Is Obama a Gay Cokehead? with Jack Posobiec and Natalie Winters

The US dollar has lost 85% of its value since the 70s, when the dollar decoupled from gold, and the government seems bent on continuing the tradition.

Charlie Kirk here. From now until after the elections, the government can print as much money as they want. The last time they did that, inflation went up 9%. Gold is the only asset that has proven to withstand inflation. Invest in gold with Noble Gold Investments. You will get a 24-carat, one-fourth of an ounce gold standard coin for free. Just use promo code KIRK. Go to noblegoldinvestments.com.

That's noblegoldinvestments.com, the only gold company I trust. Hey, everybody. Welcome to The Charlie Kirk Show. This is Andrew Kolvet, executive producer of this fine show, filling in behind the microphone before Charlie, who is on a much-needed break. He's on assignment, but never fear. The show must go on.

We have Jack Pessobic. We break down Tucker's explosive interview that's been going viral. He talks about, was Obama gay?

Was he doing drugs with people? Why the media didn't cover it? Tucker has some really impressive insights, and Jack and I both offer our own perspective on that as people that are familiar with the way this political world works. And then I bring on Natalie Winters, and we talk about China. We talk about their ties. We talk about their paid-for and bought-for propaganda campaigns that are existing and operating within the United States right now.

And we also talk about how the U.S. government is currently ramping up its COVID response ahead of 2024 and what it means for that important election. Buckle up. Here we go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy. His spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here.

Brought to you by the loan experts I trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandtodd.com. Jack, welcome to the Charlie Kirk show. Good, so everyone can see the merch. We got the new merch here, folks. There we go. Loud and proud. Boom. I love it. You know, the merch at the Charlie Kirk show, just while we're on it, sold out, Jack. Now, I don't know where you got that particular one.

I don't mean to be competing with you. However, I want to say I think we had the same. I think we had the same deal on that.

Okay, well, very good. Anyways, for all those listening, we have new stock. We had to order new stock. I mean, we bought hundreds of these shirts, and we don't really do merch on the show a lot. Maybe we will now. But they all sold out.

We had to restock them. You can go to charliekirk.com and click on the link. Or you can go to members.charliekirk.com and sign up there. We'll send you a free Never Surrender shirt if you sign up for the member site. Anyways, Jack, that's not why we're here. Although, I love the shirt. We love that they're walking billboards for Donald Trump and this weaponization. Donald Trump did nothing wrong.

Donald Trump did nothing wrong. Absolutely. Okay, so here's where we're going. Jack, you tweeted about this. I wanted to have you on to talk about it. Very important.

This is a clip that is now going around the world. 142. I'm going to start with 142, and then I'm going to talk about the one you tweeted out, actually. So we're going to go in reverse order.

Let's play 142. The media is reporting on government, but it's also dependent on government. You know, in 2008, it became really clear that Barack Obama had been having sex with men and smoking crack. And a guy came forward, Larry Sinclair, and said, I'll sign an affidavit. And he did.

I'll take a lie detector. And he did. I smoked crack with Barack Obama and had sex with him. Well, that was obviously true. Nobody reported it, not because they were squeamish about sex or drugs, but because the Obama campaign said anyone who reports in this gets no access to the Obama campaign. And so they didn't report on it. So that happens. That's just one small example.

But that happens all the time with lots of different issues. All right, Jack, there's a lot to unpack here. There's a lot to unpack here. And now you are, let's just say you're a DC insider, but on the good team. All right, you have sources within the White House. Some of your tweets, I mean, have been the most prescient things that you can imagine.

You've called it out, you predicted it. You know how the influence peddling works in DC. So he's talking about access here. He's talking about Obama. I think that everybody's fixating on the Obama piece. But explain what he said there and how that jives with your own experience.

Right. So you don't even need to go all the way to Tucker Carlson to understand this because Ben Rhodes, who was the Deputy National Security Advisor to Barack Obama actually explained this once in an interview. He says, look, we'll go and do these briefings, these press briefings, and he would take a briefing, take say the Iran deal. He was talking about the Iran deal in this one situation. By the way, Biden is trying to bring that back.

