Rich Barris and Charlie Kirk expose a donor-engineered plot to replace mass deportations with amnesty, citing Brandon Gill's Dignidad Act which would legalize 12 million illegal aliens for agribusiness profits. They debunk manipulated polls claiming enforcement is unpopular, arguing big money suppresses truth while Virginia's Abigail Spanberger and NYC's Zohran Mamdani face backlash over immigration stances. Ultimately, the hosts conclude that elite interests are actively undermining border security to secure cheap labor, framing the current political chaos as a calculated betrayal of American sovereignty. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
The Ten Point Peace Proposal00:09:33
My name is Charlie Kirk.
I run the largest pro American student organization in the country fighting for the future of our republic.
My call is to fight evil and to proclaim truth.
If the most important thing for you is just feeling good, you're going to end up miserable.
But if the most important thing is doing good, you will end up purposeful.
College is a scam, everybody.
You got to stop sending your kids to college.
You should get married as young as possible and have as many kids as possible.
Go start a turning point USA college chapter, go start a turning point USA high school chapter.
Go find out how your church can get involved.
Sign up and become an activist.
I gave my life to the Lord in fifth grade.
Most important decision I ever made in my life.
And I encourage you to do the same.
Here I am.
Lord, use me.
Buckle up, everybody.
Here we go.
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.
All right.
Welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show here at the YREFI Studios in Phoenix, Arizona.
Welcome, Blake.
Howdy.
So there's lots going on this morning.
We're going to hit the DeCarlos Brown story, the Aruna Zarutska killer, in just a second, but we want to give you a quick update on the status.
Of the fragile ceasefire.
We knew it was fragile.
Has anything updated since yesterday?
Well, Vice President Vance is out front, and I mean, you rarely see him this frustrated.
Now, we know why I think this is interesting is because Vice President Vance, we know from that blockbuster expose by Swan and Maggie Haberman that Vice President Vance was very against going into war.
He was very vocal about it internally.
We've known this from reporting that he was against going into Iran.
I think he's now going to be having a very Prominent position in the negotiations in Islamabad this Friday, Saturday, over the weekend.
So he's being asked about different aspects of this, and the clips are, I think, very telling, very important to give us a framework through which to process everything that's going on.
And one of the main keys is what's happening in Lebanon, what's happening in the Strait of Hormuz.
Those seem to actually be the two keys, I'll say.
Let's go ahead and start.
Sat 1.
I think the Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon, and it just didn't.
We never made that promise.
We never indicated that was going to be the case.
What we said is that the ceasefire would be focused on Iran and the ceasefire would be focused on America's allies, both Israel and the Gulf Arab states.
It gets at something unusual, which is a lot of ceasefires really traditionally would be written and, you know, it would have clear provisions on what it covers.
It seems this one was more ad hoc, maybe more of a 90 minutes before.
90 minutes before, verbal deal, handshake deal, what have you.
That is a way President Trump often likes to do things, but you do see where there can be issues there because you come out of the deal and then everyone is immediately arguing about what deal was actually made.
Well, and to be fair, I mean, Hezbollah is.
Supposed to be a separate entity, but this sort of exposes that they are a proxy for the Iranian regime.
Okay.
So then the issue of the 10 point plan.
So getting more and more clarity, we saw this from Caroline Levitt yesterday during the press conference that this was the previously reported on 10 point plan is not the one that they're talking about.
I'm hearing people call BS on this a little bit that this is a matter of semantics, but the other people are pushing back in the admin saying that the 10 point plan that was.
Agreed to as a basis upon which to start negotiations was significantly different than the 10 point plan previously reported on.
Vice President Vance goes pretty hardcore on this point as well.
SOT 2.
There are three different 10 point proposals, at least, that I've seen floating around.
The first 10 point proposal was something that was submitted, and we think, frankly, was probably written by ChatGPT that was submitted to Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
That immediately went in the garbage and was rejected.
There was a second 10 point Proposal that was much more reasonable, that was based on some back and forth between us, between the Pakistanis, and the Palestinians.
That is the 10 point proposal that the president was referencing in his truth yesterday.
And then, frankly, I've seen a third 10 point proposal that's even more maximalist than the first 10 point proposal that's been floating around various social media channels.
Yep, and there seems to be a particular ire that the White House is pointing and directing to CNN, New York Times.
JD Vance continues on this theme, SAT 7.
Is that I've seen various organs, the New York Times, CNN, others, pick up and run the original 10 point proposal based on little more than a random Yahoo in Iran submitting it to public access television in the country of Iran, and then them saying that somehow represents the negotiating position of the government.
It's the equivalent of somebody in, let's say, a Democratic councilman in Boise, Idaho, saying something crazy, the local public access TV picking up that crazy statement.
And then the New York Times running that as the position of the President of the United States.
It doesn't make an ounce of sense.
So, where does that leave us?
I think it leaves us in a position where the Strait is currently not operating still.
The Strait of Hormuz is not closed.
And as we remember, as you might recall.
It is closed.
Yes, it is closed.
As you might recall, we have President Trump's expletive laced Truth Social saying open the.
That wasn't really laced.
It was just one.
It was just.
Yeah, well, fair enough.
Open the effing Strait.
Open the Strait.
And so that is not open yet.
And that was a key.
I guess, pillar of establishing this two week ceasefire.
So it's unclear what's going to happen.
It seems that momentum is racing towards Islamabad on Friday and Saturday this weekend.
President Trump has indicated that JD Vance, Steve Whitcroft, Jared Kushner are going to be leading those negotiations.
And it seems to be that the calculation is even though the straight has not been opened back up, you see a little bit of saber rattling on True Social from the president saying we're armed and ready.
Everybody's getting ready to go if we have to.
But They want to see if this peace proposal can play itself out and actually net some good results for the country.
So it looks like we're sort of ignoring the straight for the time being, at least for the next two days, it appears, until a peace negotiation is able to play itself out.
So we're going to see what happens, but fragile peace to say the least.
And it does not seem that the Iranian regime is buckling necessarily.
They're defiant.
I think.
A reason we got here is we attempted to do regime change and it didn't succeed.
Let's be frank.
We turned over the top of the Iranian regime.
But yeah, the IRGC, the regime is still in power, still entrenched in that country, still running things.
It's very clear.
So we're going to see how this plays out.
This is the Trump truth.
It says all U.S. ships, aircraft, and military personnel with additional ammunition, weaponry, and anything else that is appropriate and necessary for the lethal prosecution and destruction of an already substantially degraded enemy.
Will remain in place in and around Iran until such time as the real agreement, all caps noted, reached is fully complied with.
If for any reason it is not, which is highly unlikely, then the shooting starts.
Bigger and better and stronger than any other reason.
I think the last time he said the shooting starts was Floydapalooza.
Remember he said the looting starts, the shooting starts.
Oh, is that right?
Yes, he did.
It's a phrase of his.
It's a good recall.
It was agreed a long time ago, and despite all the fake rhetoric to the contrary, No nuclear weapons and the Strait of Hormuz will be open and safe.
In the meantime, our great military is loading up and resting, looking forward actually to its next conquest.
Conquest is quite the word there.
I'm not sure if he's referencing Cuba or some other situation or around itself.
So, lots of moving pieces.
As they say, it's a complex situation.
Here's where I'm at.
I agree actually in letting the peace talks go forward.
I think we need to declare victory, get out.
Even if it's a fragile peace, that's fine.
In the first moments of this ceasefire, it's always a fragile peace.
So let's move forward, put our good faith effort forward, and see if we can get in and get out.
And let's focus on nation building back here at home.
So even if it's not perfect, as long as you get the nukes, you can declare victory.
