Share This Episode
The Charlie Kirk Show Charlie Kirk Logo

Big Fani's Biggest Flub Yet

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk
The Truth Network Radio
February 23, 2024 4:11 pm

Big Fani's Biggest Flub Yet

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 644 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

February 23, 2024 4:11 pm

Fani Willis has repeatedly sworn in court that her relationship with Nathan Wade only turned romantic in 2022. So why do new cell phone records — the same tech used to catch J6 defendants — show her meeting with Wade in the middle of the night? Charlie reacts, joined by Will Scharf and producer Blake, then looks ahead to Nikki Haley's demise in South Carolina.

For more content, become a member at! 

Support the show:

See for privacy information.


Hey everybody, it's in The Charlie Kirk Show. The latest updates with the Fannie Willis case in Georgia. Will Scharf joins us and Blake Neff helps co-pilot this episode.

We also talk about Ukraine in a preview before South Carolina. Email me directly. I love hearing from you. Freedom at Get involved with Turning Point USA at and support our show.

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. 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 That is It's where I buy all of my gold.

Go to So much news to cover, so Mr. Blake is going to help us get through all of it. Indeed. Blake, welcome back. So Blake, we're going to start today with the Fannie Willis continuing saga. This is pretty amazing what's going on. This is just, this is, we talked last night about TV and whether anyone's watching TV shows, and it's like, why would you watch a procedural drama? Why would you watch some crummy show they make in Hollywood when you can just follow Fannie Willis News or any of the other political stories going on? It's amazing.

It's almost, it's richer than some sort of, you know, TV sitcom. You know, when Fannie's first indictment dropped, it was bad and was full of stupid stuff, but I don't think any of us expected how ridiculous it would be where, you know, okay, then, oh, this attorney says you were having this relationship with your co-counsel, and then she goes to the church and does the whole, like, this is a racist attack on me. And now it's, now this, so I'll, I'll stop burying the lead here. We have a new affidavit filed today. This is actually from Trump's own legal team.

This has mostly been happening from his co-defendants have been taking the lead, but this is from the Trump team itself. They hired a private investigator who's knowledgeable, or so he testifies, in the techniques police use for assessing cell phone data. And they were able to get cell phone data from Nathan Wade's cell phone.

And they assessed it doing all of that geo-fencing stuff, the same stuff they did to catch all those January 6th defendants, actually. And they look at where's he making calls? Where is he making text messages?

Where is he physically traveling? And they say, based on this, that in the first 11 months of 2021, so this is before he was hired as a special counsel on Fannie Willis's team, he allegedly made about 2,000 phone calls to Fannie Willis and exchanged more than 12,000 text messages. Come on, 2,000 phone calls? 2,000 phone calls. Do you think you make that many phone calls in a year?

I mean, I'm just trying to think about- I don't think I do, to be honest. Maybe I'm the weirdo here, but yeah, that's about- Let me do the math. That's an extraordinary math. First 11 months. That's 330 days. He called her five times a day. Five times a day. More than that. That's like, it's probably even six times a day. Yeah, it's 5.4 times a day.

And yeah, and then, you know, six times that for the text messages, which are easy to send. And then the best part, though, is they have this PowerPoint that they have, they're describing the affidavit, and they're really digging into what he's doing. So this is September 11th to 12th. Deeper analysis in the attached affidavit of Mr. Wade's cell phone tracking from September 11th, 2021 to September 12th reveals the following activity. Leaving the Doraville area where he lives at approximately 10.15 PM, traveling directly to and arriving within the geofence, so you know, a location area they've calculated, in the Dogwood address at approximately 10.45 PM. Leaving the Dogwood address at approximately 3.28 AM. They're obviously just doing work together. And then traveling directly to towers near his Marietta residence in East Cobb and arriving at 4 or 5 AM. And text Fannie Willis at 4.20 AM.

It's obviously they were just trying to, she needed his help on some, some RICO cases. Or maybe they're fans of like European soccer. They have to watch that, you know, really morning game.