People really haven't noticed because kind of being under the radar with everything else going on. They're trying to actually bring the Iran nuclear deal back right now. More pallets of cash.

We'll see how that goes. But he said, what we would do then is hold a Skype call with like 20 journalists. And every single one of them was like some 20 something that didn't have any experience in reporting or any experience in the real world, other than hanging out on a campaign bus, which is something that's going on. They're kind of getting their feet wet. It's a tradition in in politics, especially in presidential years.

You go to Iowa, you go to New Hampshire, you hang out on the bus. So they didn't know anything. They were not Iran experts. They weren't nuclear experts.

They weren't foreign policy experts. And so he actually said, you can tell them whatever you want, and they will write down whatever it is. This, by the way, and Tucker goes on to explain later in the in the same interview. With Adam Carolla there, that this trickles all the way up the top CNN anchors like Wolf Blitzer, because they end up getting their quote unquote, you know, off the record sources exclusive national security source. What does that mean as an exclusive national security source means that there's someone from the Intel agency that has decided they want a narrative to come out on CNN, or on MSNBC, or whatever it is that they will get.

And by the way, you know, I'm not going to go into that. And by the way, this same thing happens on Fox News, because they'll walk over and say, we want this narrative out. So you can say, three Intel sources, or Intel sources, whatever it is, or Intel sources have told CNN that there were no soldiers killed in Afghanistan, or that it's perfectly safe for Joe Biden, whatever it is, anything like this. Or if you remember the actual don't even talk about this happened two years ago, when Fox News falsely reported that it was Jen Griffin, who that they were the terrorists that attacked Abby gate were later taken out in a drone strike was completely false ended up being some Afghan aid worker.

So what I mean to say is, this can all be spread around. But we're talking about how the sausage is made with access journalism. So when Tucker is talking about here is a specific incident with Barack Obama, as pertains to his campaign, as pertains to his entire White House, which really set the stage, or what we see in terms of access journalism. Now, it's completely false. And now it started during the Bush years.

And yes, there have been persistent stories about Barack Obama and his, shall we say, sex life, while he was in college, I think safe to say experimentation, I think is the right word gender fluidity, maybe. But these stories have been out there and has been ex girlfriends, people who claim that they were ex boyfriends letters that he wrote that have been authenticated. And yet none of it was able to get reported outside of like, at the time, the burgeoning it was kind of nascent, but the blogosphere was just getting going.

Remember, this is 2007 2008. That's when the blogosphere was getting going. Breitbart was just getting started, James O'Keefe, Project Veritas was just getting started in the same period. So you would see stories there, but it wasn't yet at the same maturity now that we see with social media. So these narratives never really broke out of those little silos.

Yeah, I think it's safe to say, Jack, I think it's a good point. I think today's media landscape with Real America's Voice, conservative radio, shows like yours, the Charlie Kirk show, this narrative would have gotten out there a lot in a lot more force. And that's not really a narrative. It's just reporting reporting on the facts.

I mean, we had rising star by David Garrow was like 1000 page, you know, biography on Barack Obama, which exposed this didn't really get any traction until just recently this year. And I just want to give people a little bit more insight into the way the sausage is made. Jack knows this, our audience knows this. You know, I spent a lot of my time doing PR work, media relations work.

I mean, it's it's basically when we get off the show early before the show, a lot of my time spent doing that. Here's what I will tell you. I have sources within the New York Times and Washington Post complaining to me, complaining to me, Jack, that if they write one untoward comment about the Biden administration, one speculative question, they will be cut off access will be cut off. And so this is New York Times. This is I mean, this, when I tell you that the frustration within the media community is spreading, and it's real about the by the about the Biden admin, I think we're worse, we don't know how that's going to play out in 2024. We don't know how it's going to play out if Biden can't run or chooses not to run, or if they're going to force them out.