You can say, hey, we came, we saw, we.
Took care of their military industrial base, took care of their missiles, took care of all that, and we got the nukes.
Yeah, it's not perfect.
Yeah, there's some questions about the straight.
But America, I'm telling you, we need to focus back on domestics if we're going to have any hope in the midterms and in 2028, which we do.
We do have hope.
So we got to focus on the positive there.
Ending the Endless Trial Cycle00:06:26
All right, we have to get to this story because it's going massively viral, first of all, but it's infuriating.
And that's why it's going viral.
And that, of course, is the story of DeCarlos Brown Jr., who is the crazed madman who butchered Irina Zarutska last summer on a train.
And, of course, everybody's seen the videos.
Irina Zarutska was a Ukrainian refugee from the war who moved to North Carolina.
She's on her way, I think, to her job or coming home from her job at a pizza parlor.
And DeCarlos Brown gets up out of his seat, takes out a knife, and butchers her.
And it's just the most heart wrenching video you have ever seen.
I think it shocked the nation.
It shocked our conscience just to see this brutal slang in public for no reason at all, other than the fact that this man had been left out onto the streets after multiple, multiple violent criminal crimes.
14 prior crimes.
Prior crimes.
And so, yeah, and then what the specific update going on here is this broke yesterday.
It's been unfolding for a little while, it looks like.
The New York Post.
Reports that they had that while this guy's in the hospital, they did a competency assessment, and apparently the hospital officials there, the doctors, found that he is not competent to stand trial.
Now, uh, we should clarify that's not the same thing as an insanity plea.
This is that if you're going to be placed on a criminal trial, you do have to be aware of what is going on.
You can't put someone, for example, who's in a coma on trial.
You can't put someone who, for example, if you have a bad Alzheimer's, you can't really go on trial if you have too much dementia to go.
So that's what they're apparently finding here.
This guy.
Is not aware enough, not competent enough to go on trial.
Now, there has not been a judicial ruling on this yet.
And this is actually where we're getting helped out because of the 2024 election, because of who we have in office right now.
The federal government did also federally charge DeCarlos with murder.
And they've already put out a statement pointing out they are not subject to whatever North Carolina is doing here.
And they're ready to proceed with their case.
So, so far, there has not been a judicial ruling that he's incompetent.
Because he's actually not in state custody.
So small mercies.
Well, Brown's lawyers are now asking the court to push back a scheduled April 30th hearing for another six months.
A significant delay.
I don't know what it is about these defense attorneys, but they tend to ask for six month delays in trials.
We're seeing that in the Charlie case all over.
We're seeing it all over.
And it's a thing that does genuinely cry out for reform because this is what frustrates America so much.
There is that line justice delayed is justice denied.
And it gets at a truth, which is when people can't see the process playing out in a brisk way before them, they lose trust in the system and it increases the amount of ways that.
Bad stuff can come in.
So, with these competency hearings, for example, I had Danny check the number of competency assessments that are conducted by courts has basically doubled since the early 90s.
There are about 120,000 per year now.
And it's not that we specifically want to put people who have dementia or whatever on trial, it's that this has become just a toolkit, a tool in the big toolkit to keep these people from being accountable.
So, when you have these guys who are extremely unwell and just constantly attacking people, Well, this time, oh, he's not competent to stand trial.
We had to drop the charges and, you know, don't have that many seats in these mental asylums, so let him go again.
Or we let them do insanity, please.
And then we say they've been rehabilitated enough and they're let go again.
We see that happen.
Just endless excuses, endless means for people who fundamentally they just hate civilization.
They like criminals and they want criminals back on the street.
Yeah.
Well, and if you're noticing a theme, there's another story that is grabbing headlines, and that's out of Fort Myers, Florida.
There was a bludgeoning murder that was caught on surveillance footage, and it is excruciating to watch.
I believe we have a censored version of this video, but it was a Haitian illegal who was caught and released at the border by the Biden admin in 2022.
An immigration judge ordered Rolbert Joaquim deported from the U.S. later that same year, but DHS, under the leadership of Alejandro Mayorkas and Joe Biden, Shielded him from deportation by granting him temporary protected status, which expired in 2024.
Same thing.
There's actually a perfect overlap here with what we said.
These competency hearings are a way for criminals to escape justice.
Temporary protected status created by Congress in its wisdom decades ago for situations like, oh, well, you don't deport someone if they're flying into the middle of a hurricane or something.
And now it's Haiti's had temporary protected status for the people who come here illegally from there.
For literally over a decade at this point.
I think they brought it when they had that earthquake in 2010.
It's not temporary.
It's just a tool because there are people who want everyone in the world to be able to come to America and they want to make it so even murderers like this guy are able to stay here.
They are fundamentally, that's the footage of what happened there, just an animal.
This person should be put down.
But we're going to end up spending tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of dollars so this guy can get a free criminal justice defense.
He might not even get life in prison and he might not even get deported if.
They failed to give him life in prison and then they let him out afterwards.
Yeah.
And, you know, it's just an absolute brutal killing.
If you could play that again, and again, it's censored, please forgive us, but he walks right up to this gas station clerk or whatever.
He was smashing up a car and she comes out to confront him.
He walks right at her and with full strength, he bludgeons her in the head with the hammer.
She falls down, obviously unconscious.
And then he strikes her six more times.
Six more times to the head.
He's now in local custody, and ISIS placed a detainer on him.
They have issued a statement said this illegal alien barbarically hit this woman in the head multiple times with a hammer.
This heinous murderer was released into the country by the Biden administration.
Rejecting Illegal Alien Amnesty00:11:40
This is a choice.
This is a choice.
Within living memory, this country was capable of having that person executed within two months.
This is a choice to not have that happen.
It's also a reminder that, as frustrated as you might be, we can't let what happened those last four years happen again.
I just watched A Great Awakening.
And I have to tell you, this isn't just another historical drama.
It's a wake up call that you all need to pay attention to.
We spend so much time talking about 1776 and constitutions and congresses and declarations, but this film reminds you of something even deeper.
Before the revolution, there was revelation.
George Whitefield wasn't a politician, he was a preacher.
And yet, watching this film, you see how his fearless proclamation of liberty in Christ shook the colonies to their core.
It unified people who had nothing else uniting them.
And that is power.
What really struck me was the portrayal of Benjamin Franklin.
He's this brilliant, rational mind, and yet he's drawn into genuine friendship with Whitfield.
Not because he suddenly becomes someone else, but because he begins to see freedom isn't structural, it's spiritual.
The film makes one thing clear.
You cannot sustain political liberty without moral and spiritual awakening.
In theaters, April 3rd, visit a great awakening.com to learn more today.
A great awakening.com to learn more today.
Congressman Brandon Gill from the great state of Texas joins us now.
Welcome back, Congressman.
And thanks for having me.
It's always good to be here.
Well, it's great to have you.
You have been out front, you have been sparring with Congresswoman Salazar out of Miami.
About the Dignidad Act.
Gotta say it right every time.
They're trying to run this Dignity Act scam on us.
Brandon, I am told that you need to read the bill before you open your mouth, before you call it amnesty.
I saw a tweet of something to that effect.
Is this an amnesty bill or is it not?
Are you being hyperbolic?
No, this is an amnesty bill, plain and simple.
Just ask yourself what does the bill do?
The day this bill, if this bill is enacted, the day it's enacted, what happens?
12 million, roughly 12 million illegal aliens who are in the country are given legal status.
If that's not amnesty, I don't know what is.
And you can use whatever kind of vague generalizations or semantic obfuscation you want, but that's amnesty.
And that's exactly what the American people do not want.
That's why they gave Republicans a trifecta.
