.
It works to combat fatigue, brain fog, joint pain, skin issues, and constant sickness.
I've been taking it personally for over a year now, and it's changed my life.
I take it in the morning with breakfast and it helps me with natural energy so I don't have that afternoon crash.
It gives me the clarity of mind to do all that I do every day, which is a lot.
If you're tired of feeling tired, struggling with memory, or constantly getting sick, then you have to give StrongCell a try.
I love this product because it has NAD.
By the way, fact check me on this.
Go do your own research on NADH, especially if it's mixed with CoQ10 and marine collagen.
StrongCell uses a proprietary delivery of NADH to make sure it goes straight to your cells to help your mitochondria.
And since there are cells in every area of your body, then healthier cells equals a healthier you.
The amount of people that use StrongCell now, thanks to us, is remarkable.
Over 1 million units sold.
Don't take my word for it.
Do your own research.
Check it out.
Fact check me.
Oh, Charlie's just selling me a product.
Okay.
Maybe you don't want more mental acuity.
People say, Charlie, how do you do what you do?
Maybe it's the NAD.
It's changed the lives of many Kirk listeners.
Visit strongcell.com forward slash charlie and use my discount code charlie to get 20% off your order.
This is an emerging body of work and science that is showing that NAD and NADH really might be what your body needs in this contaminated, polluted and poisoned world.
Again, that's StrongSell.com forward slash Charlie.
And don't forget to use special discount code Charlie at checkout to get a special 20% off just for Kirk listeners.
StrongSell.com forward slash Charlie.
Check it out right now.
Kamala can't really defend herself from stances she took just a few years ago.
This is a longer clip, but I think it's worth it for our audience.
This is Kamala Harris.
Versus Kamala Harris, 154.
Go ahead and play it.
Tim Walz and I are both gun owners.
We're not taking anybody's guns away.
So stop with the continuous lying about this stuff.
I support buybacks.
How mandatory is your gun buyback program?
It's mandatory.
I will not ban fracking.
I have not banned fracking as Vice President of the United States.
And in fact, I was the tie-breaking vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, which opened new leases for fracking.
Will you commit to implementing a federal ban on fracking your first day in office, adding the United States to the list of countries who have banned this devastating practice?
There's no question I'm in favor of banning fracking.
I absolutely support, and over the last four years as Vice President, private healthcare options.
You support the Medicare for All bill, I think initially co-sponsored by Senator Bernie Sanders.
You're also a co-sponsor on it.
I believe it will totally eliminate private insurance.
So for people out there who like their insurance, they don't get to keep it?
Well, listen, the idea is that everyone gets access to medical care.
And you don't have to go through the process of going through an insurance company, having them give you approval, going through the paperwork, all of the delay that may require.
Who of us has not had that situation where you've got to wait for approval and the doctor says, well, I don't know if your insurance company is going to cover this?
Let's eliminate all of that.
Let's move on.
The United States Congress, including some of the most conservative members of the United States Senate, came up with a border security bill, which I supported.
And that bill would have put 1,500 more border agents on the border to help those folks who are working there right now, over time, trying to do their jobs.
And I think there's no question that we've got to critically re-examine ICE and its role and the way that it is being administered and the work.
Kamala v. Kamala.
I know that was a long clip, Libby, but I think it's important for people to see how much of a flip-flopper, lack of moral core, lack of policy core, lack of vision, lack of value core.
She says her values haven't changed.
I think that the only reasonable take on that is that she doesn't actually know what she stands for herself.
Therefore, she could maybe make that And what is your warning to those watching?
You know, maybe her values haven't changed, Andrew.
Maybe her value is winning and the attainment of power.
And maybe that has not changed at all in the past five years.
And perhaps that's what she means when she says her values haven't changed, because certainly her perspectives on policy positions have changed.
I saw that clip.
You guys posted it yesterday.
And I thought it was a great clip.
I watched it twice.
I thought that it was very compelling to see exactly how her views on policy have changed.
And she has denied so much of it.
And even when you dig into, for example, we could just take, for instance, the border bill, right?
When you look at that border bill, and she says, you know, Trump advised people to reject it based on, you know, his political aspirations.
If you look at the bill, the bill creates the conditions for more illegal immigrants to come into the country for quicker processing of their claims and their paperwork.
So that, to me, was the biggest reason that that was not a good bill.
It had nothing to do with any political ambitions.
It had to do with national sovereignty.
You're 100% right.
I mean, that bill was an absolute dumpster fire.
Lankford out of Oklahoma, we railed against it at the time.
We railed against him for being complicit in giving Democrats a barb to throw at Trump, just like she did on an open borders bill, which could have allowed as many as 1.8
million illegals into the country at any given time per year.
And so it was a complete disaster.
And it probably would have hamstrung a future Republican president with bad legislation
that you would have had to repeal in order to get real border security accomplished.
And by the way, you know, the fact is they repealed everything he did in the border on
day one, or at least in week one, which is what sparked this crisis.
Libby, why don't you go ahead and plug your coordinates, let people know how they can follow you and follow your work at Post Millennial and Human Events.