But this this is a frustration that is deep seated within the within the the access journalism community. Which by just throw it out there, no one's ever going to give Trump credit for this. But his administration was actually one of the most open administrations ever in the history of the United States. When it comes to press access, you could be one of those bloggers, you could be somebody who essentially had a Twitter page, but he would give you a press pass, they'd issue a day pass or something for the White House, the pretty breast room, a Brady press room, you would be able to get in there and even sometimes get interviews with Sarah Huckabee or Sean Spicer when he was running the room later, Kayleigh McEnany, etc.

They gave time to literally everyone got zero credit for it. Yeah, I mean, I believe that that moment where Trump looked at Jim Acosta and said, you are fake news. He tore the veil.

He tore the veil. I'll never forget that day. And the media landscape has never been the same, Jack, it's never been the same. And we're never going back to that way that the world was.

And yet, there's still a big portion of the population that just watched this legacy news media. It might tell you that it is the secret to living long, anti-aging properties, more energy. All of that is being proven in more and more clinical trials. NADH is a precursor so that your mitochondria can remain healthy and vibrant. The elites, a lot of billionaires, people, a lot of money, they spend a ton of money on NAD. So in fact, NAD just might be your secret weapon for more energy. I take NAD every single day.

I could tell you that NADH, compared with CoQ10, the trials show very, very good things on it. Don't take my word for it. I mean, honestly, my word should be good for something. But fact check me.

Look at it. And if you do it over 30 days, you'll see an increase in energy. I wake up better than ever before. NAD can help you potentially, again, fact check me on this with depression, anxiety, other issues that you might be dealing with. It is nature's gift to you.

So you might have extra energy and mental clarity. You guys can use promo code Charlie for 20% off. It's Strongcell.com slash Charlie. NAD might be nature's secret weapon for you.

I love it. I take it every single day. Try to try it for at least 30 days to see the maximum benefit.

And let me know, has NAD helped your life? Strongcell.com slash Charlie. Check it out. Strongcell.com slash Charlie. Jack, I'm going to play a clip that you tweeted out. You've got some hot takes on it.

149. So they can't lose. They will do anything to win.

So how do they do that? They're not going to do COVID again. I know everyone on the right is afraid they're going to do COVID and mask mandate. They're not going to do that. They can't do that.

If they've already been exposed, that won't work. There's going to be no. What are they going to do? They're going to go to war with Russia. That's what they're going to do. There will be a hot war between the United States and Russia in the next year. And they're going to go to war with Russia. On. Yes, of course. They want it anyway.

I don't think we'll win it. But that's a separate analysis. But I think it's a political matter.

They need to declare war footing in order to assume war powers in order to win. I believe that. And I think the evidence suggests that's true. Jack, that's a bold statement from Tucker. I mean, we've been talking about the COVID stuff, the COVID panic. We're going to have Natalie Winters on next. We're going to discuss some of the intel that she's gathered. But this is this is a different tack. Tucker's saying that they will do anything to win, including declaring a hot war against Russia. Your take. Yeah, so I actually threw out on Twitter yesterday, just one tweet, a one line tweet.

Unlike Charlie, he's a master of the four line, the five line tweets, the one line old school 140 character Twitter tweet, where I just said very simply, I even have it right here, that they would launch America into war with Russia just to get rid of military aged males who are more likely to support Trump. Andrew, there was a new study and we have a piece up at human events.com. Today, there was a new study that came out from the University of Queensland, Australia, with the subject for more than 5000 adults in the US and the UK. It's a preprint in the journal personality and social psychology bulletin. Why does this matter? So they asked questions about empathy for political allies and empathy for political enemies.

And to the shock of the researchers, but probably nobody here in this audience. Conservatives tended to have more empathy for liberals. But Andrew, do you think that liberals had much empathy for conservatives? I'm going to take a guess and say no, hardly any, and always supported harsher measures against them. Whereas conservatives said, Oh, no, we need to be careful.