It's why President Trump got the popular vote last election.
So, for us to do this, which we're not, by the way, I'm going to make sure that we don't, but if we went down this road, it would constitute the biggest political betrayal of the American people in history.
I think it would rip apart the Republican Party, and candidly, that we would deserve to see our party ripped apart if we went forward with this bill.
You know what's so frustrating as well, Brandon?
It's like, okay, we've got this, you know, conflict in Iran that's happening.
Our eyes are directed over there as we're trying to get a ceasefire.
I think everybody wants us to focus back domestically.
We take our eye off the ball for one second, one second.
Instead of passing the Save America Act, instead of getting any of these reforms done domestically, a bunch of rhinos go and, you know, link arms with a bunch of Democrats and try and shove amnesty down our throats.
And I'm going to have a guest next hour that's going to talk about some of this, what's going on behind the scenes, who's pushing this.
But there's big ag, there's big hospitality.
It's like all the usual players trying to push this through.
And you got to ask yourself, like, why don't we get what we want?
Instead, they're trying to give us stuff we didn't want, we didn't ask for, we didn't vote for.
Why is it so powerful?
Why are these lobbies so powerful to push this unpopular garbage down our throats where we're thinking about Iran?
Well, that's the question.
And you know what's.
Really insane about this, I think, is you know, if you go back to 2015, President Trump comes on the scene, you know, he starts talking about we ought to build a wall.
And so many people in the political establishment, all on the left and some on the right, said that he was a racist, that's not the America I love, and completely denounced him.
But the American people heard that message and it entirely resonated with them.
They said, you know what, I actually do want politicians in Washington who are going to stand up for us, who are going to secure the border.
And deport illegal aliens so that I can have my country back.
And now we, you know, that was over 10 years ago.
We ought to listen to that.
Whenever voters give us a mandate, we ought to actually follow through and do what we said we were going to do on the campaign trail.
But of course, these big agribusiness or other lobbyists don't like that.
And it's really simple.
They obviously want cheap labor, they want amnesty, they want illegal aliens in the country because for them, that's bigger profit margins.
Whenever you suppress American wages, or whenever you're able to replace more expensive American workers with cheaper illegal aliens or other foreigners, that increases their profit margin.
I mean, it's really, really simple for them.
But going back to the Dignity Act here, it's not just the 12 million illegal aliens who are given amnesty immediately.
This act would allow illegal aliens who have previously been deported to be brought back into the country and be given legal status.
On top of that, it effectively stops the president from deporting anybody out of the country because whenever an illegal alien is apprehended, all they have to do is say, I've been in the US for longer than five years.
Boom, they can't be deported for at least two years.
I mean, this is a mass migration bill.
It is exactly what the American people rejected.
Yeah, bingo.
I think that's, I mean, this is the same point Charlie made when we caught wind of this last year is that you basically, I mean, the record keeping is garbage, right?
On when some of these people came over.
All they have to do is say, oh, I actually came, you know, before a certain date and we can't prove it.
And then they get rubber stamped amnesty.
And so I think it's garbage.
I want to play a clip for you and get your reaction.
This was actually last night.
Laura Ingram, I think, did a phenomenal job cross examining Mike Lawler from New York.
He's a Republican.
You know, they are friends.
Laura Ingram and Mike Lawler are friends.
I think that's noteworthy because she didn't hold back even though they're friends.
Okay, let's play SOT 13.
I don't know what shadows you're looking at, but they're not in the shadows.
They're working in restaurants.
Some are.
Others are engaged in fraud in California.
But this idea that they're not being given amnesty.
They're not already given amnesty.
Why do you come on television and say that?
Criminal aliens 100% should be removed from this country, period.
And the bill provides for that.
I don't want anyone getting a waiver.
I don't want anyone getting a free pass.
It's in the legislation.
If you have committed a crime, it's very clear.
It's a simple question.
Please tell my audience how does an immigration officer determine continuous presence?
If they cannot prove continuous presence, they wouldn't qualify for this.
I can't imagine Democrat immigration officers under a Democrat.
president in the future was going to hold the strict, you know, we're not going to let any criminals in.
Man, she went for it.
But even with the continuous presence, I believe there's parts of this bill that literally will allow people who were previously deported to return, correct?
That's what he said.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, your reaction to that clip.
Yeah, you know, Mike Lawler is a friend of mine.
So is Maria Salazar, by the way.
They're friends and their colleagues.
They're just wrong on this.
And I'm glad to see that the reality of this bill is being made more and more clear to the American people because you hear language.
I hear people saying things like the current state of affairs is amnesty because these people are living in the shadows and nothing is happening.
That is just blatantly not true.
The current state of affairs is that if you're an illegal alien in the United States, you are subject to deportation.
And if you're caught, you're going to be deported out of the country.
What this bill does is stop those deportations from happening.
So, this is by any standard an amnesty bill.
We have to be straightforward about this, have to be straightforward about the fact that.
This bill does not have any serious vetting requirements.
This bill does not ensure that criminal illegal aliens are taken out of the country or that we can actually ensure the people who are given amnesty should be in our country.
There's no practical way to vet 12 million people in a short period of time.
So none of that stuff is true.
But we know that on the surface, anything that is amnesty, we ought to stay away from.
At the end of the day, it's really that simple.
Well, I want to give you an example of why some of this.
Anytime we give an inch, they're going to take a mile and it's going to screw us up.
And so here's a Salvadorian MS 13 terrorist, and he's an international fugitive.
This is according to the U.S. Customs, Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Danny Granados Garcia.
He's wanted in his home country for murdering a pastor, allegedly.
This guy is an example of we wouldn't deport him because he doesn't have a rap sheet in this country.
We don't know when he necessarily got here, but he's wanted for murder in his home country, right?
So, this is the semantics.
Anytime you give these little carve outs, what are we supposed to do with this?
No, you've got to give ICE and Customs and Border Patrol full leeway to get them all out.
You're all on the board.
If you are an illegal here, we're going to get you out.
This guy's a murderer.
In his home country, but he hasn't committed a crime here.
And this is the types of people that they want us to just ignore out of some misplaced sense of compassion.
Meanwhile, you know, excuse me, meanwhile, we're seeing Haitians in Florida, you know, just bludgeon gas station clerks.
This is none of this should be happening if we had the will to do it.
And, Congressman, I think you are one of the few that has just the sane, consistent, drumbeat voice on this stuff.
And it's so important that you're out front doing this.
So, final, final, uh, 45 seconds to you on this issue.
I appreciate that.
There's nothing compassionate about open borders and there's nothing dignified about giving illegal aliens amnesty.
The people whose dignity we should be concerned about are the American citizens whose jobs are being taken, whose wages are being suppressed, whose communities are being transformed, whose children's schools are now flooded with fentanyl, who are trying to take their kids to soccer practice and are seeing illegal aliens driving 18 wheelers on their streets that are now more dangerous.
Those are the people that we should be looking out for.
Those are people, by the way, that we as elected representatives whose interests we actually represent, not illegal aliens.
There's nothing compassionate about open borders.
There's nothing compassionate about amnesty.
And we ought to return to first principles about who we represent, and that's the American citizen.
It's not, it's not, no, not only is it not compassionate, it's cruelty to Americans.
Yep.
Congressman, well done on this.
Open Borders Are Cruelty00:11:13
Keep charging.
You know, I don't want to cause you any problems.
But I could see a Senate run in your future one day.
I don't want to cause any problems.
I know it gets very territorial down there.
I'm just saying, you know, I would be enthusiastic.
Let's kill this amnesty bill before we think about anything else.
All right.
I don't want to cause you problems, brother.