You can find me on what used to be Twitter at Libby Emmons.
You can check out what we're doing at thepostmillennial.com and humanevents.com.
And if you want to hear from me every day, you can check out my newsletter at thepostmillennial.com slash Libby.
Yeah, and Libby, the post-millennial and human events are so unique in the space.
Just explain how you guys approach the news and what makes you different than the rest.
We really try to call out the lies.
We try to give a fresh perspective that is not the one that you're going to find in legacy media outlets.
We try to shy away from the language manipulation that's used by the left to confuse people and to convince everyone that they should go along with progressive lives.
We do that both at the Postmillennial and Human Events.
We work with, we have great people.
Andy Ngo is an investigative journalist.
He works at the Postmillennial and Jack Busobik, of course, is at Human Events.
He does amazing work.
And I'm very happy to, very happy with our whole staff and our whole team.
So you can come check out what we're doing.
We'd be glad to have you as subscribers as well.
Yeah, I really recommend people do that.
I mean, your guys' stories so closely follow and track so many of the things that we're thinking about here at the Charlie Kirk Show.
It's really uncanny.
You guys have your editorial senses really highly tuned, and so if you consider yourself somebody that's a movement conservative or just a consumer of news more broadly, you guys are very fair.
You cover both sides, both storylines.
So a great way to stay informed.
So check out the post-millennial and human events.
There was a crazy clip that came out and it's just last night from a Democrat that truly blew me away.
Let's go ahead and play cut 153.
This is Senator Richard Blumenthal on the investigation into the assassination attempt against Donald Trump's life. 153.
I think the American people are going to be shocked, astonished, and appalled by what we will report to them about the failures by the Secret Service in this assassination attempt on the former president.
But I think they also ought to be Appalled and astonished by the failure of the Department of Homeland Security to be more forthcoming, to be as candid and frank as it should be to them in terms of providing information.
And we are going to absolutely insist on the truth and the whole truth.
I'm not going to go into what we have learned in specifics.
I'm giving you my reaction.
And we will have a report very, very soon that I think will absolutely shock the American people.
All right, Libby, what is the backstory here?
The Senate's doing an investigation.
This is a shocking, shockingly honest clip, but I don't want to make too much of it.
Consider the source.
This is a Democrat in the Senate.
What's the context here?
Yeah, I think that there's a lot to dig into with the attempted assassination of Donald Trump back on July 13th in Butler, Pennsylvania.
It was carried live.
I think a lot of us saw that happen.
We saw the gunshots.
We heard it.
I think a lot of us in years to come will remember where we were on July 13th.
And there has been very little that has come out since that day about what really happened, what was going on, how this was allowed to happen, the motivations of the shooter who has now has been killed himself.
There's so many tragedies surrounding it.
A man who was a retired firefighter was also killed in that shooting.
Very tragic.
Other people were hospitalized.
And there hasn't been a lot.
Kimberly Cheadle, who was the Secret Service head director of that program, resigned.
And that was also fascinating.
And speaking of Democrats, one of the key moments, I thought, of the hearing where she testified was when Ro Khanna, a Democrat, said to her, um, you know, remember when Ronald Reagan, there was an assassination attempt on his life.
Do you know if the secret service director resigned?
And she said, no, he did not resign.
And Kana said, yeah, yeah, he resigned.
Um, and I thought she's done now she's going to be out, but there still hasn't been a lot revealed about the failures of the secret service.
There were a lot of warnings going on.
There were in, in the, uh, you know, hours leading up to it, there was a failure of law enforcement Um, failure of the secret service to confer with law enforcement.
There were agents who were not normally assigned to, um, Trump's detail who were there that day.
And, uh, there was a, yeah, there were a lot of failures.
So I think that, um, whatever comes out in this report, it will be really interesting.
And in terms of the difference between, you know, Democrats and Republicans, when it comes to something like this, the failures of the secret service, the failures of protection for elected officials.
That's something that I think it should be and probably is near and dear to the heart of every elected official in Washington, because every one of these men and women relies on Secret Service protection at some point in their careers.
And certainly many of them aspire to higher offices and would like to know and believe that they will be secure by the agency that is tasked with protecting them.
Yeah, that's kind of my read on this too, Libby, is that, you know, it seems like You know, consider the source.
Certainly, there was a lot of suspicion.
You know, what's he playing at?
What's going on?
But I do tend to agree with you that at some point there might be a line for most of these people where their conscience and their morality actually kicks in and they say, you know what, this is a bridge too far and we need to keep our politicians safe.
I have to believe, I have to sort of glass half full this view and not be so cynical.
I hope that Senator Blumenthal is actually being sincere here and that he's genuinely shocked and appalled
at what this investigation has uncovered.
You know, we came two centimeters away from essentially seeing our entire Republic
be thrown upside down.
And so I hope that this investigation really gets to the bottom and the truth of what happened so it doesn't happen again.
God willing.
Libby Emmons, The Postmillennial Human Events.
Thank you so much Libby for jumping on this.
It's been a fun hour.
Thanks Andrew, I appreciate it.
Thanks so much for listening everybody.
We'll talk to you soon.
▲
Export Selection