We need there are friends, etc. We must have empathy for them, even though there are political allies. Well, the problem with this is that it leads to false outcomes, because they are misreading the room. And so when I posted that tweet, and when Tucker put his thing out saying that, the the left, the regime, the Uniparty, the overstate, as I call it, that is currently in power would be willing to now we've been saying that they'll bring back COVID to end the election. Tucker's going a step further, I believe, saying they want war with Russia, in order to declare war footing to stay in power. And then I kind of was riffing off of that and said, and not only that, but if you launch a hot war with Russia, what are they going to do? Who are they going to send?

It will be military age males who are more than likely predisposed to support to supporting Trump, that would end up going to have to fight in any such situation. Now, when you put all of this together, the neocons got so mad. And all like half of neocon DC was raining down on me on Twitter yesterday in which I was just throwing them out like like Andre in a battle royale. But you've got at the same time, the left the liberals, they didn't say a word. They didn't say a single thing to my tweeters.

That's up to 2.5 million impressions. I just looked. They didn't have an issue with it.

Why? Because they winked. They looked at it and they winked and said, Yeah, we would do that. They're also not attacking Tucker either for what he said about getting into hot war with Russia. Because if you look at things in Ukraine right now, they are definitely not going Zelensky's way.

We just had Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer on human events. And he predicts that because of the failure of the Ukrainian counter offense, remember, we were told this is going to be the spring counter offensive, and it's going to launch and now it's summer and they'll summer is over going into fall. They've barely been able to take anything. Meanwhile, they're losing thousands and thousands of soldiers, and they're losing NATO equipment in the field with Russia. Russia, on the other hand, hasn't even lost their, their superior defensive lines that they've spent all of this time building. So you look at what Russia is doing the Kremlin, on one hand, they're cleaning up, right, they're cleaning up the ranks, they got rid of precaution, they're making sure that everybody's on board, everyone's loyal to the big boss, taking care of the family business settling old scores. Now they're moving around replacing generals that are in operational control of what's going on in Ukraine. They're about to go on the offensive.

And Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer has predicted that they're likely to even get on the offensive by October 1. What does this mean for the United States? What does this mean for Biden? Biden, not only the corruption involved the belief involved, they will do anything to go and continue this fight, including up to all out hot war. Jack Pessobic with the hot take. I sure hope you're wrong, Jack.

I sure hope Tucker's wrong. Listen, as students begin heading back to school, do you think they'll be learning about the founding principles that made America the freest, most prosperous nation in history? Will they learn that our unalienable rights are God given and not granted by government?

Will they be given a full and honest account of our nation's history? The answer to all these questions is yes, for students at Hillsdale College. And these days, in addition to teaching college students, Hillsdale has extended its teaching to K through 12 students and lifelong learners like you and me. If you're not doing so already, one of the best ways to start learning from my friends at Hillsdale is through In Primus, Hillsdale's free digest of liberty. My listeners can sign up for free at the special website, which is available for a limited time. It's at charlie4hillsdale.com. I look forward to In Primus each month and you can too. It's interesting, useful and free, the best and smartest in conservative constitutionalist thought. Find out more about Hillsdale and In Primus at charlie4hillsdale.com.

They're an excellent college, America's greatest college, charlie4hillsdale.com. I am very excited to bring my next guest on. That is Natalie Winters.

She's the executive editor of War Room and co-host of War Room with Steve Bannon. Natalie, welcome to the show. Hi, thank you so much for having me. I'm honored to be on with you as someone who also filled in for Steve when he's out. I know it's big shoes to fill, but you're doing a wonderful job. Well, thank you, Natalie.

That's high praise from you indeed. Funny backstory with Natalie. I wasn't sure if I was gonna bring this up. I was trying to get a hold of Natalie. Was this like two years ago? Was this like a year and a half ago too?

About, yeah. So I broke some report. I was like, Natalie, you need to come on the show. And she thought I was a stalker folks. True story. Apparently you have a problem with this stalker phenomenon. But nevertheless, we cleared it up at a turning point event.

And she was like, oh, okay, that's who you are. So it's fine. I know. That's why I never come on the Charlie Kirk show, but I'm glad to be here now because now I know that you're not just having me for whatever reason, but you won't spread the gospel about the stories that I write.