All right.
Brandon Gill from Texas' 26th congressional district.
Thank you, sir.
Keep up the good work.
Thanks for having me.
The war in Iran is having a devastating effect on the people living there locally.
What most people don't realize is it's affecting everyone on the global scale as well, even if we aren't there physically.
Every time a missile is launched or a bomb goes off, tiny microplastic particles are being spread into our atmosphere, leaching into our soil and water.
And guess what?
They eventually end up in our body, causing harm.
They cross the gut lining, leach into your blood, and disrupt everything.
They've been shown to alter gut bacteria, suppress your immune response.
And increase your risk for heart attack, stroke, cognitive diseases, and cancer.
There's now a plastic spoon's worth of microplastics in the average human brain, but your gut can help fight back.
Kimchi 1 from Brightcore Nutrition is a potent ally in this toxic world.
It's packed with over 900 probiotic strains unique to kimchi and proven to bind and excrete microplastics, helping you detox from the inside out.
Your body was never designed to handle plastic, but your gut was designed to protect you.
You must give it The right tools.
Today, you can get an exclusive offer by visiting brightcore.comslash Charlie, or for an even better deal, call Brightcore for up to 50% off your order and free shipping.
Give them a call now at 888 317 9258.
So, if you call them, you get an even better deal.
So, again, that's 888 317 9258, or you can visit them and get 25% off at brightcore.comslash Charlie.
Purchase only directly from Brightcore Nutrition to ensure product integrity.
They do not authorize resellers.
So again, brightcore.com slash Charlie for 25% off or call them to get 50% off at 888 317 9258.
All right.
We have another country we got to turn our attention to, however.
And there is a new acronym that is apparently going around.
Hold on.
It is MM.
No, hold on.
Hold on.
Don't say it.
We have to let them play the clip.
There's like 48 letters in this.
We have to let them play the clip and then we have to react.
We love making fun of CNN.
It's a pastime, right?
Where is it here?
It's SOT 11.
When the budget was released, I was shocked to find out that Prime Minister Carney is cutting $7 billion between Indigenous Services Canada and Crown Indigenous Relations.
They provided zero dollars to deal with the ongoing genocide of MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA.
This is abhorrent.
This is callous.
Rates of violence are increasing.
And what is the prime minister doing?
He is turning a blind eye on this violence.
The best part was how smoothly it came out.
Zero stuttering.
That is a person who uses that term all the time.
Can I read what it means?
You know what's embarrassing?
You don't need to read what it means because I know what it means just from hearing it.
Right.
But here's what it actually means.
No, but I know what it means.
I can recite it.
I need to, like, Prove myself here.
All right.
So he has not looked this up.
He's going to just.
So going off memory.
So it starts with M M I W G.
So that all, what's weird is it's the gay acronym, but it's actually like, how to put this?
It's not actually gay stuff.
It's missing and murdered indigenous women and girls.
Yep.
And so this is a whole thing in Canada where they've made a big cause that First Nations, Inuit, Native Americans basically, but in Canada, they're more likely to be missing and they're more likely to be murdered.
The reason for this is.
They are in relationships with First Nations and Inuit men, and they commit more domestic violence per capita, more murders per capita.
Unfortunately, it's a community with a lot of problems, similar to what you'd see in the United States.
And so that's why.
But in Canada, you're required by law to also punish people less for crimes if they're First Nations or Black, for example.
So they're literally more likely to be victimized because of the laws Canada has.
Like that is what is going on here.
So they go from there.
Then they have 2S, that means two spirit.
This is a made up.
Thing from about 1990 91 and it just made it where they just made it up, or it's basically you're an Indian, a First Nations person, and also gay that is what it is.
They just made up a new category for being gay, but then if you're in that group, then you should know LGBT, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans.
Then QQ, that is queer and questioning.
So queer is sort of gay, but catch all lots of different things.
Questioning, you're not sure.
I did they have I in there, yes, and that's intersex, and then A, and then A is allies, and then you still got to have plus.
Because this is not all consuming.
We might add new letters to it later.
So, that is the full explanation of that acronym.
I spent time in a university where I had to learn all of those things.
It's amazing.
So, apparently, murdered is now a queer identity, which is, you know, why not?
I mean, we should just throw in every other intersectional group that we can in this.
Can we play the clip one more time?
I just want to hear her that smooth.
Just cut it out.
Cut it off after that.
Yeah.
Play the side again.
When the budget was released, I was shocked to find out that Prime Minister Carney is cutting $7 billion between Indigenous Services Canada and Crown Indigenous Relations.
They provided zero dollars to deal with the ongoing genocide of MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA.
It's incredible.
I mean, that's commitment.
Ruthless.
Just, oh, crushes it.
Okay.
So proud of her.
So, not only can Canada not beat us in hockey, the one sport they're supposed to, and they, by the way, they also lost the World Series to the Dodgers, which I'm still happy about.
He's very happy about it.
They are suiciding themselves on purpose, and they have government funds for that.
But now they are upset that MMIW G2 SL.
He's not doing it.
GBTQQIA funding has been cut by Carney.
MMIWG2SLGBTQQQIA.
I think I got an extra Q in there, unfortunately.
QQQQQ.
What are your thoughts?
Send us your thoughts about Canada.
Are you glad if you're from Canada?
Especially if you're from Canada.
What's it like?
It's easy to joke about this, but to be serious for a moment, Canada is this road not taken where they've kind of kept down the 2020, Vibe, the Obama vibe, like maximally live on everything.
So, stuff that is at least contested here in the US, full bore in Canada.
So, they have maximum assisted suicide.
They have state mandated discrimination in criminal punishments.
They allow you to discriminate based on race and sex for a job.
I saw that at one of their universities, they're hiring for a forestry professor, but the person being hired has to be disabled.
You must be a disabled person or identify as a disabled person.
Yeah, well, that's what I was going to say.
I actually was talking to a gentleman.
So, it's like 2024 never happened in Canada.
But I was talking to a gentleman that was, you know, we're talking about all the fracturing that's going on and the movement and the coalition.
He just was like, you know what?
These are the golden years.
I'm telling you, this is the golden age.
I was like, why is that?
He said, well, listen, my company, I almost got delisted from one of the stock exchanges because I didn't have a gay man or a woman on my board.
And who said that this gentleman on his board was like, listen, if I need to identify as a gay, black, 80 year old man, I'm going to do that.
But none of that exists anymore.
This was years ago now, and we've overcome a lot of the woke garbage, and companies are actually able to just be a company that's focused on making money.
They don't have to have disabled, queer, black, lesbians, or whatever on their board just to satisfy some quota requirement.
This is absolutely forward progress.
And I want to show you guys one other thing because I think we don't pay attention enough to all the wins.
If you're frustrated with some of the president's decisions, whether that's Iran or something else, Just remember how much worse this actually could be right now.
We have this graphic.
It is the graphic about asylum claims.
So, this was a breaking news story that happened.
Asylum grants, grant rates have plummeted.
Average monthly rate for decided asylum cases is down to 7%.
Now, if you compare and contrast that to those spikes during Biden and Obama, we have made massive problems or progress.
You know why?
Because the asylum system is rife with fraud.
People claim.
Anything they want.
If you can claim it, the Democrat logic, if you can claim that you are a queer, MM, LGBTQ, YA, whatever, without anybody questioning it or being allowed to question it, well, you can claim asylum and nobody's allowed to question it.
Those days are over.
It's down to 7%, and we should celebrate that.
Hallelujah.
I want to talk to you about an issue so many Americans face, and that's health insurance.
There's an organization I really, really appreciate called Christian Healthcare Ministries.
CHM is a faith based alternative to health insurance.
