The Plot to Take Trump Off the Ballot with Mike Davis and Rep. Jim Jordan

Hey everybody, Charlie Kirk here. Are you new to investing and have savings you need to protect right now? With the Middle East war, the Ukraine war, and maybe Taiwan soon, you need a new playbook that is safe. Allocate some gold now and avoid the frenzied panic of the unprepared. When fear reigns, gold protects the wise. Noble Gold Investments offers a free 5-ounce America the Beautiful coin with new IRAs this month. Shield your savings with a Noble Gold Investments IRA. Go to NobleGoldInvestments.com. NobleGoldInvestments.com, the only gold company I trust.

That is NobleGoldInvestments.com. Hey everybody, today on The Charlie Kirk Show, we have Jim Jordan join the program to talk about the latest fights in Congress. We also have Mike Davis from Article Free Project to talk about Donald Trump potentially not being on the ballot in Colorado and other states. Very important, underreported story.

Shout out to Steve Bannon who has been leading the charge on this story. Email us as always, Freedom at CharlieKirk.com. Get involved with Turning Point USA at TPUSA.com.

That is TPUSA.com. Start a high school or college chapter today at TPUSA.com. Get involved with The Charlie Kirk Show and become a member. If you want to listen to our content advertiser-free, go to CharlieKirk.com and click on the Members tab where you listen to all of our content advertiser-free. Email us as always, Freedom at CharlieKirk.com. That is Freedom at CharlieKirk.com.

Buckle up everybody, 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. How often do you hear them on cable television or in their speeches? Democracy. The party of democracy. Democracy dies in darkness. We must protect our democracy. Our democracy is at stake. Well, we're not a democracy, but even if we were, isn't part of a democracy voting? Isn't part of a democracy allowing people to choose?

No. What they want is an oligarchy, and they want to choose for you. Joining us now is Mike Davis, who has been doing yeoman's work and hero's work, a story that Steve Bannon deserves a lot of credit for bringing to the forefront. But honestly, this has not been covered in the mainstream media nearly enough. Mike Davis, thank you for taking the time. Tell us what is going on in Colorado for somebody that has no understanding, that might be in the shadows of, you know, not really cued in.

Walk us through it. So yeah, the Democrats impeached Trump for nonsense, and they indicted him four times for non-crimes, and that made Trump a lot more popular than the Democrats expected. Now it's backfired on them, and he is on a glide path to beating Biden on November 5, 2024. So now what they're trying to do is throw a legal Hail Mary. They're trying to dust off the 14th Amendment, passed and acted after the Civil War.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment disqualifies from holding office in the United States those who engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, right? And so the Democrats think that this post-Civil War provision, they're going to apply that to President Trump for January 6, and they're just going to have their Democrats, judges and Democrat prosecutors and Democrats, lawyers, just simply remove President Trump from the ballots based upon this bogus legal theory. They're going to start in a blue state like Colorado, like they're doing this week, where they have this biased judge, this biased Democrat judge, who donated to a group that sought to throw out of office Republicans who supported President Trump on January 6. She donated to this group, and then somehow she's sitting on this trial this week to try to throw President Trump off the ballot for January 6. President Trump's lawyers filed a motion to recuse her. She denied that. She said, oh, I made this donation.

I don't remember making it, but I could be fair regardless. Well, that's not the legal standard. Whether she thinks she can be fair is not the legal standard. It's whether the public thinks she can be fair, and I don't know how any reasonable person thinks a Democrat judge can be fair if she donated to an anti-Trump January 6 political action committee.

And now she's sitting on his trial. They're going to try to get him, they're going to have this judge disqualify him from the Colorado ballot. It's going to go to the Colorado Supreme Court on an expedited basis. And I presume that these left-wing judges on the Colorado Supreme Court will keep him off the ballot. They'll disqualify him. And then the Supreme Court of the United States, which has discretionary review, will have to decide whether to take this case or not. They have to take this case because these are Republic-ending tactics by the Democrats, but we'll see what happens. And the Democrats will use the precedent set here in Colorado, and they'll use it in swing states like Michigan. And so we're going into very dangerous legal territory as a country. So, Mike, I want you to, as fairly, I know it's hard, as fairly as possible, make their argument for our audience, OK?