Exactly. It was you were blacklisted temporarily, but we're glad to have you back. A self-imposed blacklist. Yeah, you brought it on yourself, Natalie. Anyways, here we go. So I, you know, I've been following your reporting as this stuff has gone mega viral on Twitter. You really started a new kind of narrative, a new a new questioning line of questioning probing of the administration, the regime rather. Let's go ahead and throw up the tear out exclusive federal government is starting COVID-19 emergency contracts expiring in 2025. This is a bombshell story. You know, the Department of Health and Human Services begun rolling out federal contracts for COVID-19 response with start dates in September and in concluding in the year of 2025. Okay, so Natalie, walk us through these.

How did you find them? Where did the scoop come from? And what is the greater significance? Sure. So this is the second part of the story, sort of a chronicle that I had been keeping track of the federal government's spending database, how they're choosing to spend your hard-earned taxpayer dollars, but specifically sort of juxtaposing the narrative coming out from some alternative media outlets. It really started with Alex Jones at Infowars talking about the potential for these lockdowns and mandates to be coming again. And of course, if you turn on the mainstream media right now, even if you look around at certain hospitals, VA centers, studios, colleges, you have started to see the rollout of these, of course, ineffective policies. So I always like to look for the receipts because the Biden regime is very good at lying and not telling us the truth.

You can't lie on USAspending.gov, right? The money is where the math is. And what I have found really, I think, is an alarming trend for a variety of reasons. But the story that you highlighted shows contracts coming from HHS, the Department of Health and Human Services, to various vendors, various federal contractors for COVID-19 services. The HHS contract in particular is going to a pandemic response and tracking firm that specializes in surveillance.

They don't really get into excessive details about why they're hiring them, why they're giving them millions of your taxpayer dollars. But I've also heard other contracts coming from the DOD, coming from the VA for similar use, whether it was COVID-19 equipment, COVID-19 test kits or just enforcing COVID-19 quote safety protocols. But what I think the most concerning part is about this story isn't even the fact that right now they're getting ready to weaponize our taxpayer dollars and purchase these contracts. What's even more damning is on the other end is the end dates of these contracts. And in a lot of cases, those coming from HHS are set to end in 2025. But those coming from the DOD and the VA are actually set to culminate in, believe it or not, the year 2028.

And why I think this is so damning, it goes back to something that you guys are always covering on the show, right? This isn't about public health. It's not about COVID. It's about weaponizing and exploiting it and using it to push a very nefarious social agenda that of course, dovetails with the 2024 election.

Yeah, so it's an interesting tie in Natalie. So 2025, obviously, this would be after the 2024 elections, right? 2028 would be assuming Democrats remain in power, they're going to have these contracts in place until then, which could mean we are in for if Democrats win and get their way, we could be in for an era of COVID tyranny that we, I think most of the general public, certainly myself thought was basically in the rearview mirror. Now, are you seeing a change in tone? I think I am, but I want to get your perspective on this. Are you seeing a change in tone from the likes of Carine Jean-Pierre, or any of the other admin folks within the Biden administration, that this is actually something they're ramping up to do? Do we see the signs that would indicate that your reporting is actually part of a greater scheme?

Sure. Well, from a scientific and data perspective, there's absolutely no signs that the Biden White House, the Biden regime should be back on these measures. I'm sure people are aware, the week predating the sort of new rollout of the mask mandates, like I said, on the college campuses, various studios and sort of starting to see the mainstream media use its COVID-19 talking points again, of the 324 COVID deaths that were recorded countrywide. And that week, like I said, predating the raw of these mask mandates, just about 1.7% of those deaths actually identified COVID-19 as the primary cause of death, even at peak pandemic levels, that percentage hovered more so around 30%. So I think if you really want to get into why they're bringing this back, I think the more important number is the really freefall that companies like Moderna and Pfizer have seen in their profits when it comes to COVID-19 products. While the CDC has come out and rather forcefully through the mainstream media and through, of course, their fact-checking apparatus, the factcheck.orgs of the world come out and said, we're not going back into lockdowns. We're not going to reinstitute mask mandates. I don't know about you. Anytime the CDC says something, the opposite is probably true.