And this is real stuff, folks.
Like, you got to listen in.
With CHM, you're not paying into a company's profit margin.
You're investing in a community with less overhead than the competition.
You get reliable support through the giving and prayer of fellow members.
Members contribute every month to help pay for each other's medical bills, allowing believers to afford the care they need.
Because they're not insurance, you get access to your preferred doctor or hospital without network restrictions.
You heard that right.
If you want to see massive savings in your healthcare budget, CHM has four low cost programs for every stage of life, starting at just $115 a month.
Plus, you can enroll or switch your program at any time.
See why so many believers are taking a leap of faith?
Start today by visiting chministries.orgslash Charlie and use promo code Charlie for a 50% credit towards your first month.
That's chministries.orgslash Charlie and use promo code Charlie.
We have Rich Barris on the line.
Rich, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk Show.
It's good to see you, my friend.
Money Behind Mass Deportations00:16:04
You as well, guys.
Thanks for having me.
It's great to be here.
Yeah, man, listen, I am told, I'm credibly told, Rich.
That we're not allowed to say mass deportations anymore.
It's out.
It's what's in.
Mass deportations is out.
Dignidad is in.
Amnesty is in.
Worst of the worst.
Worst of the worst.
You know, so, okay.
What am I missing here?
I'll give the audience a little precursor.
We've been texting, and you told me there's quite the little backstory here.
So the floor is yours, Rich.
Tell us what you know.
Indeed.
So, there isn't this, isn't new, right?
Amnesty is never dead.
And I think the right knows that.
The Republican base voters know that.
Amnesty is never dead.
Amnesty is always right around the corner, and you always have to guard against it because a lot of Republican donors want amnesty, right?
And I argued when we saw these protests going on against ICE, you're not going to see any investigations into who organizes these protests because I think you'd be a little bit surprised by some of the people that are okay with them.
And this is a backstory, all right?
So, I just wanted to say that as a preface, Andrew.
But look, Last year, right, just to dive right into this, last year, I, along with some other pollsters that are considered credible by MAGA, were asked to collaborate on a project that was sold initially as a way that if there could be a grand bargain, what are the deal breakers with MAGA voters and what would you have to do?
And this included everything you just said and went over.
You can't use words like that with MAGA, right?
You know that.
So, how could it be sold, et cetera, et cetera?
I didn't even want to sign on to it, Andrew, unless I was given an explicit promise, whatever you want to call it, that this will not be misrepresented to the president without my presence, right?
And that's what I was concerned would happen to the product.
We did a huge national study.
We did, I want to say, it had to be at least a dozen states, at least.
I actually think it was more like 16.
I think you said 18 to me.
Originally.
Yeah, it may have been.
I'm not sure how many some of the others had.
It is at least 16, just judging from what I know people did.
And then focus groups, of course.
And we did this in not just battleground states, it had to be more.
You're right.
It was battleground adjacent.
One of them was in Maine, for crying out loud, right?
Because why?
We were concerned about the second congressional district.
Donald Trump performs there in a way that other Republicans do not because of Donald Trump's base, his coalition, which is not the Republican coalition.
They're two totally different things.
And unfortunately, this is what people should know.
I mean, unfortunately, that's what the donors who paid, you know, the donor who paid for the project really wanted, which is why I didn't want to sign on to it without getting that guarantee.
I got that guarantee.
I warned the vice president that they would probably try to go behind my back and sell it to him without completely misinterpreting what it said, completely misreading the data, or honestly, let's be real, intentionally obfuscating what it said.
And the report that we gave was filled with caveats, filled with nuances.
And to make a very long story short, that's exactly what they did.
So they wanted the names, they wanted the credibility, and they wanted the stamps of all the guys like me who polled well in the Trump era and know the MAGA coalition.
But they did not want guys like me, and not just me, but others who are more reliable to tell the truth, to convey to the president what it actually meant.
So they waltzed in there and tried to sell it to him.
And this is where we are now.
To sum it up, you're saying that there was a moneyed individual.
That basically wanted a result.
And when you didn't deliver the results, because actually mass deportations are more popular than, I guess, this individual wanted them to be, or at least there was nuance in the way the polling was actually the results you got, you then got cut out of the process, is essentially.
100%.
Yeah, 100%.
Despite having a guarantee.
This is why you need to be very suspicious about polling, friends out in the audience.
So, okay, you sent me a list of three things that.
you thought that the polling actually revealed.
And one of them has to do with masks.
One of them is with the FBI and what constitutes crimes that will get you punished if you get in the way of ICE officers.
Okay, so why don't you walk us through your three points?
So we, and it's important to know how early this was, we identified before it became, you know, social media sensation, before big media started to run with this.
Yeah, you had left wing media talking about ICE and using, they at that time had the ICE narrative basically all to themselves.
We were wrapped up and very busy with other things like Operation Midnight Hammer.
I mean, that's how long ago this was when they started this.
Yeah.
And we basically warned them that, look, ICE is having an image issue.
So there are a couple of things you have to do to address it because you can't cave on mass deportations.
If you do, your base is going to be pissed.
And by the way, there's no reason to because the public still supports it.
One of them, and, you know, Blake and I talked about this before on the show masks.
It was a big deal.
They were toxic at that point.
And when you look at, you know, how people were getting doxxed in the first place, it really wasn't.
Required to keep these masks on.
Either way, it didn't matter.
We lost the public debate so badly, there was no coming back from it.
We had to get rid of the masks.
Second is that they did not view ICE as professional, as like the FBI, even the DEA for that matter.
And they wanted the FBI to come in and have control over the resting environment.
This way, we didn't have these incidents that we kept having, which ultimately blew up into shootings, right?
Later.
Minneapolis.
Exactly.
That's right.
And the third thing was a confusion over what constitutes.
These crimes because we were talking to, and this wasn't quite core based MAGA, but you know, Trump coalition voters saying, You know, we're not sure what constitutes a crime that will end you up on this list.
And while we do support mass deportations, we would rather see the really bad people go.
And they weren't even saying that the Trump administration wasn't doing it.
What they were saying was that there was just no information available.
You have MSNBC constantly running stories about how this one didn't pay a parking ticket, so they ripped the baby out of her hand and threw her into a cage and sent her on her way.
They wanted this laid out like, no, this is what we do.
This is what, you know, this is the priority list of crimes.
Those three things, simply alone, Andrew, would have gone a very long way in avoiding what essentially was a political catastrophe.
And it ended up that way because by the time we were done, this was a long term project.
By the time we were done, ICE was less popular than the FBI.
There were more people who wanted to abolish ICE than who wanted to abolish the FBI.
And it was stunning to me.
Nobody listened.
Nobody wanted to hear it because it dawned on me the donors don't care.
The donors want amnesty.
So they don't care if ICE gets defunded.
That's the truth.
And that is the hard, terrible truth.
And meanwhile, we have an FBI who waged two coups, Andrew, against the sitting president.
And they were more popular than ICE.
Yeah.
And so go through your points again.
What you found when you actually Pulled this issue was got to get rid of the masks.
The masks were optically toxic.
Listen, we all want our ICE agents to be safe.
We don't want them to be targeted, but they're optically toxic.
Okay.
It was too much.
Second point was use the FBI on the arresting and enforcement aspect of these raids.
So if you get in the way and impede ICE agents doing their job, the FBI would come in and be the enforcement mechanism.
And then three, clearly define what constitutes crimes that would land you in jail and prison.
Okay.
I think that's really, really clear.
Rich, I want to zero in on something here because I think it's really important, and that is the donor element.
That we know that big ag, we know that big hospitality, we know these are the industries that tend to often donate to Republican causes, campaigns, and they're the most hungry for cheap labor.