You got to watch it. Manchester United is 3 AM. There's a lot of possible justifications. Midnight Scrabble. Yeah. Or maybe they were just, you know, burning the midnight oil to get Trump. Yeah. They were super committed. No one could understand how intense this is. And, you know, maybe that is only to over time in a convenient, completely professional manner.

It only blossomed into romance later. So what is the significance of this? Because this means perjury, doesn't it? Exactly. So if this, if the judge interprets this, as I think most people do, as very strong evidence that they were engaged in a intimate personal relationship before what they've been testifying, then that would mean they both perjured themselves in this case. And it really means, the very funny thing is, is a lot of analysts say that, you know, even if they'd been in a relationship in some capacity, it might have gotten by this because it wouldn't necessarily prove the prosecution itself was unethical. But once you're perjuring yourself in this case, they would just both have to be removed and possibly indicted.

So, yeah. So what is the timeline? Because these motions keep on getting filed and I mean, it's just getting worse for Fannie Willis at this point.

It's getting worse and worse. I don't think we have a specific timeline on when the judge is going to rule on this. It would presumably be soon because there's a trial they have to get on with if he's going to keep him on the case. So I would imagine we'll get a ruling on this within a matter of weeks. Does another county have to take the case?

How does this work? So assuming they keep the prosecution going, what would happen is, first, he could just strike Fannie herself from it and Wade. And then in theory, they could have another prosecutor take it up on their own. A more likely possibility is that because it's the DA and it would kind of taint her whole office. And so they would say, your office is dismissed from this case, which this has happened before. And instead, they'd have to bring in a neighboring office to do this. So you might have the DeKalb County guy do it or if they want to. And what really matters is that would totally throw off the timeline and it would probably push it past the election. What if the DeKalb guy is also corrupt? I mean, the point is that they're going to find this is a very high profile case. Let's go to cut 27 MSNBC trying to explain this away.

Cut 27. So if there is a romantic relationship between Mr. Wade and Ms. Willis began before he was hired by her in Fulton County, then the affidavit that he submitted might be false. And not only did that affidavit be false, Caddy, Ms. Willis propounded that affidavit, provided that affidavit to the court in support of her contention that the relationship started subsequently.

By the way, if a supervisor is having a relationship with a subordinate, regardless of when it starts, that's reason for the subordinate or the supervisor to step away from the case. So basically, he's saying that this is this is bad. This is that's MSNBC mumbo jumbo. And the best part is it's just built up slowly over time. When it first dropped a few months ago, I think all of us raised our eyebrows.

OK, is this is this real? It seems like a big good to be Hail Mary. And there weren't receipts in the first filing they made, but now they've got they just keep getting more and more. And these Willis and Wade just come off. If this is true, if they really just have them dead to rights like this, they come off as very dumb because they really had to slip their own heads into this trap. Fannie Willis says no weapon against her shall prosper.

I mean, I think she's this is quite something. Play cut 28. No weapon formed against you shall prosper. They did not say the weapon weapons will not form.

And that's the part I didn't hear until recently. Just because they won't prosper, it doesn't mean that they won't form. Even if you feel like everything you are doing in your life is the right thing and you're making mistakes all along the way, but you are trying. You should not think that those weapons will not form. The other lesson that I've learned in this three years is God ordains those weapons. He puts those weapons in your life to form against you. You become in your maturity to understand. He does it for a reason. And it's to grow you and it's to make you stronger.

And it is to prepare you. It's a sermon by Pastor Willis. Pastor Willis, she's, I don't know, you probably could do the... She's like a walking violation of like half the Ten Commandments that we know of. You know, we're all sinners, Charlie. And some of us are greater sinners than others.

However, if you have no repentance for your sins and you try to own them as if they're attacks from weapons formed against you, I have very, very little compassion for you. They're like a friend who knows all about keeping your money safe. They suggest gold and silver, all these but goodies in the finance world. Plus, they've got a sweet deal, a free one-fourth of an ounce gold standard gold coin this month. If you qualify, it's pretty cool, right? If you're curious, just give them a call at 877-646-5347.