So that doesn't really give me any comfort. But we've already started to see Joe Biden pick up the COVID-19 booster talking points saying that people should get ready to start taking their boosters come September, which of course is just starting tomorrow. And there's been a lot of talk about how the FDA is already starting to authorize those boosters specifically for the COVID-19 products. So I think we will see a full-scale push for vaccination come from the Biden White House. I think they will be a little more cautious with their talking points and how they're going to talk about the lockdowns, potentially the mask mandates, because I think they know you can only push the American people so far.

And I think, you know, we will not comply is really the prevailing sentiment of most America. And I think the Biden regime understands that. So I think they'll try to be a little more indirect in the way that they're going to implement these lockdowns.

And frankly, I'm sure I think the way that we're already starting to see that comes in the way that they're very, very, very skilled with their language, with the syntax and the diction that they use. In other words, they've sort of rebranded the term lockdown, the term mandate, and now they're called safety protocols. If you read the mainstream media, you'll start to see this word pop up. But that's sort of the new remake of what a COVID-19 mandate or COVID lockdown is. It's a safety protocol, a very euphemistic term. That means we got to trust the experts because only they know how to keep us safe. I'm, of course, being ironic.

Of course. I mean, like on a 30,000 foot level, I guess like my question is, you know, are they really serious about this? I mean, was this a trial balloon? You know, to gauge the public's reaction to this? I mean, do they think this has any political advantage whatsoever?

Are they just so neurotic they can't really help themselves? I mean, what could be driving this? And I'm going to play this clip again for the audience and for you of Tucker saying, hey, it's not going to be COVID. It's not going to be mass and lockdowns.

Actually, it's going to be war with Ukraine. I mean, are they floating trial balloons to see what sticks here? I think so. I think it's so in your face. And I think they think that they can get away with it, because if you think about it, I mean, for the past years, we've really only seen now because of FOIA requests and awesome investigative reporting that the censorship industrial complex really does exist.

Right. You have these groups that are within the government, but it's also been outsourced to these sort of NGO types. We, of course, see that with the collusion with big tech. So I think the Joe Biden types of the world, the Biden regime is really the American ruling class has been able to get away with lying to the American people because they have essentially a Praetorian guard that is running cover for them and censoring anyone that they disagree with. When it comes to the mandates and the potential lockdowns, I mean, I really think that we need to look at these as an extension of democratic lawfare just in the style of the impeachments and the indictments that they've weaponized against Donald Trump. I think they've realized that the indictments are backfiring.

Trump, of course, had his highest ever reported day in terms of campaign fundraising the day after his Georgia mugshot was released. He's only skyrocketing in the polls. The indictments are not cutting through. They're not having the results that I think the establishment hoped or thought they would. So I really think that they are throwing the entire kitchen sink at him because they know that they can't beat him at the ballot box.

And I know everyone always says that. But I really think it's become so normalized now. The tactics that the Democrats have used and the Republican establishment against Donald J. Trump. But really, these COVID mandates, these lockdowns are just part of that kind of, like you said, 30,000 feet game. It's not actually about public health, right?

It's not actually about stopping the spread. They'll weaponize climate lockdowns. They'll use racism as a supposed ill or social crisis that we need to combat using any tactic, whether it's a lockdown or a mandate, just enough to really give them the prerequisite or the justification to what is, I think, really use the mass universal mail-in voting. I think that's one of the key ways that they've kind of rigged elections legally in a weird way, although that sounds paradoxical. But I think it's just about getting the public, you know, concerned, triggered, you know, into the COVID hysteria again, that they can launch this country and use the justification to have what is another election that is conducted really primarily vote by mail. But that, of course, comes with the guaranteed fact that Democrats know it all too well that it means it will also be right with fraud.

Yeah, you know, I totally agree. I think we've gotten accustomed to this game of whack-a-mole that we're now playing with the Democrats. The Democrats seem to constantly be on the offensive.