It's very frustrating.
And then I noticed something when I was looking at this Dignidad Act, the production value of it.
I'm going to play this clip, and we're going to Tie these two pieces together.
SOT 16.
What does the word dignity mean to you?
To me, it means not having to live in the shadows.
It means being proud to contribute to the economy and be respected for it.
That's what 10 million illegal immigrants deserve.
Let them work legally and generate over $100 billion in revenue for our Treasury.
No path to citizenship, no right to vote in our elections, and no access to federal programs.
It's called the Dignity Act, where they can work and live without fear.
Is the right thing to do, is the Christian thing to do, is the American thing to do.
So let's do it.
The Christian thing to do, Jorah.
Yeah, you love the Bible, don't you?
You have to get rid of your country.
The Bible says that.
I got super triggered when I watched that the first time with that line, too.
It's the Christian thing to do, it's the American thing to do.
So let's do it.
No.
Okay.
Enforcing your laws and looking out for the people of this country is actually our Christian duty to our fellow citizens.
That's the first responsibility of this country.
But you notice the production value there the music and the multi angles and the sharp lighting.
There's money behind this stuff.
And it's crazy that we take our eye off the ball for one second and we're focused on a ceasefire in Iran or whatever.
Instantly, they've got these things in the hopper, and you're getting pushed out when you're doing polling, Rich.
To reveal that, hey, actually, mass deportations is still popular.
We just have to change some messaging things.
We lost on the mass things.
We got to change the way we enforce it, add some clarity.
And meanwhile, so I know that you can't tell us, but I have some guesses of who you might have been working with.
And again, I go back to big ag and I go back to big hospitality.
Yeah, you got it.
Yeah, okay.
So I figured as much.
So I know you can't tell us because of your non disclosures and all this stuff, Rich, but like, What the vibe in that room?
So, you're in a room with a big money guy that's wanting to get an answer, wants to engineer an answer from your polling.
What tell us, like, give us the reality of this donor class and how hungry they are for this cheap labor.
It was a constant fight.
You know, if you go to a doctor, I don't care how much money you have, if you go to a doctor and there's something seriously wrong with you, I mean, it's a serious issue.
Are you going to second guess everything the doctor tells you?
Are you going to let the doctor do his job and be professional and get the best outcome or the right outcome?
For you.
That's not how it works in my industry.
It's constant fighting with the wording of the question, which you know as a pollster with integrity is a leading question.
It's constantly how are the graphics going to be presented to the president?
Can we possibly?
Let me give you an example, Andrew.
If you say, Do you support this?
And the Trump base says no.
And then you give them a bunch of riders in a series of questions to try to get them to sign on.
Well, what about if it doesn't include anybody who came over during the Biden era, which is a deal breaker, by the way?
And then you get a few more people on board.
It's constantly, well, can't we just combine those two together and say that that's the total to give to the president?
Well, no, we can't because that total includes specific riders that were also polled because initially they told you no.
This is the kind of stuff I'm talking about.
Okay.
So it's the president's very visual when you give him something, a product like that.
He wants to see the numbers, he wants to see the red, right?
Because Republicans are red.
He wants to see which one's what.
And that's it.
He doesn't want to dive down and look and see that it takes three, four, five specific proposals, different language assigned to it, and how you sell it.
They don't want to deliver that to him.
They want to mash it all together and present to the president as, you know what, this only leaves like 10% of your base, and that's nothing.
Well, first of all, 10% is the end of you as a coalition.
It's not nothing.
Secondly, you can't do that.
It's dishonest.
But there's a lot of money behind it, Andrew, and you want to get hired again.
So there are very few people who are like me.
Who will spend Christmas Eve screaming about how the product looks, you know?
Or, by the way, which carried all through the New Year celebrations.
This was a long term thing.
Very, very, very few pollsters will push back.
They'll just say, let's get him what he wants.
I understand.
There's the wink, there's the nod.
I want the money.
That's so infuriating.
On our side, too.
On our side.
Yeah, exactly.
And the grift is real.
And so I just want everybody to be very cautious when you see polls that seem too good to be true because they probably are false.
Okay?
That's right.
You know, so this reminds me of the 100% of MAGA supports this.
Like, I mean, I was speaking to another friend of mine who works adjacent to Poland, and he talked about the fact, just sort of the way you can use polls to set things up.
And he told me, we.
Commission polls, and I know not what 90% of them are going to say before the results even come out, but it's that you just create these polls so that you can convince people to do what they already want to do or convince them to do what you know you want them to do.
You can just set everything up.
So there's some polls that provide information, but there's arguably a lot more polls that are just used to manipulate people.
And, you know, President Trump, if he was given the right information, we would get better policies.
And that's why it's so critical that we.
And you, Rich, expose how this grift game works.
All right, I want to pivot just really quick.
If you have a final thought on that, that's great.
I just was going to say, you know what drives me nuts about this was this idea like, oh, let's not burden the president with the minutiae, the specifics, the caveat, the nuances.
Are you saying the president's a stupid man?
He's a smart guy.
Give me 10 minutes to explain this to him correctly.
It's insulting.
And we all know what it is.
We're going to keep saying mass deportations because guess what?
That's what the people want.
It is.
This is America.
What the people want, the people get.
Just sell it differently.
You got to have a messaging strategy that helps move it along.
I mean, this is what Bovino was saying.
He's saying, look at what we did in Louisiana, in New Orleans.
Look at what we did even in LA.
Look at what we did in all these places where we had the messaging out front.
We had a strategy.
They executed the strategy.
Everything went to crap in Minneapolis.
We get it.
I mean, that was a tidal wave and a political disaster.
But it doesn't mean that we don't want mass deportation still.
You just have to do it in a way that.
You know, we want commas, not drama.
We don't want the drama.
Keep the Asians off the headlines.
But we want mastery deportations.
Go ahead, Blake.
I'm wondering, 30 seconds, but would it be a workable approach if you said, if you went around saying, oh, we're getting the worst of the worst, and then you just started targeting business after business that's employing people illegally?
Because I think there's a lot more sympathy when you go after, oh, this business was employing all illegal workers, and you smear the business owner instead of the immigrant.
I just want to say, I can't believe in 20 seconds left and we got to that because that was another big sticking point.
They had no sympathies for big business, yet, guess who were the big donors?
So, of course, we couldn't bring that up either.
Racism in New York City00:16:09
That's another great.
I'm so glad you said that, Blake, because that was a fight that me and one other pollster had with everybody else.
Like, this is the obvious path to take.
Hello.
Yeah.
Crazy.
Rich Bears, thanks for ticking us off here before we leave here.
Listen, if faith and values are important to you, they should be a part of how you date.
It's that simple, not something you figure out later when you're like three, four months down the road in a relationship.
You see, most dating apps are built around casual connection, instant gratification, no long term vision.
And that's just not what many of you are looking for.
Thank goodness.
That's why I like Upward.
It's a dating app.
Designed around faith and shared values.
People who care about commitment, integrity, marriage, and family, the things that we really value on this show, you're starting from common ground instead of trying to negotiate your core beliefs months into a relationship.
That kind of clarity matters.
If faith is central to your life, or even if it's something that shaped how you were raised and how you see the world, Upward connects you with people who take that seriously.
So if you're tired of the confusion and ready to date with intention with marriage and family in mind, download Upward and start building on that right foundation because strong relationships.
Start with shared values.
Download the Upward app today.
Welcoming now to the show is our dear friend Libby Emmons.
She's the editor in chief of the Post Millennial and Human Events.
We've got lots to go over with Libby.
Thank you for joining us, Libby.
