China held a spectacular military parade Wednesday, joined by the leaders of Russia, India, and other nations. It wasn't just a bunch of tanks and troops, but also clear evidence that China's strength is almost on par with America's — or maybe ahead of us in some areas. Charlie explains how far China has come, and why America must radically overhaul itself to not be replaced as the world's most powerful country. Plus, Mike Lee discusses redistricting drama in Utah and why protesters in this "red state" are lining up to denounce Charlie. Watch every episode ad-free on members.charliekirk.com! Get new merch at charliekirkstore.com!Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Hey everybody, Charlie Kirk here live from the Bitcoin.com studio.
China keeps rising.
We need to take it very seriously.
We analyze the rise of the Chinese Communist Party.
We talk about what is the end of history and Francis Fukiyama.
If you don't know the answer, you should definitely listen to this program.
It'll help you understand the rise of the Chinese Communist Party.
We then have Senator Mike Lee, and also we talk Epstein in this action-packed episode of the Charlie Kirk show.
Epstein, China, Fukiyama, and the history, Mike Lee, Utah redistricting, and more.
Email us as always, Freedom at Charlie Kirk.com and become a member, members.charliekirk.com, members.charley Kirk.com.
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 gonna fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
The Charlie Kirk Show is proudly sponsored by Preserve Gold, the leading gold and silver experts and the only precious metals company I recommend to my family, friends, and viewers.
We had an amazing event last night in Visalia, California.
It's right in the Central Valley there.
That is where you get your pistachios from, your almonds from, some of your tomatoes, some of your citrus.
We had 2,700 people.
It was a paid ticketing event for Tulare Right to Life And they do they did a phenomenal job.
They could have had another thousand people.
Isabel Brown was there.
It was just a very special evening.
Just being around the grassroots, the support is greater than ever.
And the watch the Charlie Kirk show, they listen to the podcast, they see what we're doing.
So thank you guys and God bless you.
It was an amazing event.
We're gonna place some pieces of tape there.
You'll see right there that is 2,700 people there last evening in Visalia, California.
It just felt great being back out as we prepare for yet another ambitious campus tour.
I am going to an undisclosed location to a nation that I will not tell you tonight.
In fact, I'm gonna really set Twitter ablaze tonight.
I'm gonna be like, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna tweet out, I'm going to a foreign nation 14 hours away.
What country will do you think it is?
You're gonna see, it's just gonna be a fun tweet.
We're gonna do that.
But speaking of foreign nations, yesterday, something really important happened.
And all the headlines are focused on the optics and the aesthetics and the visuals, which is fine, but it's deeper than that.
Yesterday was the 80-year anniversary of Victory Day, or the essentially the founding of the Chinese Communist Party.
The visuals were obviously impressive.
Look, totalitarian countries, they do military parades quite well.
They're able to mobilize everything without any of the media clamoring or yammering.
And it was impressive from the nuclear arsenal to their investments in the military.
The Chinese Communist Party wanted to put on full display for the rest of the world, and especially it really was all designed for an audience of one.
The military parade was really designed for one person.
And that person, of course, is President Donald Trump.
The Chinese were doing, as you can see, propaganda of their bombers and of their aircraft.
They're investing billions and billions of dollars in their military.
Now, their military is still a fraction of our entire military investment.
It's still about 200 to 300 billion dollars a year.
However, you have to wonder, even though they spend a fraction that we do, they probably don't have the bloat in the waist and the government contractors that we do.
You have to wonder if they're able to spread that a little bit more than we do.
We waste a ton of money on our military, a ton of money on Lockheed Martin and Northup Grumman.
However, I think there is definitely still an admission from independent analysts that we have military weaponry and technology that they still do not have.
We pay soldiers a ton of money, they do not.
They're able to draft anyone they want.
They're a country of 770 million able-bodied people and a country of well over a billion individuals.
They have hypersonic missiles.
we may be behind on some weapons.
They might have hypersonic missiles that we don't have, by the way.
I'm putting these visuals up on screen here because we have focused on a lot of different topics mass migration, the Islamism rising in the West.
But I think what yesterday should be a reminder is a little bit of an early fall wake up call.
We already know that the Chinese Communist Party is a great threat to us.
But me even saying that is important.
Let's ask the very simple question.
What is China?