Is this never-ending onslaught? New idea, new idea, new idea. Oh, you know, can we remove Trump from the ballot? Can we do mass mail-in ballots? Can we stoke fears that, you know, a war with Russia is our impending doom?

Can we scare people about masks and lockdowns and all of these other things? Can we throw four indictments at Donald Trump? And it seems like the Republicans are just playing defense.

There is no plan. Charlie said that this week. In spite of all of that, the reason I think that we're not done seeing these new ideas is because in these new attempts to derail the Trump movement is simply because the trend is our friend. In these battle states, the McLaughlin poll came out today having Trump up 49-41 in battleground states, which is massive if true. They are not done. They are wargaming.

Mark my words, people. They are wargaming this in some back room, some Zoom call, trying to figure out what we can do to stop Trump. Let's talk about China. So if we're buying up all of these COVID supplies, if we're gearing up for this 2024 push, what's China doing? Is there any connections that you're seeing?

The floor is yours. Sure. Well, I think when we talk about Chinese Communist Party influence operations, you know, it wasn't just COVID that I think exposed how in depth they are ingrained and embedded in this country. But I think the level, the extent to which their propaganda operation has a grip and a grasp on this country really was exposed through COVID. And what I mean by that is, you know, think about the propaganda that they were able to disseminate about the origins of COVID-19, right? The wet market as opposed to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. I would even argue all the way back to kind of day one of the origins of the virus intentionally being released from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where it's just being a natural spillover event.

They have hidden, they have continued to hide the viral genomic sequences about the virus, the fact that they were engaging in gain of function research. But what I think the fundamental point is here and what I have dedicated a lot of my previous career to in terms of the investigative reporting is that it's not just the origins of COVID that the Chinese Communist Party is running these propaganda campaigns on and spreading actual disinformation here in the United States. It's on all issues. And it really is election interference, really in its purest form. And there's actually a wonderful article today in The New York Times that's saying that Republicans, people like me and you who dare to speak out against the Chinese Communist Party and call them out for the evil regime that they are, that we're actually fueled by just a desire to basically keep white people and Christianity in power in this country.

I think that might hold the record for worst political take in recent history. But my point in all this is that this narrative about China being a competitor, China being an ally, China being a friend to the United States. That is a narrative.

That is a talking point. The Chinese Communist Party, through their political worker department, which is called the United Front Work Department, has spent billions and I use the term billions of dollars getting disseminated and really trying to mainstream here in the United States. So when you hear the neoliberal talking point, right, which comes from the Biden regime basically every day about how, you know, a rise in China is not a threat to the United States. Joe Biden wrote an op-ed in 2011 saying that a rise in China does not pose a threat to the United States.

It's a direct quote. Maybe that takes the bait for best New York Times take it in a long while. But it's just important to remember that a lot of the talking points that you've heard about China, they are just like so many things in this country made in China. And there's these groups like the China United States Exchange Foundation, the Chinese People's Association for Friendship and Foreign Contact, all these very happy, innocuous sounding names that they have budgets from the Chinese Communist Party, specifically from the People's Liberation Army. And they are tasked to liaise and really embed themselves not just with politicians here, but with people who work at the think tanks in Washington, D.C., academics, of course, family members of politicians really so they can astroturf and create this narrative that a rise in China is great for the United States. And that's why you've really seen such weakness coming from Joe Biden against China.

They use human rights sort of as a cop-out, but the issue is much deeper than that. Beware of what you read. Who knows who paid for it? Thank you so much, Natalie. Thanks so much for tuning in, everybody.

I hope you enjoyed those conversations as much as I did. If this show has meant anything to you, if it's changed your life for the better, please consider becoming an annual member at members.charlicurk.com. That's members.charlicurk.com. And if you sign up today, here's the bonus. If you sign up for an annual membership, we're going to send you a Never Surrender shirt. They sold out very, very quickly. So we restocked them. So please come and get your shirt at members.charlicurk.com.

Sign up for that annual membership and it will be shipped out to you pronto. Thanks so much for listening. Talk soon. Thank you.