It's just the chat, no pressure. They'll help you figure out if gold and silver are right for you. Or visit or take the first step towards a safer financial future. That is They'll help you find out if gold and silver are the right next step for you. Go to

That is There's some new polls out that show that European optimism is fading. Exactly. So several things. So first of all, we're still going hard at it. We just filed several hundred new sanctions in the wake of Navalny's death. I'm sure they'll work just like the last one.

Can you explain what these are? Because, I mean, I thought we already did a maximum pressure campaign against Russia. There's more stuff we could, you know, it's like Spinal Tap. You can just take it. It goes up to 11.

You just take it another time. What are these? These are like bad names that you they say it's targeting more than 500 additional people and entities. So they're just adding a ton of extra people to the list of sanctions. So they start with Putin, maybe all of his core government people, and they're just expanding it out further and further and further. And of course, that's noteworthy because the other thing that's going on with regards to Russia is you're getting more and more justification of just outright seizing the assets of everyone from Russia. They're talking about, you know, they froze billions of dollars in Russian assets after the invasion. Now the talk in Europe especially is we should literally confiscate all those assets, unfreeze them and just take them and then give them to Ukraine, which would be a pretty big step. Like consider with Iran. We've been in conflict with Iran 30 years and we never did that.

It was always frozen. It was always diplomatic bait to, you know, maybe get them to the table. When you're seizing it, you're really, you know, you're crossing a threshold to, I mean, you can't really undo it for one. That would further kill the dollar or the right.

Why would anyone trade in dollars if that's... It would definitely be a big problem. And one of the possibilities is they realize that's happening anyway.

And so you might as well do it while you can. Now the poll, this is a poll of a wide number of Europeans all across and they asked people in lots of different European countries, basically, what do you think the outcome of the war will be? And notably, an average of about 10% across all these different countries believe that Ukraine will win the war ultimately. It's about 15 to 20% who think Russia will win. A large portion just think there will be some sort of compromise piece, which is a cop-out answer, of course, because you could really frame even a compromise piece as a win for one or the other. But it really just shows that the sort of narrow Washington view where some of these people think that Ukraine is going to smash the Russians and capture Moscow is just not going to happen or even just take Crimea. That's just not going to happen.

And most people realize that. They realize, at best, we're dumping billions of dollars to sustain a stalemate, which is going to kill a ton of people, require more money in the future to keep going and probably end in something approaching a defeat anyway. When, again, you can go back to the start of this conflict and the deal we could have negotiated then right at the outset would almost certainly be better than the one we would have to negotiate now. Yes.

So let's kind of go a step back. If we were to seize the assets, we've frozen them. We haven't seized them.

Exactly. And if we then send it to Ukraine, that would further de-dollarization. When can anyone define what is Ukrainian success look like? Does that include Crimea? That's one of the biggest problems is the most diehard ones do believe they should take all the land they've lost to Russia in the last decade, which includes Crimea, includes the Donbas. It includes large areas where by general consensus, the people there do not want to be a part of Ukraine. That's the biggest thing about Crimea is you can nitpick with, oh, you can disagree with Russia's seizure of it outside, you know, normal international law by force, whatever. But it is massive consensus that that place wanted to be in Russia. And the fact that it was in Ukraine was substantially a historical fluke. The Russian Navy was headquartered. The Russian Navy was headquartered there. It was settled by Russians. They acquired it at a different time. It was literally in Ukraine as a sort of sentimental thing that Nikita Khrushchev did because he liked Ukraine.

He'd run Ukraine during the famines. And so, you know, it was bad that they seized it by force. That's not what we want countries to be doing. But it would not be a great thing to just grab it and give it back to Ukraine.