Is China our friend?
Are they a rival like Joe Biden called them?
Are they an adversary?
I think they're an enemy of the United States of America.
I've said it once and I'll say it again.
They have internationalist ambitions.
They want to expand their territory.
Now, does that mean I believe that we should go to a kinetic conflict against them?
Of course not.
But we need to start treating them at the very least like a serious rival.
At the very least.
The Chinese Communist Party just threw an inside fastball.
That was a brushback pitch yesterday.
And not only did they have that, they brought Vladimir Putin, they brought Kim Jong-un, they brought a lot of the other tyrannical autocrats from the region in a massive show of force.
Oh, there's the vice president of China.
I actually met that guy.
Can we get we should get that picture?
I I met I it was one of the funniest stories.
I think I told the vice president of China story once.
I think I told on thought crime.
I met him at the inauguration.
I went up and asked for a picture.
And then I think they um tapped my phone.
This is a much tougher rivalry than the Cold War.
And we just gotta be honest about it.
The Soviet Union was hobbled by a terrible, terrible economy.
You see, the Soviet Union, they were pure ideologues.
They really were.
The Soviet Union had a council of actual Marxists that refused to ever embrace market principles.
They were actual ideologues.
The Chinese economic model is a lot different.
It's far more pragmatic.
They're basically what works, what makes us rich, if we have to liberalize some areas, we will, but if we have to be totalitarian in other ways, we'll also do that.
The Chinese Communist Party's economy is still not as big as ours.
Still not.
The latest GDP numbers show the Chinese Communist Party's maybe around 18 to 20 trillion dollars.
We're around 27 to 28 trillion dollars.
We owe a lot more money, by the way.
Our national debt is way above the Chinese Communist Party national debt.
Remember, the USSR was a multi-ethnic mess, which is why it collapsed.
China is overwhelmingly Chinese.
They have some Uyghur Muslim problems and they mistreat them, but they're largely off in the rural areas.
And China is very nationalist, and China is in a moment.
You have to look at where is the moment in empire.
And next year we celebrate our 250th anniversary, our 250th birthday as a nation.
Well, since we're celebrating our 250th birthday, that's about as long as empires last.
It's about the expiration date.
Chinese Communist Party is at year 80.
I want you to think about where we were in year 80.
Year 80, we were fighting a civil war.
Year 80, we were still trying to find our national identity.
Once we got through the Civil War, we then had basically an uninterrupted rise to a superpower with, you know, industrial revolution, World War II, World War II, but we did not have serious existential threats to the homeland post-Civil War.
Once we got through that civil war right around our 80th birthday, approximation, then we were able to basically have a glide pattern up towards being the superpower of the 19th century, late 9th century, the 20th century, and of course now the 21st century.
Those two oceans and Canada and Mexico being next to us are quite helpful.
And of course, we've made mistakes, we've slipped in some ways, but we are still the world's superpower, and we still have this window of opportunity.
We still have this window where we have a great president, we have a mandate, we have a nationalistic undercurrent in our country where we need to have a very serious moment and say, what exactly is China?
Why are we not treating them in the way we should be?
Or maybe we should not be treating that way.
President Donald Trump had some very harsh words for the Chinese Communist Party today.
He said, I was not happy in many ways.
He said, I'm I was not happy with what I saw, and I know it was for me.
I was very impressed, but I was not pleased by Xi Jinping's comments.
He had some very harsh words today.
President Trump is rebuilding our military, but you have to wonder for every one dollar that we spend in our military, I would just conjecture the Chinese Communist Party is able to probably spend like 25 cents.
I bet they get way more bang for their buck on military spending than we do.
And we can't always see this in terms of money.
That's a very important thing.
This is about who is going to win and own the 21st century.
We need to see this in terms of real strength.
Are we innovative?
Are we merit-based?
Are we entrepreneurial?
Are we unified?
Are we strong?
Are we aspirational?
Forget all the economic data.
Right now, yes, we have the incumbent advantage.
Can we make stuff?
It takes all, I mean, just for example, we're doing this construction project at Turning Point USA to install a gate.
And it is the most bureaucratic.
It's taken literally like a year and a half to install a very simple gate.
And I thought I turned to my team the other day, outside of this whole victory day parade.
I said, in China, this would take like a week.
In China, this would just take a week.
You just wave a hand and you get it done.
Now, in some ways it's bad, it would probably not be up to code or whatever.
But China's, they're able to source rare earth minerals.
They're able to build new factories, they're able to roll out new robots.
We increasingly have difficulty doing those things.
Now, I'm not I'm not painting a dumerous picture.
There's a lot of advantages we have over the Chinese Communist Party.
But I gotta be honest, when I I went to a national forest, national park uh over the weekend, Sedona.
It's actually not a national park, national forest.
And there was products sold by the U.S. government.
This drove me nuts.
And this is not a criticism of President Trump.
You inherit it from Joe Biden, but we gotta fix it.
The Department of Interior is selling merchandise made in China.
Our own US government is selling merchandise that is made in China.
We don't make stuff anymore, but we should.
I want you to email me Freedom at Charlie Kirk.com.
What is China?
Friend, adversary, enemy, rival, competitor.
I realize there are many choices when it comes to who you choose for your cell phone service, and there are new ones popping up all the time.
But here is the truth.
There's only one that boldly stands in the gap for every American that believes freedom is worth fighting for.
For more than 12 years, Patriot Mobile has been on the front lines fighting for God given rights, freedoms, while also providing exceptional nationwide service and with access to all three main networks.
Don't just take my word for it, go to PatriotMobile.com/slash Kirk.
That is PatriotMobile.com slash Kirk, ask the hundreds of thousands of Americans who've made the switch and are now supporting causes they believe in simply by joining Patriot Mobile.
Patriot Mobile's all US based support team is standing by to take care of you.
Call 972 Patriot today, or go to PatriotMobile.com slash Charlie.
Make the switch today, PatriotMobile.com slash Charlie, or call 972 Patriot and make the switch today.
In order for us to keep talking about China, it's very important that all of you in the audience know the name and the book, first Francis Fukiyama and the book, The End of History and The Last Man.
It was published in 1992.
Remember the context of when this book was published.
This book was published right after the fall of the Soviet Union.
This was peak neoliberal arrogance.
This was about the crescendo of the ruling class of the West that believed that this was the end of all human government, that liberal democracy had emerged as literally the final form of human government.
The claim wasn't that history literally ends, but that the ideological evolution has reached its endpoint.
No rival system at the time in 1992 seemed capable of challenging liberal democracy in legitimacy or performance.
We assumed the American way had won forever.
And I was raised in this context.
I was told by teachers, I was told by professionals, Charlie, the more that we trade with China, soon they're going to be wearing Levi jeans and having McDonald's in Tiananmen Square, and they'll be listening on their iPods.
And once they do that, they're going to embrace free speech.
They're going to embrace American values and they will de-radicalize and decouple from totalitarianism.
This book, The End of History and The Last Man by Francis Fukiyama, without a doubt, was one of the most important arrogant theses of the 1990s.
It set the tone for the American ruling class.
Because the wall had fallen, the enemy of the Soviet Union collapsed.
We did it without having to go to a kinetic war.
It felt as if we did not just win a war, but we won an ideological battle, and boy, did we get cocky.
Our leaders assumed anybody who came to America from China will decide America's way is better than China's and either join our team or fight to make China be on our side.
But if you really think about it, if you come here today from China, what are you likely to think?
Cities are filthy, they're murderous, they're dangerous.
And as we have declined in virtue in our country, it's much harder to have liberty when you do not have virtue.
When you do not have a virtuous people, when you do not have strong families, when you do not have people going to church, liberty quickly becomes license.
Bill Clinton articulated this best.
Bill Clinton celebrated the entrance of the Chinese Communist Party into the World Trade Organization.
I want you to put up the B-roll again of the mil the Chinese military, please.
The Chinese military with their tanks and their missiles rolling through the streets.
You guys paid for that.
This is paid for by the U.S. citizen.
This is paid for by your beanie babies.
This is paid for by your baseballs.
And this is paid for by your textiles.
Hey, that's paid for by your vitamin C and by your antibiotics.
Bill Clinton helped design this order, but this was all because of Fukiyama's argument.
This is very important.
Fukuyama gave them the arrogance that if we started trading with China, we would get super rich.
The economic elite would then be able to have more capital.
And then China would liberalize and the whole world would live in liberal democratic harmony.