I hope you're doing well.
Yeah, you too.
Nice to see you guys.
It's great to see you.
So I saw this clip out of Virginia.
So Abigail Spanberger, she's been governor of Virginia for about 12 weeks now.
And apparently her poll numbers are slumping.
And she got asked about this.
And it was just too delicious.
We had to play it.
Satsix.
There was a poll out that had your numbers a little unfavorable on your numbers.
What do you attribute that to?
I would say, if everybody hated me, why is everybody putting my face on their mailers for the referendum?
Would be question number one.
Smirk, awkward smile, uncomfortable.
Go ahead.
She's just, she's a very, she's like a skinwalker or something.
You get this thing.
She's not, there's not, she's just a skinwalker.
Well, don't ever go from Virginia.
So, here's the details on the poll.
We have another Sot here for you, Libby.
So, we, to be fair, she's about 50 50.
All right.
But when you compare it to past governors of Virginia at this state, she's not doing so good.
OK?
SOP 15.
Glenn Youngkin had great approval ratings, but look at hers.
She's three months in, and her approval rating is almost what it is for disapproval.
About 50% like her, and 50% don't like her.
But if you compare that to approval ratings for past governors, nobody else was where she was at this point in their candidacy or in their governorship.
And so she was asked about this yesterday, and she defended it.
So she's not doing well because she ran as a moderate and she's gone full commie over in Virginia.
Your take, Libby Evans.
Yeah, she sure has.
This is something I've talked to some of our staffers at the Postmillennial who live in Virginia about this.
And they say that they are so sick of all of this gerrymandering stuff that she had previously said that she would not back gerrymandering in the state of Virginia.
And now she's going full force on that.
They're also telling me that there have been a number of illegal immigrant murders in the state just.
Since she's taken office, we saw an absolutely brutal murder in Fairfax, Virginia, of a mom who was just at a bus stop and this psychopathic illegal immigrant came off the bus and stabbed her to death.
Absolutely horrifying.
And these are people who have no business in the country and, in many cases, are people who have a criminal record in the state and should not be in the state.
They should not be in the country and they certainly shouldn't be going around stabbing women.
There's also, she's also reversed course on the cooperation of Virginia police with ICE.
So that's an issue as well, especially when you consider these illegal immigrant murders.
So I think people are looking around and they're saying, well, you know, we elected this woman who said she was going to be a moderate, and instead she is a far left crazy progressive.
And we're looking at a 50 50.
So while Democrats, for the most part, continue to support her, she's not making any inroads with Republicans in the state.
And that's going to be a problem.
Well, and by the way, the mailers that her face is being plastered on, a lot of those are against the redistricting effort that they're leading.
So we have to hit that.
We're hitting this really hard because if you're in Virginia, the final vote is next week.
Next week, Tuesday, I believe.
We get the results.
Virginia's redistricting.
They're trying to take it from a pretty even House split.
It's 6 5.
10 1.
They're trying to make it 10 Democrats, 1 Republican.
This very easily could decide the House next fall.
Either way, five seats is a ton.
This matters a lot.
And I know we lost that Virginia's race wasn't super close last fall.
But the polling shows this is very close.
There have only been three polls on it.
One is yes up by eight, one is no up by eight, one is yes up by five.
So, right there, not only that, if you get into the crosstabs, the highest propensity voters are actually the most skeptical about it.
The ones who have already voted are the most likely to say, no, I don't support this.
And we are seeing evidence of higher turnout in the Republican parts of the state.
So, this is a dead heat, as we like to say.
If you haven't voted yet, go vote right now.
I don't know why you didn't listen the last two times we told you to do that, but do it now.
And I think the last day is probably this Saturday.
If you don't do it by then, make sure you vote Tuesday.
This matters.
Exactly.
And this is a state that Kamala took by six points.
So this is a pretty close state, right?
And so they had six, five maps.
They're going to try and go to 10, one maps.
A total, total disaster, by the way.
And it does have national implications.
And what's also infuriating about this, you said this, Libby, that she ran against doing this.
Now she's all in favor because they lie.
And secondly, before this, they had A-plus maps.
They were rated A-plus for being fair, okay, to the voting electorate.
So, I mean, it's a bastardization of the sort of special election process, which I think is getting litigated, but nevertheless, the vote is going forward.
So vote, Yeah.
Libby, you also used to live in the city of New York.
You have a special place in your heart for the city of New York, I think it's safe to say.
And Mamdani is getting a dismal report card, new report out from the New York Post.
Mamdani gets dismal reports.
Report card from New Yorkers after less than 100 days in office.
What are you hearing?
Yeah, so I was looking at this poll as well.
He's got a 48% approval rating, which is substantially lower than Eric Adams, previous mayor's 61% at this point in his term.
It's more on par with Bill de Blasio's approval rating, and he was one of the worst mayors the city has ever seen, ever in the history of the city, and that's really saying something.
He's got a 30% disapproval rating, Mamdani has.
And as he's had his 100 days in office, it's been pretty, the far leftism has been really pretty rampant.
And also, he's Been breaking some campaign promises.
He's already walking back the free buses things because it turns out, golly gee, it's not that affordable.
Who would have known that?
I don't know.
Perhaps the entire city knew that and they elected him for it anyway.
They got on board.
So he's trying to walk that back.
He's also proposing some plans based on some equity reporting that was conducted after George Floyd.
This was put into place in 2022 by the city council.
Hey, let's get on board with some of this BLM equity stuff.
And he's noticed that there are racial disparities in terms of income and various other things, housing in the city.
And he's decided that this is all based on prejudice and racism, not choices that people make.
So that's something that people are looking at now.
He's complaining that white households earn something like $200,000 average, black households around $20,000.
And he's claiming that this is all racism.
And this is a study where everybody, all 45 agencies of the city, had to look at practices and policies.
Through the lens of critical race theory, the idea was go look for racism.
And if you're going to put on glasses that are covered with racism, that's all you're going to find.
Well, and if you think that the wealth disparity in New York City is caused by racism, I don't know what to do for you.
I don't know how to help you.
But the national, the entire basic purpose of New York City at this point might as well be to reallocate money in order to solve disparities.
Yeah.
Well, and remember, his campaign promise was to tax white neighborhoods.
Yes.
To essentially loot the wealth of white New Yorkers, give it to black and brown New Yorkers.
Here's the clip Sot 17.
The inequities in this city, the racial inequities are stark.
The wealth of a median white household in the city is more than $200,000, while that of a black household is less than $20,000.
We are reckoning with the long history of racism here and starting to act upon a framework that puts equity right at the center of it.
Standing right behind the mayor in that clip, by the way, is City Councilman Youssef Salam.
He is one of the Central Park Five.
He participated in a gang rape of the Central Park jogger, and that was a giant crusade to let him off.
Allegedly.
Basically.
Allegedly.
Okay.
I'm saying he 100% did it.
Well, allegedly.
So, yeah, allegedly.
The allegedly, and then media gets on board and paints all these beautiful paintings of him, and now there he is in city council.
Yeah, I looked at this, and as a white person who lived in New York City, who definitely did not make the kind of income that he's looking for, but would have probably been taxed at a higher rate anyway, just because of where I lived or whatever, it's really surprising to see.
How many people are actually on board with this?
Where you also have Black New Yorkers who are homeowners who are railing against this, saying, you know, we don't need to be taxed more just because we have the good fortune to own a home.
We're trying to do this crazy thing called building generational wealth for our families, for our children, for our communities.
That's important.
And you have Mamdani continuing to try to extort Albany for more tax revenue and more of all this stuff because he wants to implement more and more crazy programs that are based on equity, not opportunity.