And it would be an extremely, probably impossible. And we would worry that they would actually use nuclear weapons over that sort of thing. So if that's their threshold for victory, it's, they're committing Ukraine to essentially a suicidal path. And what we're seeing, you see more and more now, if you just follow Twitter statements and all that stuff that comes out of Ukraine, and it's very hard to read, especially if you don't know the language, but it seems more and more that the war is not going well. You have a lot of recriminations between members of the government, stuff they tried to paper over. You have the mayor of Kiev coming out and saying, you know, I've never really talked to Zelensky this entire war.

The mayor of the biggest city in Ukraine. That they're both in the same city. And yeah, and they're both in the same war and they just don't talk to each other. Not a good relationship.

How's that possible? And you have generals criticizing Zelensky. You have generals getting fired and you have a lot of stuff about their manpower situation is actually really, really bad. It's about to get worse this spring. As it falls, the fighting season will continue.

Yeah, and it's going to be a bloodbath. OK, Kirk fans, I need you to stop and pay attention to this. If you deal with exhaustion, brain fog, mood swings or food cravings, you're constantly getting sick or simply lack the zeal used to have in life, then I have some news for you. While back, I found a liquid supplement called Strong Cell and it changed my health in a very profound way.

I take it every single day. Look, I knew I had to partner with them. I did the research.

Google and look up online. What happens when you mix NADH with CoQ10 and marine collagen? It's simple. Every area of your body has cells. So if your cells are healthier, then you will also be healthier.

You don't have to take my word for it. Listen to one of these testimonials. After taking Strong Cell for six weeks, I found improvement in many areas, less shoulder pain, improved mental clarity, increased natural energy and so much more. I'm thankful that Charlie Kirk recommended this to his listeners. Rebecca says, I absolutely love Strong Cell. At first, I didn't think would make much of a difference for my chronic fatigue, depression and anxiety, but I thought I'd give it a chance.

I've tried to find depression meds for 10 years. And since you Strong Cell, I'm feeling better than I ever have on depression medication. Customer for life. Thank you, Charlie Kirk, for recommending this product.

So there it is. You've heard from me directly and some of the users who have seen their lives changed by Strong Cell. I personally recommend taking it every day for at least 30 days. I take it every day before I go on the air and it's helped me in more ways than I can even name. Each of our bodies is very different.

So I would recommend you give the supplement at least two to three months to see the changes in your body. Go to and learn more for yourself. That's forward slash Charlie. And don't forget to use discount code Charlie at checkout to get your special 20% discount for Kirk listeners. Or you can call 888-596-0155 to order over the phone.

That is 888-596-0155 or visit forward slash Charlie. Joining us now is Will Scharf, one of President Trump's attorneys. Will, welcome to the program. Will, your reaction to the well, I'm not sure if you were involved in this filing, but bombshell filing out of Georgia.

Will, your reaction? Yeah, just when you think this Fannie Willis prosecution in Georgia couldn't get any crazier, you have a morning like this morning. Our team down there filed an affidavit from a highly experienced criminal investigator whose analysis of Nathan Wade, that's Fannie Willis's special prosecutor slash lover. The analysis of his cell phone shows that in 2021, which is before this investigation started, Nathan Wade and Fannie Willis had over 2000 phone calls, a little less than 12,000 text messages that on dozens of occasions, Wade was at Fannie Willis's sort of secret condo, including overnight stays. Now, both Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade denied on the stand that their relationship predated the prosecution of President Trump and his co-defendants. This data strongly seems to indicate that both of them perjured themselves in open court when they testified that this relationship, this romantic relationship clearly predated the prosecution. And to me, that just raises the specter of corruption that has infected this entire prosecution from the start and that I believe will ultimately or should ultimately result in its dismissal altogether. And this is what I asked this question earlier, Blake, who's here today, helping copilot will what happens then if this goes to another county?