That sounds so dumb when I say it today now in 2025, but that's exactly the context of which all these decisions were made.
World Trade Organization, NAFTA, play cut 393.
Bringing China into the WTO is a win-win decision.
It will protect our prosperity, and it will promote the right kind of change in China.
It is good for our farmers, for our manufacturers, and for our investors.
Encouraging China to play by international rules, I say again, is an important step toward a safer, saner world.
Now, instead of China changing, we've actually become more like China.
Not in the good ways, by the way, less free speech, more oligarchic governance, an untouchable billionaire class.
We became more like them.
They did not adapt.
They did not liberalize.
They don't have free speech.
You can't challenge the government.
You can't own firearms.
China is more totalitarian than they were either in the 1990s.
And this is where all the experts, again, which should just be completely discounted.
They're like, well, you can't have economic liberty without personal liberty.
Oh, yeah, you can.
China's proven you can.
You can own stuff and be hypermaterialistic and have no other personal freedom.
You can go to the mall and shop and do stuff and still not be able to go to church.
The 1990s, Francis Fukiyama End of History, Bill Clinton, the dot-com era.
We won.
And instead of entering the victory with humility, we also did the 1990 Immigration Act.
We opened up our borders to the entire world.
And now in 2025, we are reckoning with the consequences of the cockiness of the leaders of the 1990s.
So much what we are living through is because of the arrogance and the pride of a ruling class in America that saw the wall fall in Berlin and said, We won, baby.
Bring in the foreigners, import the plastic, make us rich.
It's the end of history.
Turns out history was just getting started.
Let's be honest.
Most of what comes out of Hollywood these days makes a mockery of America, our history, our values, and our faith.
But they're still a place telling stories that remind us why this country is worth celebrating.
That place is Angel Studios.
They're creating unapologetically patriotic films and shows, original films and shows that uplifts, educates, and inspires.
Like Sound of Freedom, a powerful true story that exposed the horrors of child trafficking and rallied millions to action.
Something to stand for with Mike Rowe, an incredible tribute to ordinary Americans who risked everything to defend liberty.
And the last rodeo, an upcoming heartland drama about a bull riding veteran who comes out of retirement to save his grandson.
It's faith, it's grit, it's the kind of storytelling Hollywood forgot how to do.
Angel is also behind shows like the Tuttle Twins, teaching kids the principles of freedom and personal responsibility.
And Green and Gold, a small town story about a family standing up for their values and risking it all to save their farm.
These aren't just good films, they're cultural reset buttons.
When you join the Angel Guild, you don't just stream entertainment, you help create it.
You vote on what gets made.
You support filmmakers who still believe in America.
As a premium member, you get two free tickets to every theatrical release.
So if you're ready to support entertainment that celebrates faith, family, community, and freedom, go to angel.com/slash Charlie and become a premier angel guild member today.
Support entertainment that builds something worth passing on.
Joining us now is a great friend and amazing person, Senator Mike Lee from the wonderful state of Utah.
Senator Lee, great to see you.
Senator, I am going to Utah next week, a week from today, at the wonderful Utah Valley State University.
All are welcome.
You guys can get your tickets at American Comeback Tour.com.
Senator Lee, this is already making a lot of headlines.
People are very angry.
They're calling for my cancellation.
They think our permit should be pulled.
What uh this is a greater response than when I go to Berkeley.
Senator Lee, what is going on in the beautiful state of Utah?
Well, first of all, Charlie, I want to thank you for the work that you're doing on campuses across the country and for your interest in visiting Utah next week.
Uh you're you're giving students everywhere the chance to hear perspectives that they uh often wouldn't otherwise get.
Uh you've been on the front lines defending free speech, uh uh, especially where it's been most under pressure, uh, as it has been on college campuses all over the country.
And I'm so glad that you're bringing that fight uh to Utah State uh university and Utah Valley University next week.
Look, free speech shouldn't stop at the campus gates.
If anything, uh we we should have uh a heightened degree of attention and focus a heightened degree of protectiveness around uh free speech on campuses, because the learning environment necessarily requires open, honest conversations where different viewpoints are examined.
Our students uh deserve open discussion and vigorous debate and not just the same sanitized woke version that uh so many college administrators and faculty members seem to prefer and seem to demand exclusively.
Uh look, Utah's belief in open debate and free exchange of ideas.
What you're doing uh helps to ensure students get that experience.
Because if students can't handle diverse ideas in college, how are they ever going to handle that in real life?
So look, I I I hope and expect that your visit to Utah will be productive, that you will be able to speak, they're not gonna exclude you.
And I anticipate that once you're there, uh a lot of the naysayers, a lot of those people trying to exclude you are gonna see some real utility behind your visit there.
Um who knows why they decide uh uh to start these things, but each time they start them, and then you show up and do what you do best.
Uh uh uh uh people are enlightened as a result of it.
So thank you for doing that.
Well, it's gonna be fun, and I think some of these people that are getting very angry are gonna be very disappointed, because I am the same person on this program that I'm there on campus.
And if you disagree, you can go to the front of the line and we're gonna have a good chat.
It's American Comeback Tour.com.
When you show up and they're just your thought, please, and have opposable thumbs.
Uh, I I think some of them are gonna feel a little bit silly after the big to-do they've made of that.
No, that that that's exactly that that's well said, and and thank you, Senator.
Senator, I want to shift gears here to President Trump's truth social.
He said Monday's court order in Utah is absolutely uns unconstitutional.
How did such a wonderful Republican state like Utah, which I won every election, end up with so many radical left judges.
Senator, what is going on here?
Please take some time and go into some detail and explain what's happening in the great state of Utah.
Yeah, so Utah's electoral system is under attack by Democrats and and uh including their leftist allies in the Utah courts.
Um about seven years ago, uh, there was uh an effort uh through which Utah voters passed a law through a ballot initiative, creating a legislative redistricting commission.
Now, in the years that followed, the Utah legislature uh subsequently amended that law, uh, which it has the power to do under the Utah Constitution.
Uh in other words, you can make a law uh either through the legislature or through a ballot initiative.
Uh the power somewhat rarely used, but when it is used, it it runs on a parallel track with laws made by the legislature.
And so that the legislature can subsequently amend or even repeal a law that was previously made under our state constitution through a ballot initiative.
But uh Utah courts are now invalidating uh the legislature's amendments to that earlier ballot initiative and to Utah's existing congressional district maps, even though nothing in the Utah Constitution compels or even allows that result.
And even though uh one provision in particular, Article 9 of the Utah Constitution actually requires legislative districts, including congressional districts, to be drawn by the legislature.
Not by some uh nameless, faceless uh commission uh consisting of people who, as well-educated and well-intentioned as they might be, uh, have never been elected by anybody and and don't serve accountable to the voters of Utah.
So it now appears that Utah is likely to be bound by uh uh a process involving congressional district maps being drawn, not by the legislature, but by this outside commission.
And although the legislature still has final authority to approve any such maps uh under the uh court order that came out last week that maps of uh uh one way or another have to be uh more or less drawn by the commission, even though that constitution belongs to the legislature.
Look, this is great for Utah's Democrats who haven't controlled the Utah legislature in many, many decades.
Uh not because Utah voters um uh are ignorant, but because they don't like what the Democratic Party is selling and have it for decades.
That's why we have Republican supermajority uh uh margins in the Utah House and in the Senate, and why we've controlled the governor's office for decades.
Um, but now with this, they found a clever way uh uh to even the score by enlisting the help of their judicial allies.
Look, this is a terrible development uh for the rule of law for voters in Utah who deserve to have these decisions made in a manner consistent with the U.S. Constitution and the Utah Constitution.
Now, and make no mistake, this this decision, while being heralded by the left because they like it, because it's a victory.
These are cheap points they're scoring.
This will make the process of drawing legislative districts in Utah less accountable to the voters, not more.
Because that's what happens when you take that constitutional responsibility away from elected lawmakers and you give it to someone else.
It'll also result in maps that are far more generous to Democrats, and I think that's the whole point.
Uh is that they hope to pick up at least one seat, maybe two for Democrats in Utah as a result of this.
So it's kind of a judicial takeover of the political process, one that's designed by leftists to advance the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party in Utah.
And it's yet another example of how these independent commissions are so often used by the left to give an unfair, unearned advantage to Democrats in red states, one that they could never otherwise secure through the electoral process.
Yeah, so this is part of a broader redistricting fight in California and Texas.
Let me ask this wh why is Utah seemingly having this Democrat appeasing moderate streak?
Let's just talk more broadly about Utah.
You're a constitutional conservative, Senator Lee, and one of the best, if not the best, in the nation, and you have an amazing track record, and you're so good to your constituents and you represent your voters.
Why is it that in Utah, which is supposed to be this solidly red state, why give any ground at all whatsoever?
What are the influences that are seeping into Utah that seem to be changing the politic there?
Perhaps first and foremost, I think we've gotten a little complacent with the fact that we've had these Republican majorities in both houses of our legislature and uh the governor's office and so many of our other prominent elected positions in the state.
Um the fact that we've had those under uh uh uh re the Republican banner for as many decades as we have has perhaps uh um caused um many in the state to not be aware of what's going on because you have to dig into some of these details to see what's going on once something like this happens.
Then you add to that, Charlie, what happens in a state like mine, uh uh a Republican state, consistently Republican state, that has no conservative media to speak of it.
Uh, you know, we've got a uh a handful here or there, uh uh we've got a uh uh uh a handful of of great uh uh people on the radio, for example.
Um, but as far as our print media and our mainstream broadcast media, TV and radio within the state, uh we have no significant large-scale uh conservative or even right of center um media uh uh within Utah.
It's a pretty mismatched state in terms of the political views of the constituency, the citizenry of Utah, and the uh disparity between that and the news media establishment.
That doesn't help.
Uh uh, but but here again, just w with the apathy problem or the lack of awareness problem.
The more people talk about this, the more we can draw attention to it.
I think we can remedy some of that defect.
And I think what you're doing uh with your visit to Utah next week, which I applaud, uh helps to shed light on these things and helps to raise awareness of what's actually happening.
Senator, in closing here, I want you to comment on the CDC situation.
Senate Republicans express alarm over CDC directors' firing.
Can't imagine that you share that view, but if you do, I'd love to hear, because I trust your opinion.
Well, what is your opinion of what's happening at the CDC right now?
Look, uh my copy of the Constitution says that the executive power of the U.S. government is vested in the president.
Now, for that to mean anything, for the Constitution to hold up for the separation of powers generally to be respected, including this uh the element of separation of powers that's found within Article II, which governs the executive branch and the president.
For those things to mean anything, the president, as the head of the executive branch, necessarily must have the authority to hire and fire subordinates.
Now, some of those subordinate officers uh require Senate confirmation when he hires them, but uh there's no comparable restriction on congressional authorization to fire them, nor should there be.
Now, by statute, we have uh Congress has over time, unwisely and I believe unconstitutionally, limited the president's firing authority to these four-cause circumstances or or through career civil servant protection or otherwise.
And that's wrong.
The executive power is lodged in the president.
It needs to stay there.
And uh if uh CDC director or HHS bureaucratic president, they have to be held accountable by the president.
Thank you so much, Senator Lee.
See you soon.
Hey everybody, Charlie Kirk here.
We are saving babies with pre-born.
There are 24,836 kindergartners starting school this month who wouldn't be alive today if it hadn't been for what pre-born did in 2019.
That's how many babies were saved that year because of the gift of ultrasounds from people like you.
When a woman considering abortions sees her baby on that ultrasound and hears the baby's heartbeat, it doubles the chance she'll choose life.
140 dollars gives mothers a free ultrasound and saves babies.
280 dollars can save 10 babies, and just 28 bucks a month can save a baby a month for less than a dollar a day.
And a $15,000 gift will provide an ultrasound machine that will save babies' lives for years to come.
Whether you want to save one baby or five or hundreds, it's just a phone call or click away.
Join me now by saving babies.
It's 833-850-229.
I'm a donor to preborn and you should be too.
Or click on the pre-born banner right now at Charlikirk.com.
That is the pre-born banner at Charlikirk.com.
Check it out right now.
So it's been say a week or two, probably, since we've covered the Epstein situation.
We are covering a lot of other stories.
And the media, they they were waiting for this.
You see, Congress, they brought in a lot of the Epstein victims, and it's undoubtedly terrible what Epstein did to the underage high school girls and groomed them and sexually abused them.
They're bringing in all of these Epstein victims.
Interestingly, one of them is a man, so I don't that's breaking news, at least to me.