Just not, I don't want to exaggerate anything. What are they saying in court as the reason for why Trump should not be on the ballot? I want our audience to hear it as fairly as possible of the arguments that they are making.

Just repeat that and let's zero in on that, Mike Davis. So they brought in two Capitol Police officers to testify to testify about the riots that happened on January 6th. And then they brought in an expert witness, a sociologist who got his Ph.D. in Vegas, and he is testifying that when Trump said peaceful, he didn't really mean it. And when Trump said fight, he meant insurrection. And unlike Democrats, when Democrats say peaceful, it has a different meaning. And when Democrats say fight... Is this a 14th Amendment thing then?

Sorry to interrupt you, Mike. Is this all centered around 14th Amendment? No one shall become president who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion or assisted thereof? OK. Yeah.

Under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, they're saying that because January 6 was an insurrection and Trump instigated that, that he should be disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. OK. So a couple of questions. First of all, isn't it true, Mike, that they tried this and failed with Marjorie Taylor Greene in Georgia? They workshopped this, right? And they played around with this with congressional, even tried it with Madison Cawthorn with some point, right? So talk, Mike, how this has not been some one-off thing.

This has been workshopped both in the courts, but also with the Overton window, where in New Hampshire, for example, there were a series of meetings. Our audience actually stopped it. We got a lot of credit for it in the media where Lawrence Tribe had this Atlantic piece. And there were, you know, elections are bad for democracy.

You know, take Trump off the ballot. It came out of nowhere, allegedly. So talk about how this is not just a mistake.

This is coordinated and precise. Yeah, there's actually a website. It's called LawfareMedia.org that shows their law. It shows where these these Section 3 litigations are happening all over the country. And it's like in 20 different states around the around our country where they bring these lawsuits.

They were unsuccessful in New Hampshire and Florida. They had their cases dismissed by the plaintiffs in Idaho, Utah, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Maine. But there are very active cases all over the country. And this is the first case in Colorado and in Denver that's that's actually going to trial.

Right. And they're trying to set this precedent with this biased Democrat judge in Colorado that they can disqualify him under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. And then they're going to use this precedent in states all over the country.

They're going to use it, try to use it in Michigan, for example. And the problem with their legal argument is this, that the country ratified the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments after the Civil War, the post-Civil War amendments to outlaw slavery, to provide due process and equal protection to the freed slaves and to provide voting rights to the freed male slaves. And as part of that 14th Amendment, Section 3 was to disqualify because you saw Confederate sympathizers who engaged in insurrection or rebellion during the Civil War were winning elected office. They were being appointed as judges in state and federal offices. And so they enacted Section 3 so they can get rid of these Confederates insurrectionists because they were undermining the Civil War effort, the post-Civil War reconstruction in the Union. There's a case from 1869 that's very clear. Chief Justice Samuel Chase wrote this opinion that in order to disqualify under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for insurrection or rebellion, Congress has to pass a federal criminal statute, which Congress did in 1870, and you have to have a U.S. attorney bring federal charges in federal court with a federal judge and a federal jury with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, a unanimous jury verdict the judge has to convict, and it has to be upheld on appeal under this specific federal criminal statute that deals with insurrection or rebellion. They have not done that with Trump because that evidence does not exist despite tens of millions of dollars that the January 6 Committee spent looking for this evidence, despite tens of millions of dollars that the Biden Justice Department, including Jack Smith, has spent looking for this evidence.

They know that they do not have evidence of insurrection or rebellion, but they fear that President Trump is going to beat Biden like a drum on November 5th. So this is their legal Hail Mary. This is illegal. It's unconstitutional. It's anti-democratic.

It's un-American. Just so everyone understands that six random voters filed this lawsuit, and then any random judge can now rule. And that's why this has to go to SCOTUS to settle this.

The Trump derangement is so high that the sooner SCOTUS can rule on this, hopefully the sooner that we can kind of just calm all these down. All right, you've probably heard me. It's actually now 25 pounds that I have lost.

And I'm sure some of you say, oh, Charlie, I've tried everything. That was me. You know, my first Zoom call with my Ph.D. weight loss, I was kind of skeptical. I was like, come on, guys. I've learned this whole thing before about about about about. And boy, was I wrong. They know what they're doing. My Ph.D. weight loss.

Like this is 100 percent legit. And people say, well, Charlie, you've lost so much weight. And I say, yeah, my Ph.D. weight loss. Hello.

But look, they have a different approach. And it's Dr. Ashley Lucas. She's great. I text with her.

She does a really, really good job. Twenty five pounds, I'll tell you. And I have more energy and I'm healthier than ever before. Here's why. The program rids your body of the inflammation that is causing so many health problems. If you look around today, America is the fattest it has ever been. Our families, friends and neighbors are dying of diabetes, heart disease and Alzheimer's now called T3 diabetes. Ph.D. has helped so many people who want to have a good active life, play with their grandkids, travel, hike to a waterfall, go for a bike ride.

But their weight was holding them hostage. They don't want any of you on experimental drugs for your brain degeneration from Alzheimer's or homebound with an oxygen tank for heart failure. My Ph.D. weight loss knows that losing weight is the best thing for overall health. We are way too fat as a society. And here's the thing.

If you're listening to this and you say, boy, I'm a little overweight, it's perfectly fine. Do something about it. Use your free will, your agency, say, you know what, I'm just not where I want to be. This is an empowerment tool for you.

All of these things can be prevented. You look at heart disease, the beast, you know, what they now call diabesity. By the way, there's a great new book by Dr. Peter Attia about longevity. You want to live long, lose weight. Look, Dr. Ashley Lucas, she is the master of this and she is the genius behind my Ph.D. weight loss. So you can call them today at 864-644-1900.

That is 864-644-1900. By the way, this is not like a sign up and you're automatically going to lose weight. You've got to do some work. You've got to apply yourself. It's not a too good to be true thing. But if you have motivation, they will channel that motivation towards a very positive, measurable and real outcome. Find them online at my Ph.D. weight loss dot com.

Tell them Charlie Kirk sent you. That is my Ph.D. weight loss dot com. Ph.D. weight loss and nutrition. Physician and dietitian developed individually delivered. Again, I lost 25 pounds and I feel great.

If you think you've tried everything, you're wrong until you say you've tried my Ph.D. weight loss. They map you as a whole person. It's not like, hey, just read this book.

No, no, no, no. It's a deep dive. It's personalized. It's going to get results for you.

My Ph.D. weight loss dot com. Mike, they're trying to use the 14th Amendment to kick Trump off the ballot, the party of democracy. This will then end up getting to the US Supreme Court.

But let's just broaden this for a second. As we are doing this broadcast, it is conceivable that in the coming days, Trump will not be allowed on the ballot on Colorado. Donald Trump Jr. is testifying in a New York civil trial right now as we are doing this broadcast. Donald Trump is facing 700 years in federal prison. This is so damaging, unhealthy, not just unhealthy.

It's corrosive. There's no going back from this, Mike. And what I fear more than anything else is the normalization of this. We're acting as if this is just fine. Even conservatives I talk to, oh, yeah, you know, Trump just has to beat the stuff in court.

Mike, riff on this for a little bit. I mean, what the Democrats are doing here, think about this. They impeached him twice. They indicted him four times. They're trying to bankrupt his family business for the non-fraud of a businessman paying back sophisticated Wall Street banks in full on time with interest as agreed.

And somehow that's fraud. And you see his poll numbers going up. And so now they're trying to gag him these unconstitutional illegal gags on a criminal defendant, which is just absolutely un-American.

They're going to try to throw him in jail for speaking out against about the judge, the prosecutor, the court staff, the witnesses, the process, which he's absolutely allowed to do under the First Amendment that even the ACLU was forced to come out and even argue. And now they want to just take him off the ballot. Nothing screams democracy like trying to bankrupt, throw in prison for 700 years and just take off the ballot your political opponent. These are republic ending tactics by the Democrats. This is not our parents or grandparents' Democrat Party. These aren't liberals who love America. These are leftists. These are Marxists. And they are playing for keeps and they are destroying our country with their Trump derangements. And these Republicans who are sitting back and saying, oh, this is all going to go away when Trump goes away.

They don't understand the 100 million people who have died over 100 years of Marxism. Yeah. And if they say that this will go away when Trump goes away, then they're acknowledging that this is bad. And so they don't want to fight something that is evil and bad because they hate Trump.

Yes. So the normalization of this is so is so damaging. The lawfare continues on every possible way. So let me ask you, Mike, just going back to the Colorado case, do you feel confident if the Supreme Court hears it, that Donald Trump will be allowed on the ballot? Because if this happens in Colorado, this will spread like wildfire to almost every swing state.

They will try to win the 2024 election before a vote is even cast. Well, we're going to see the end of our republic as we know it, if you can just take the leading presidential candidates off the ballot based upon a bogus, illegal, unconstitutional legal theory. So if the Supreme Court wants to keep our country together, they're going to have to decide to take this case and they're going to have to follow the Constitution. And the Constitution has been very clear. There's a case from 1869 from Chief Justice Samuel Chase that's very clear that if you want to take Trump off the ballot, if you want to disqualify him, you have to do it through a federal criminal statute and not some goofball biased Democrat judge in Denver, Colorado, or some partisan secretary of state in Michigan or some other state. You have to actually follow the Constitution and follow the law, right? And so let's just hope that these Supreme Court justices with their lifetime tenure and their pay protection, let's hope that they find the courage to do their damn job.

Yeah, it's remarkable. They talk about the power of democracy and they don't want you to be able to choose your president or even your nominee. Mike Davis, Article 3 Project, thank you so much.

Thank you, Charlie. America's colleges and universities today are less concerned with critical thinking than with indoctrination. It is no wonder why so many young Americans embrace cancel culture, deny free speech to conservatives, and even celebrate terrorism. But I'm happy to report there is one college where students debate ideas openly and honestly, where they pursue truth together with their professors, and where America's great heritage of liberty is studied and revered. My favorite college, Hillsdale College.

As stated in Hillsdale's founding document in 1844, Hillsdale's original mission was to offer the kind of serious liberal arts education needed to preserve the blessings of civil and religious liberty across the land, and this mission continues to guide Hillsdale College today. You can learn more at my favorite college's website, charlieforhillsdale.com. There you will find a short video that's just over a minute long showing how Hillsdale's work, not only on its Michigan campus, not only Washington, D.C. campus, but across the nation as effective in defending American liberty. Take some time to watch today at charlieforhillsdale.com.

That is charlieforhillsdale.com. Joining us now is Congressman Jim Jordan. Congressman, welcome to the program. I was pushing for you to become speaker, but it seems as if you're happy with this result. Walk us through the last couple weeks and tell us about our new speaker, speaker Johnson.

Mike Johnson is one solid individual. I think he's a Christian fellow. He's been a member of our committee, both the full judiciary committee, the weaponization select committee. He chaired the subcommittee on the Constitution. I mean, he's argued cases in front of the Supreme Court, a constitutional scholar, just a great guy, a great friend, and I think he's going to do an outstanding job. And, Charlie, you've already seen it, when he said he wanted to separate out the support for Israel and have a pay-for for that, you know, going after the IRS, which is, I think, a great place to get the revenue to help our dearest and closest ally, the state of Israel.

I think he's already shown what kind of leader he is, so, yeah, Mike's going to do a great job. So let's talk about the looming continuing resolution fight. I know that there was obviously a lot of time spent on the speaker's race, and we want to do these 12 different appropriation bills. Walk us through how the Christmas break, the looming Christmas break, potentially kicking this January 15th, what should we expect? How do you think things are going to play out in the next couple of weeks? Well, what we're trying to avoid, what Speaker Johnson's trying to avoid, I think all of us are, is this big ugly package that gets thrown in our lap on Christmas Eve.

That's been the norm for like the last 15 years. So we want to do the individual bills where we can focus on those. You can get a real focus on the policy riders, some of the language we want. Like we got some good language in the bills coming out of committee, like in the Department of Homeland Security, where we say, you know, no money can be used to set up a disinformation governance board.

No money can be used to censor the speech of American citizens. You know, that kind of good policy language we want in there. You get a better chance to get that language, keep it in the bill, if you're focusing on the individual bill as we're supposed to do. So that's the focus here. We'll see how this shakes out. But I know Speaker Johnson is saying, no way are we, does he want to take, do we want to take a omnibus bill, like I said, which typically winds up on our desk on Christmas Eve.

Yeah. And that the issue, of course, is what the most graft, as you know, Congressman, you've been around for a while, and the worst deals are cut because of external Christmas pressure. So it wouldn't, I know Speaker Johnson, I guess it would be better to kick it to January than to have a bad deal before Christmas. But, of course, but is there any appetite to make the old bulls in the Senate work through Christmas and, you know, not shut down the government for those those couple days? I mean, I think you're hitting the key is individual bills, because when it gets all thrown together, you don't get the scrutiny that you get for the earmarks that are the, you know, the member directed spending. You don't get the scrutiny on that kind of stuff that you do if it's an individual bill and you're focused on that bill and you got a conference committee. So we want to get to that. I'm not sure how long that's going to take us, because, you know, we've done most of our bills over here. We've done 70 percent of the funding we've already passed for the government.

Senate hasn't done much of anything. So there's a time concern. I get it. But whatever, whatever we can do to get us to individually focus on those separate bills, I think is the right way to go. How that shakes out if it's January 15th, if it's December 15th. I mean, I don't think December 15th works because that's just setting us up for this Christmas Eve scenario like we've had every other year. It's got to be, I think, something a little longer, but we'll leave that up to the conference and Speaker Johnson.

But I know he's committed to the same goal you and I want. So the House, has it passed that Ukraine bill with the IRS cuts yet or was that is that going to be passed? What is the status of that with Israel? That'll be on Friday.

Yeah, it'll be Israel. That'll be on Friday. I just actually talked with with Speaker Johnson. It looks like it'll be on Friday because we're going to have a few members, I think, not here tomorrow because of, I think, a big President Trump student event.

So I think that'll be on Friday. And then we pass that. We'll send it to the Senate. And then we need our Senate Republicans to say, hey, we want to we want to support the new speaker. We want to support the Republican leader on Capitol Hill, Speaker Johnson. We want to support that and not try to tie it all together like the White House does with Ukraine and other things and some pretend border. We want real border security and any type of bill that comes later. But we want to focus right now just on helping our dearest and closest ally, the state of Israel. So Mitch McConnell says it's kind of somewhat dead on arrival. What then is just kind of a stalemate on that? What do you think is the way to exert leverage?

And I like the idea. Rally the Senate Republicans, try to have some schism in the ranks. But McConnell wants Israel, Ukraine tied together. No IRS cuts.

Why should it be dead on arrival? I would say to Leader McConnell, I mean, come on. This is if the House passes this, this is the House Republican position. Why wouldn't Senate Republicans support this? Encourage Chuck Schumer to bring it up that way and get the support to our to our friend, the state of Israel, just as soon as we possibly can. And not tied to something that's much more controversial, which is the Ukraine and some pretend border solution that may, you know, that that's being talked about. We want real border security. We want some of the language from our H.R. 2 bill that we passed several months ago that was real border security enforcement and real immigration enforcement. We want we want that kind of legislation. Yeah. So let's talk. The border is important, but it's a little deceiving that just money for the border, because McConnell's floating out, maybe a couple of billion here, but not expedited catch and release.

Right. I mean, that's not border funding that that is essentially facilitating more entry into the country by a McConnell and Biden are back channeling right now to try to get Israel, Ukraine and a little bit of the, you know, throwing, quote unquote, crumbs to the border issue. What would be a win on the border? What specifically legislatively would actually help?

Well, first of all, Charlie, you're you're 100 percent right. More money just so you can process faster. The unbelievable number of migrants that have come into the country is not the answer. The answer is to build a wall, to have remain in Mexico policy, to not allow catch and release and to reform our asylum laws. Those are the elements we had in the bill we passed several months ago through the House. As I said, the strongest immigration enforcement legislation ever. Those are the elements we need in this legislation.

You can almost get it down. If you if you really had to get it down to one sentence, no money can be used to process or allowed to enter into the country. Any new migrants, you just stop it. So you got to detain them or you have to say, no, you're not allowed to come into the country.

That is the key. But there's things you want to do in asylum as well that I think would be very helpful. And of course, you want to build the wall. You want to continue to build the wall. So that's what has to happen, I think, for it to be real immigration enforcement. There have been two million some migrants who've come in since Joe Biden's been president that we know about.

Not counting all the God always, not everything else, but that we know about. Two point three million migrants. Of those two point three, only six thousand.

I think about this. We released this report two weeks ago. Only six thousand have went through the adjudication process and been removed. Everyone's just being released, not even showing up for the court date.

Whenever that court date may be, it may be years off. That's what's happened under Joe Biden. That's what has to change. And just throwing money at the problem is not going to do it.

You have to change the law and then enforce it. Six thousand out of two million that we know of. So just one. I said this yesterday to Chip Roy, my own kind of editorial here is that from a messaging standpoint, Congressman, every day you should be mentioning Sherrod Brown, Joe Manchin, Jon Tester, Kyrsten Sinema, Senate Republicans, yes. But the ones that are really getting nervous, as you know, Sherrod Brown, he's he's well liked in Ohio.

But with Donald Trump on the top of the ballot in twenty four, Sherrod Brown is going to be really in a tough spot. Let's put pressure on those Senate Democrats. They haven't done any good with all those.

They haven't done it yet. We got to win all those. Yes.

Right. Win Ohio, win Montana, win West Virginia, win Arizona. We win those four. Keep the House, put President Trump back in the White House. Now we can get about doing the thing that the American people care about, putting America first, making sure we're projecting strength around the world from the White House like we did under President Trump. And like we're not doing under President Biden. All those things happen.

But you're right. Winning those four Senate seats is is really, really important. So I don't want to fear monger here, Congressman, but there's more and more chatter and question of who's actually in the interior of our country. What can you share with our audience based on people from the Middle East, potentially Hamas, other sleeper cells that have entered the country? Eight million people have illegally entered that we know of under Joe Biden. We don't know who these people are. Their backgrounds over 100 different countries. Do you think that there's a chance that there might be unidentified sleeper cells in this country?

Not trying to fear monger, just trying to talk the facts of that entered this country illegally. I mean, boy, I hope not. But when you have that volume of people come into the country, not to mention all the people we don't know about who are the so-called gotaways when that happens and you have all these different countries and you know that the ones that we have encountered who are on the terrorist watch list, that number is higher than it's ever been. It certainly makes you wonder that, you know, could could that be the case?

I hope not. But, you know, it's this again. This is this is just, I guess, a result of when you have an intentional policy put into place on day one by the Biden administration, when they said no more wall, no more remain in Mexico and no more hold, no more detain. We're going to catch and release. This is what happens. People come from everywhere.

And it's it's probably not out of the out of the realm of possibility that some of these people are really, really bad. And there's also been some incredible developments. There's so much news. I just want to make sure everyone knows there's been some major bombshell revelations with James Comer in oversight. Can you just mention this check made out to Joe Biden directly?

This has not received the media attention that it deserves or warrants. Tell us about Joe Biden just getting a check. They might as well just wrote in the memo line, you know, 10 percent for the big guy.

Right. It gets that it gets the two hundred thousand dollar one from his brother says loan repayment. We can't figure out how this whole loan arrangement work. Then there's the other one, the forty thousand dollar one with with with some link to to China.

There's the brand. There's all this stuff that Mr. Comer has uncovered in the oversight committee. And then what we're trying to do on the judiciary committees, we're looking at the investigation, how that was handled into Hunter Biden. But by the way, Charlie, we had an amazing deposition a week and a half ago from Scott Brady, the U.S. attorney in the Western District of Pennsylvania, who was assigned by Attorney General Barr back on January 3rd, 2020, to get be the intake and be the filter for all information related to Ukraine and Hunter Biden.

Now, he gets his job on January 3rd. But we of course, for our deposition, he told us that he didn't learn about the confidential human source who was that 1023 form. He didn't learn about that until six months into his work. The FBI kept that from him.

They dropped their feet all the time. They made it tough on him. And he never once was told about the laptop. I asked him during the deposition, when did you learn about the laptop? He said the day it went public in the news story from the New York Post, October 14th, 2020.

So, I mean, think about that. He's supposed to be the guy looking at all this information. And the FBI kept that information from him, even though they had the laptop prior to him ever being assigned that job by the United States attorney general.

So you got that element. You got what Jason Smith has with the whistleblowers. You got what Mr. Comer is doing relative to the bank records and the whole influence peddling scheme, the shell companies, everything else. We're going to compile all that information and see if it warrants moving to actual articles of impeachment at some point. Yes.

That's my last question. Are we going to see some movements on either impeachment of Biden, Mayorkas? Because, as you know, time is running out. Speaker Johnson says, hey, you know, we got to get moving on this.

So we have like a 60 day window. Do you think that that's something that might be proceeding? Yeah, we're going to we're going to continue to do our work.