What is the process? Have you ever been involved in cases where that has been the case? I mean, it's it'll depend on how the judge decides to treat this, but he could easily disqualify both Wade and Willis from continuing in their roles as prosecutors, in which case a different prosecutor would be appointed to take over, who might take a very different view of the underlying facts and the charges that have been brought. The other option, though, is an outright dismissal of this whole case, where you have prosecutorial misconduct and lies and corruption, infecting a case from its initiation, as I believe that we're seeing here, a judge would be well within his rights just to dismiss the case altogether. And I think given the evidence that's mounting against Willis and Wade and just this entire prosecution, I don't want to say that's likely, but it certainly is a lot more likely today than it appeared to be just a couple of weeks ago. So Will, on timeline, I know you mentioned this, I just want to make sure I'm clear, betting odds are that Donald Trump will not be in a Georgia courtroom before November.

Do you think that still remains true? You know, I hate making predictions like this, Charlie, but I think the chances of this case going to trial on any sort of timeline that could impact the presidential election are diminishing by the day. And with each passing revelation, with each new hit on this prosecution, a hit against this prosecution, I think that likelihood continues to decrease. And we've seen that in other cases as well. The federal documents case in Florida, for instance, we were told that was going to be rushed to trial. But given the scope of discovery, the number of pretrial motions that we filed, including within the last day, I think the likelihood of that case going to trial have been significantly diminished.

Likewise, in Washington, DC, where our arguments on presidential immunity have resulted in an absolute stay, what's called a coinbase stay of lower court proceedings in that case. So time and time again, we've heard that Donald Trump is not going to be able to campaign effectively. Thus far, events have proven those predictions wrong. President Trump is campaigning in a highly effective manner, as evidenced by just about every poll that shows him trouncing Joe Biden if the election were held today. So, Will, we have not had you on the program, I believe, you know, all the stuff blurs together since the seizure of Donald Trump's business empire.

I believe we haven't had you on since then. This is playing into this lawfare type regime. I don't know if you're particularly on that case, but can you just riff on the unprecedented nature of being able to take somebody's business empire away?

There was a brilliant tweet, I need to find the attribution, I always want to give credit where credit's due, where Donald Trump pays back banks with interest and he gets his business empire taken away from him, but students don't pay back their student loans and they get them forgiven. Anyway, so Will, what is your take on what happened in the state of New York? Yeah, look, I think this is probably the first fraud case, the first supposed fraud case in American history, where the parties that were allegedly defrauded testified on behalf of the defendant. You know, Deutsche Bank, all the lenders, all the insurers that were involved in these transactions, they all said that they were paid in time and on full, that Trump was a great client, that they appreciated the business and that they would do business with him again. I mean, that's the basic upshot of their testimony in that New York trial.

So the idea that there was any kind of fraud here, much less a culpable fraud, much less a fraud that would result in hundreds of millions of dollars in so-called civil remedies, it's just it doesn't pass the smell test. And I think that really speaks to how this entire campaign of lawfare against President Trump is really much more about politics and interfering with his ability to campaign for office than it has ever been about the rule of law, than it has ever been about the way these sorts of cases are supposed to go. We're going to appeal that judgment, obviously. I think we have very strong grounds for appeal there.

And it's worth noting that on two prior occasions, in that very case, the New York appellate division has smacked down Judge Ingoron, ruling that he exceeded his authority or made bad legal judgments. I think we're going to see more of that in the coming weeks and months. But we're certainly excited to get that case up on appeal and hopefully win on appeal. Blake, you have a question for Will. Yeah.

Hi, Will. So we talked a lot about the timeline of will Trump be convicted or will he be on trial next fall when the election's going? But I think we're looking more and more at the alternative, which is what if Trump's October surprise, his late boost is could we get court rulings the other way? Could we get appeals courts reversed in the New York judgment? Could we get the Supreme Court saying Jack Smith overstepped his bounds?

Do you know the timeline on that? Is there a good chance we'd be able to get a ruling like that before election? So we have two issues in front of the Supreme Court right now.

One is the Colorado ballot access case. We're expecting a ruling on that just about any day. And we expect that the Supreme Court will rule that President Trump can be on the ballot. The other issue we have in front of the Supreme Court right now is we've requested a stay of the DC prosecution, pending resolution through the appellate courts of our presidential immunity arguments. Hypothetically, if the Supreme Court were to grant the stay that we've asked for, then this case would likely reach the Supreme Court next fall once the new term starts in October. And I wouldn't bet on that dynamic occurring.