I don't quite know all the details surrounding that.
And NBC News thought they had their moment.
It is the media.
They want nothing more than to be able to tie this to Donald Trump.
They bring all of these Epstein victims, one after the other after the other, and they have their big moment.
The media is just waiting for a metaphorical kill shot on Donald Trump.
Amazingly, of all the questions they could ask, this is the one, but in some ways, I'm kind of glad they asked it.
In kind of a sick and twisted way.
I'm glad they did.
I'm glad they were able to air it out, because this was a swing and a miss and a media loss right here.
And this kind of goes to show that there's a lot of misinformation and half-truths that are circulating around this entire thing, especially in the proximity of President Trump.
So President Donald Trump has been thrown in to all of this unnecessarily.
So here it is.
NBC News, ready to go.
Try to get Donald Trump.
We got him dead to rights.
We got the panel.
We got them all lined up.
This is gonna be it.
The NBC producers, they're waiting and they're waiting.
We're gonna have our moment.
We're gonna play cut 400.
I do have to ask, and I know, uh and it's just something that I think we're compelled to at this moment, with the attention on President Trump with these questions around a part in.
Did anybody see or hear of the president himself doing anything inappropriate as it related to Jeffrey Epstein?
No.
The answer is no.
No, President Donald Trump was not involved in any of that stuff.
Period.
Hard stop.
So anticlimactic.
No.
No.
This is Cut 401.
This is another one of the Epstein victims.
Several of us as a team of survivors have been discussing creating our own list of names.
We know the names.
Many of us were abused by them.
And now, together as survivors, we'll confidentially compile the names.
Play cut 401.
Several of us F-team survivors have been discussing creating our own list of names.
Thank you.
We know the names.
Many of us are abused by them.
That's right.
Now, together as survivors, we will confidentially compile the names.
We all know we're regularly in the Epstein world.
And it will be done by survivors and for survivors.
No one else is involved.
There is ongoing reporting, though.
This is why you gotta be very careful with this stuff, everybody.
You saw this with the Jerry Sandusky case in Penn State.
You gotta be very, very careful with situations like this.
Because you get a lot, you can get a bandwagon effect where a lot of people use half-truths to be able to get money from a guy that obviously had a lot of assets.
So you gotta be gotta have a lot, you gotta pursue evidence.
But you saw right there with the other previous clip.
I just gotta replay this anticlimactic one.
You gotta see this big wind up from NBC.
We gotta replay Cut 400, replay Cut 400.
I do have to ask, and I know it's just something that I think we're compelled to at this moment, with the attention on President Trump with these questions around a part in.
Did anybody see or hear of the president himself doing anything inappropriate as it related to Jeffrey Epstein?
No.
I could watch that on repeat.
That's the entire media narrative poof.
By the way, if the answer was yes, we would have heard this years ago if Biden would have been sitting on files that show Donald Trump compromised with anything Epstein, they would have released this a long time ago.
And I'm just gonna be honest, with a lot of these movements that we see.
We saw this with Sandusky, we saw this with others, and Michael Tracy on Twitter, quote, the British model and socialite who stayed in contact with Jeffrey Epstein into her 30s and who was ruled by a judge to have endured no illegal sexual activity, is currently speaking at the big Epstein press conference.
So you get a lot of hanger-ons, you get a lot of bandwagon effect, you get a lot of people in moments like this that are gonna try to either get money or try to ruin ruin somebody's character, and especially they'll try to ruin Donald Trump's character.
And you saw an NBC that it can't even do that.
You gotta use discernment.
You gotta use prudence.
So you gotta stay very cautious.
Remember the lessons of the Me Too movement, and remember Kavanaugh, remember all of that.
And just another one.
Again, a lot of the people I'm sure that are presenting at this press conference were harmed and have terrible situations of them.
Others, Juliet Bryant is an alleged victim who got money and says she was abducted by a UFO.
It's quite a claim.
In situations like this, I am coming at this from a perspective.
Number one, they're gonna try to, they're gonna try to smear and slander President Trump completely unnecessarily here.
You saw this with the fake Wall Street Journal piece.
You now saw this of the whole panel.
Donald Trump wasn't involved.
But additionally, we're starting to verge in the territory on this story, the way that it's going right now, where this is way too me too.
Where, okay, you're abducted by aliens, and you were kind of like in your 30s, who is ruled by a judge to have no illegal sexual activity.
And so this is bad for two reasons.
It's bad because the young ladies who were actually abused by this monster, Jeffrey Epstein, are now going to be looped into some of these liars.
And that's bad.
And then number two, it's also just bad on its merits.
There can be a temptation to rush into blind trust and a lack of healthy skepticism.
A lot of Jeffrey Epstein victims were adults, and that distinction is important.
Not all of them.
Jeffrey Epstein absolutely also engaged with underage people as well.
I don't know if it was both men and women, but men seem to be part of the panel, but at least women.
My take right now and my approach, and this is my contribution to the zeitgeist, is I cut my teeth.
I have the wounds to show during the Me Too movement.
During the Me Too movement, I learned a lot.
We saw the whole country lose its mind during mass hysteria.
So let's not do that again.
We need empirical data.
And especially if there are people like Michael Tracy tweets, this British socialite who a judge endured no illegal activity and stayed in contact with Epstein into the 30s, into her 30s.
Guys, that's not someone that I think we should be platforming.
And we just want the truth.
And a lot of this, again, it undermines the actual victims.
And then you have a gold rush.
And that's the problem.
This happens way too often in situations like this is you see a gold rush.
From Sandusky to I there's like 50 examples.
The Weinstein case, by the way, Harvey Weinstein is a great example.
Candace Owens has done some actually very interesting reporting on this.
I don't know if I agree with all of it.
She's actually really made me reconsider all, but the point being is that you have a gold rush in situations like this, where you have real victims at the core who deserve restitution and deserve justice, and then you have people on the exterior who present themselves as real victims, either for attention or money.
But the key today, and the big takeaway is that this was a major swing and a miss for the media.
They wanted to try to take out Trump.
The Democrats are desperate for a new narrative.
And in the most anticlimactic, lead balloon way that I've ever seen on live television.
No, wasn't involved.
No.
We're going to keep analyzing this, but I we're now starting to see the ghosts of me too past start to seep into this.
The language, the terminology.
And I think we got to learn our lessons from the Kavanaugh, from the guilty and two proven innocent stuff that we saw.
And that's not to say that every one of these individuals is like that.
But Juliet Bryan, who got money and said she was abducted by a UFO.
I mean, that's an interesting claim.
Love to learn more about that.
We're cautious, as we should be, because you're dealing with people's, not just reputation, but you're dealing with the truth.
And what you do not want, what will invalidate the actual abuse of these victims and the treacherous elements of this, whether it be intel agencies or all the other stuff, will be a bunch of opportunists that gold rush into this in a me too way to try to get cash or try to get clicks.
Try to get cash or try to get clicks.
Like this British socialite model.
I don't know who this person's name is.
Michael Tracy's reporting.
You guys can look at all Michael Tracy stuff at M. Tracy.
You got to be prudent.
You got to be cautious.
But at least my instinct feels a little bit too much like the Weinstein, the Kavanaugh.
This whole thing is starting to raise some red flags for me, guys.
It's starting to feel like much more of a operation that we traditionally would ask questions about.
It's kind of turning into a three ring media circus.
When there is money to be made by accusing people, accusers will appear.
So we need to be cautious.
We're going to call balls and strikes as hard evidence emerges.
But the big takeaway today, is that this is a big miss for those people that wanted to take out Donald Trump.
And final point there is a massive multi-billion dollar Epstein compensation fund.
There is a high incentive for people to say they were victims of him.
There were real victims of him.
A hundred percent.
But now we're verging on, we're we're blurring some lines, like this one socialite who was a judge ruled no illegal sexual activity, was an adult when they when she engaged with Epstein, and stayed in contact through his 30s.
We do not want hysteria.
We are anti hysteria and anti-panic.
Email us freedom at charliekirk.com.
The final point is many of them then want to extract money from wealthy people who will undoubtedly get embroiled in the coming fallout.
I don't know.
This is raising some antennas here.
Got a little red flags going on here.
Because I live through the nonsense and the carnage of me too.
Let us not participate in that kind of circus.
Let's be prudent.
Let's look at the evidence.
Let's weigh it, give everybody due process, and that's our take.
Big swing and a miss for those trying to take out Donald Trump.