I always say we've got to be driven by the facts. I do know next week we have David Weiss coming in. We've talked to the U.S. attorney from District of Columbia, the U.S. attorney from the Central District of California. We talked to Mr. Brady.

We talked to the top DOJ tax attorney who was part of the Hunter Biden investigation. Next Tuesday, excuse me, next Wednesday, we will be talking with with David Weiss. Congressman Jordan, thank you so much. Keep up the great work and the high energy passion for the country. We appreciate it. Thank you. You bet. Thank you. Thank you.

That is members dot Charlie Kirk dot com. There's a lot happening on these university campuses right now. Karine Jean-Pierre was asked directly about this.

Let's play cut 37. We hear you guys don't talk about extremists all the time. It is usually about maggot extremists. So what about these protesters who are making Jewish students feel safe on college campuses?

Are they extreme? I've been very, very clear. We are calling out any form of hate, any form of hate. It is not acceptable.

It should not be acceptable here. And we are going to continue to call that out and let and let me be very clear. This is a president that has continued to have that fight in his office, in this administration. You know, when he repealed Trump's Muslim ban on his very first first day in office. You know who wants the Muslim ban back? Jews.

They should. You know who's quietly saying, you know, Trump was right. Trump was right. It is no joke outside of the media matters, whatever stuff. Wealthy liberal Jews are legitimately waking up. This is not some sort of one off thing.

And I do want to make sure this is very clear. Some of the passion and the emotion, I don't take some of these attacks seriously. I don't.

And let me tell you why. The slaughter of the Jews in Israel was so horrific. It was so unprecedented that people have been over emotional. And I get it, you should be emotional. So I don't take the attacks personally. If 1,400, if 50,000 Americans were slaughtered in that capacity, I would probably be over emotional too. I'll be very honest. Now, some of these articles and stuff, they're writing about us and Candace Owens and myself.

Charlie, you hate Jews. Just calm down, guys. But I do want to sympathize that it's fever pitch.

I get it. But make sure you isolate your targets correctly. And I think that's actually beginning to happen. Hamas's leader has now come out and said they will do it again. If there is one positive takeaway of all of this, it's that maybe, maybe Jewish donors and or anybody in high society realizes you should not give your money to subsidize things that hate you.

Do not underwrite your own demise. Hamas is utterly intolerable. They've revealed that they are enemies of humanity.

And people who support them discredit themselves utterly. But I also want to make sure you understand, and this is not a popular thing to say, based on a public poll, a majority of American Muslims, a majority of American Muslims, 57% said that Hamas was justified in targeting Jewish babies, women, children, and rock concert. 57% of your quote-unquote fellow American Muslims support that.

Now, I want to be even more clear. Of course there are some amazing American and decent Muslims. We're going to have one on this program. Dr. Zudi Jasser, who's an honorable, good person, where he is actually arguing and advocating for a reformation in Islam.

And I'm cheering for him. I want Zudi Jasser to be successful in a reformation of Islam. I think that is a righteous cause because there are some really great people that are Muslims in this country. But we also should not bury the lead. 57% based on a signal poll said that Hamas was, quote, justified in their action against Israel.

That's worth thinking about. Why did we let these people into our country? Where does that come from? Are they assimilating, really, at 57%? Now, let's say the signal poll is wrong. Let's say that it's 40%. That's still shocking. Let's say it's 30%.

That's still shocking. That is effectively saying beheadings and a Jewish 9-11, we're cool with that. Give us our American passport.

No, you should be deported back to the country you came from. I support Israel, and I get a lot of flak for supporting Israel. It's about values. Israel is fighting a defensive war. Hamas says it will attack them again. They can't coexist with this cancer.

An unpopular opinion is this. Sometimes you have to go to war to remove a tumor. Hamas is that tumor.

And I pray Israel is successful. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us, as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.

Thanks so much for listening, and God bless. And have my words policed by HR. Words like grandfather, peanut gallery, long time no see, no can do. When I grow up, I want to be obsessed with emotional safety and do workplace sensitivity training all day long. When I grow up, I want to climb the corporate ladder just by following the crowd. I want to be a conformist. I want to weaponize my pronouns.

What are pronouns? It's time to grow up and get back to work. Introducing the number one WokeFree job board in America. RedBalloon.Work