But that's certainly a possibility. Our only ask of really all the courts in all of these different cases is that President Trump and his litigation be treated the way that any other party would be treated in the courts normally. We're not asking for special treatment. We're just asking that the courts don't treat President Trump differently, just because he's a presidential candidate. In contrast to that, Jack Smith and his team have constantly urged that these cases need to move to trial on a fundamentally political timeline.

And that's just wrong. It violates Department of Justice policy. It violates long-standing processes. And that's why I think courts have been so reluctant to side with Smith on these scheduling issues. It's because judges smell a rat and they know what's going on just isn't the way things are normally done. So to answer your question directly, the issue that could be in front of the court next fall is presidential immunity.

It could also obviously reach the court sooner than that, depending on how they deal with our stay application. That's another judgment or another ruling that we're looking for in the coming days and weeks. Will, I want you to remind our audience the elements and the details of the Alvin Bragg case. That's going to sneak up on us pretty quick here.

It has been scheduled. Again, it's easy for people, including myself, to confuse these cases. Eugene Care, New York Civil, Eugene Carroll, New York Civil case. We have Letitia James.

We have Alvin Bragg. Remind our audience the details of this one that's coming up in just a couple of weeks. Yeah, look, it's easy to confuse all this stuff just because there's never been this sort of coordinated campaign of lawfare against a single individual in American history. It's really outrageous what's going on and maintaining that big picture view of what's being done to President Trump, I think is very important. And Alvin Bragg brought a case against President Trump for supposed business records violations that he's tied into supposed federal election violations. Basically, the story there is that in the lead up to the 2016 election, the Trump Organization paid Michael Cohen, their then lawyer, who's a known perjurer and just an absolute liar. They paid Michael Cohen money. He then made payments to Stormy Daniels to prevent her from speaking publicly about some of her allegations. Now, Bragg is alleging that those payments, which were booked as legal expenses, since they were payments to one of their lawyers, should have actually been booked as campaign expenses, as an in-kind to the Trump campaign. Now, the Biden Department of Justice, which is obviously no friend of President Trump's, looked at this exact same case and declined to prosecute because they didn't see a case there. What happened then was that the number three at the Biden DOJ, a guy named Matthew Colangelo, quit his job at DOJ and went to become an assistant in Alvin Bragg's office, after which we see this prosecution kick off in New York. So this all leads back to Joe Biden at the end of the day, and it's all an effort, as you said before, Charlie, to interfere with President Trump's ability to run to force him to stand trial at the height of election season. That case is currently scheduled.

The trial there is currently scheduled to begin in late March, late next month. But again, that case is largely reliant on the testimony of a known perjurer, Michael Cohen. I think the evidentiary issues there are profound. I think the legal issues there are profound. The strength of that case has been derided by legal experts across the political spectrum as just extraordinarily weak. So we're hopeful on that case and really the entire litigation portfolio at this point that we'll get some positive results.

But the fact that President Trump is being forced to stand trial as he closes out this primary election and prepares for the general, it's just absurd. Well, I'm thrilled you're on Trump's legal team. It might just be a causation correlation thing. But as soon as you joined, you know, things started to get really good. So maybe you're a good luck charm or maybe you're contributing a lot.

I think I think it's the latter. Will, thank you so much. We're not we're not tired of winning yet, Charlie.

We have a lot more wins to wrap up. Will is the guy you want in your corner if the feds ever come after you. Will, thanks so much. Thank you.

Thanks a lot. The South Carolina primary is tomorrow. And if you did not know any better, you would think that Donald Trump is from the state of South Carolina.

Certainly not Haley. It's absolutely hilarious what we're getting. They haven't even cast the votes yet.

I'm starting to wonder if she's going to lose by 50 or something. So they. So, Blake, what are some of the the polling, the kind of reporting going into South Carolina? I think my favorite was I just checked Politico this morning and they have this headline. This is an actual headline right on the front page of Politico.