And one of the greatest things about New York City.
Is just the amount of opportunity that is available.
There are a lot of really good public schools, you know, and if you work really hard, if you tell your kids to work really hard, they can get into those schools and they can make a great name for themselves.
They can make a future.
There's Nobel Prize winners that come out of these New York City schools.
And so when you look at the way that Mamdani is treating the city, he wants to slash everybody off at the knees who's doing well and give those, you know, give those legs to somebody else so that they can climb higher.
But these are people who living in one of the cities that has greatest opportunity in the world.
Have been unable to build on those opportunities.
And that's really just a shame.
And I think it's going to be a shame for the children of that city.
Well, surprise, surprise.
We have two examples of far left governance that are not, it's not popular because it doesn't work.
All right, Blake, you got a story on the Pope that everybody's talking about.
JD Vance is getting asked about it.
Yeah, it's just interesting.
I'm not entirely sure how to react to it.
This is a reporting from the Free Press, that's Barry Weiss's outfit, that supposedly the Pentagon, supposedly the Pentagon of one of our officials there, Elbridge Colby, Summoned Cardinal Christophe Pierre, who's the Vatican's ambassador to the United States, for a meeting in January.
And this is in the wording of the free press that he told this cardinal that the United States has the military power to do, quote, whatever it wants, and that the Pope, the American Pope Leo, had, quote, better take its side.
And supposedly, in this confrontation, the US went so far as to invoke the Avignon Papacy.
And that raises my eyebrow.
That sounds a little unlikely to me, to be frank.
For the 99% of you who have no idea what that's in reference to, in the 1300s, the King of France forcibly relocated the Pope to a town in France called Avignon.
And that's where the Pope was instead of Rome for a little under 100 years.
And for a period, there were even two popes there was a Pope in Avignon and a Pope in Rome.
Very complicated business.
It was very important 700 years ago.
It all sounds very unlikely to me.
Well, so, yes.
So, a spokesman for the Department of Defense told Newsweek that the free press's characterization of the meeting was highly exaggerated and distorted.
The meeting between Pentagon and Vatican officials was a respectful and reasonable discussion, the spokesman said.
We have nothing but the highest regard and welcome continued dialogue with the Holy See.
Yeah.
Now, we should be frank.
There has been a lot of friction between the new papacy and the admin.
I'll be frank, I think the Pope has been a little annoying with his rhetoric on migration, on immigration, stuff like that.
It bothers me because I just don't think it really is in line with traditional Christian views on things like that.
And it's annoying.
You used to have the Pope say things that are annoying, and you go, Oh, well, he said it in Italian, and it's getting translated weird.
Now we have this Pope from Chicago, and he just says stuff, and it sounds like a lib commentator on MS Now, and it's frustrating and annoying.
That said, I also don't think you want to be picking fights with the Vatican.
They are an institution with a Long legacy, a lot of moral legitimacy.
We don't need to spar with them either.
We can respectfully disagree with them.
That's what I hope, anyway.
Yeah, I mean, I think that it's been interesting to see the Pope.
This is the first American Pope.
I'm Catholic, so full disclosure there.
Fun fact about the Avignon Papacy I believe that that's where we got the wine, the Chateau Neuf de Pomp that came from the Avignon Papacy.
But yeah, I've been following Leo on X, coming out all of the time, speaking against war, speaking in favor of being nice to migrants.
And to a certain regard, I really respect what he's doing.
He's saying, no war.
That's really a pretty Catholic perspective at this point.
No war.
Be nice to migrants.
That's, you know, of course, we should be kind to these people.
And this is, of course, not the first time that a religious leader like the Pope, a religious Catholic leader, has come into conflict with the big military powers of the world.
It kind of speaks to a certain sense of balance and it makes sense.
I mean, the papacy is not here to.
Back the American government.
That's not what it's for.
It's supposed to guide Catholics in their view.
So that's, I think, what matters here is the speaking to Catholics about how they should behave.
Should Catholics be in favor of war?
Probably not.
But that doesn't mean that you don't back your United States, come hell or high water, no matter what.
And I'm frankly very comfortable with that, you know, potential contradiction.
And the same thing is true with the migration.
I think that it makes a lot of sense to be kind to migrants, to be kind to People who are intent on leaving their own nations, but that doesn't mean they have to come to the United States.
There is a separation there, certainly, between faith in Jesus Christ and what you think is best for your nation.
They're not always going to necessarily be the same thing, right?
I mean, I don't think that we should let our nation be overrun because that would certainly get in the way of faith and expressing faith and all of that stuff, too.
So there has to be a balance.
But I think Leo is doing what he thinks is the right thing to do.
Faith Versus National Security00:03:16
I think America is doing what America thinks is the right thing to do.
And it's okay if those two things are not always aligned.
I'm perfectly comfortable with that.
There's been a similar story that was unfolding in the past week.
There's this.
Push that's been made to frame the Pentagon under Pete Hegsef, who is a Protestant, as actively anti Catholic in some capacity.
There was a story that they had a Good Friday service on Good Friday and that they sent out a notice where it said Protestant service, no Catholic Mass.
And this was hyped up by a lot of people as them actively saying, We don't have Mass on Good Friday.
Yeah, it was ridiculous.
We don't have Mass.
Do not have a Mass on Good Friday.
We just don't do that.
Yeah, it's the only day of the year.
I actually went to a service on Good Friday.
You still have the Eucharist because they'll prepare it in advance, but they just distribute it.
They don't do the whole thing.
Wait, you just said they don't have a service, but you went to one.
So we have a service.
We don't have like a specific Good Friday Mass.
I mean, there's Mass every day.
Show up at your church at like eight in the morning.
You're going to find it.
It's important sacrament stuff.
Yeah, yeah.
Got it.
Listen, I'm a cradle Catholic, but I'm obviously a little rusty on some of the particulars.
But I can guarantee you that Pete Heg said he has nothing but love for the Catholic Church and.
Catholics serving in the military.
But it's something we actually talked about with Michael Knowles.
It does feel like there is some sort of effort to drive a wedge between Catholics and Protestants, evangelicals specifically in this country.
I don't know where that's coming from exactly, but I don't feel it innately myself.
It just feels like there's forces that are trying to drive a wedge between Catholics and Protestants.
And I genuinely don't resonate with it at all.
What I would say is Catholics and Evangelicals and different brands of Protestant, they have different beliefs about Christianity, and we shouldn't ignore those things.
I think if you go too far on ecumenism, you miss that.
You kind of end up imagining that doctrine isn't important, and that, oh, it's just we all kind of like ceremony a bit more than others.
And it is more than that that's going on.
Getting back to the big picture, I think it seems pretty obvious there's going to be friction between this admin and the Pope.
The Pope might bash the president a bit.
I would say, in contrast to most world leaders, The president probably shouldn't bash the Pope back.
He's just, it's not a fight that's worth picking.
It's not worth it.
There's a good exchange I remember.
I think there was a tech leader who was making fun of the Pope, and a guy just said, Don't mock the Pope.
Don't mock the Pope.
And if they did say something about we have military power, I find it unlikely that this administration did that.
But I do remember the supposed line by Joseph Stalin How many divisions does the Pope have?
And then the church played a big role in bringing down communism in Eastern Europe.
Well, but my point is, I'm not saying the doctrinal issues don't matter.
They certainly can and do sometimes.
But in general, we have way more in common than we do that separates us, namely Jesus Christ.
Yes.
Is our Lord and Savior.
Yes.
So, amen.
Libby Evans, thank you for joining us, the post millennial and human events.
Thanks for making the time, Libby.
We'll see you again soon.
Thanks so much, guys.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.