She abandoned us. Haley's South Carolina problem isn't just Trump. The former South Carolina governor largely ignored the state's grassroots activist base. And it's just an entire article of people in South Carolina saying, you know, they point out Nikki Haley's from here, but at this point, not really.

No one really cares. I think they open with this fact. This is a quote from the article. Since leaving the governor's office, Haley has largely ignored the state's grassroots activists, according to interviews with more than a dozen GOP operatives across South Carolina. One striking illustration came in December when a junior level staffer on Haley's campaign sent the South Carolina GOP an email asking how to find out about county party events so that Haley could begin sending surrogates to them.

This is the woman who once governed the state and they're just totally detached from it. And there was another poll from Winthrop University last month. Haley has a favorability, not overall in South Carolina, this is her favorability among South Carolina Republicans. Fifty six percent. Fifty six percent.

Fifty six percent favorability. Now, it just goes to show how the Republican Party has dramatically changed in the last decade. She was once kind of the heir apparent to the conservative movement.

Yes. And, you know, she's not overall she is a lot more conservative than certainly some of the people who've been put forward to us as the alternative. She's very hawkish, but the GOP was hawkish for a long time. And just a lot of people did not evolve away from that, unfortunately, because I think if she had, we'd be more favorable to her.

There's still stuff we don't care for. She was very much always had that temptation to submit to some of the Democrats kind of like latest issue of the moment propaganda. And then now she tries to awkwardly walk that back by making weird answers on what the Civil War was about.

It's definitely damaged her, not just because of the specific answers, but I think a lot of people have started to really see her as calculating, always trying to say the thing that will just let her become president eventually. And it's really soured her. And then in contrast, she just doesn't have that relationship with the base. And there's no substitute for just putting in the time, putting in the effort, putting in the face to face communication.

And there's another line here. More than a decade after she last won over conservative voters here, Haley has become a stranger at state and local party events. She avoids silver elephant dinners. She avoids party conventions.

She avoids grassroots gatherings as she embarked on a national speaking circuit and book tour. I will say that one of the blessings of this is that a couple of weeks ago, Nikki was in the running for vice president. That is no longer the case.

Yeah. As we say, she's now she's just openly they're sending mailers to Democrats, letting them know you can vote in this primary. And it's just becoming more and more clear that she exists as a Democrat operation, essentially, because she distracts money and time and attention from Trump when the race is over. You are running a protest candidacy. And yeah, it very much kills the vice presidential idea, I think.

And in return for what? Do you think she might run third party? I find that unlikely. I'm just not sure who would back her in that case. I don't think the no labels people really want Nikki Haley involved. They want a more moderate streak to their campaign, more moderate even than Haley.

And it just doesn't I don't see the path. I think a lot of people pence her. They have this delusion that eventually, you know, Trump will lose next fall, they believe. And then this will cause this psychic break in the Republican Party and it'll just will rewind time and it will be 2005 again. I don't think that's likely, but a lot of these people seem to really believe it.

And I bet if you're in their circles and if you only talk to their donors all the time, it's more believable. You get in this bubble. Yeah, it's the final prediction. I think it's going to be a 30 to 40 point loss. Yeah, I think it's going to be a total bloodbath. Yeah, I think it'll be a depressing beat down. She'll wish she was back to the days of losing. What is she going to say in her like speech tomorrow? We gave it our all onward to Super Tuesday, I guess. And Trump will have then gone four for four. Oh, yeah, yeah.

I mean, he's going to win every single state. It looks that way. No, she is a Democrat sabotage campaign to screw up the data. And I'm not really even sure her personal motivations here, except just trying to destroy the Republican Party.

I can't really figure out what it is otherwise. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us is always freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com. Thanks so much for listening and God bless. For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to Charlie Kirk dot com.
Whisper: medium.en / 2024-02-23 18:13:09 / 2024-02-23 18:27:39 / 15

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime