Share This Episode
The Charlie Kirk Show Charlie Kirk Logo

Maine's War Against America's Children

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk
The Truth Network Radio
March 12, 2024 5:00 am

Maine's War Against America's Children

The Charlie Kirk Show / Charlie Kirk

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 749 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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

March 12, 2024 5:00 am

The American public is pulling back from the transgender frenzy, but the diehard left is only becoming more fanatical. Tennessee AG Jonathan Skrmetti joins to discuss an insane law out of Maine which lets residents sue people in other states for not aiding or abetting child mutilation. Plus, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr makes the case for forcing China to sell off TikTok, or else banning it from America's app stores.

Support the show:

See for privacy information.


Hey, everybody. It's The Charlie Kirk Show.

Should we ban TikTok? That is the question. Also, we go after trans surgeries and how it's happening in Tennessee and bizarre new bill out of Maine that we address. Get involved with Turning Point USA at Become a member today at Subscribe to our podcast, Charlie Kirk Show, and click on the podcast page. Email us as always, freedom at 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. The fight for our children has never been more important and the threats have never been more clear and present. Joining us now is the Attorney General of the great state of Tennessee, Jonathan Scrimetti. Jonathan, thank you so much for taking the time. This story is breaking and it involves the state of Maine. Walk our audience through it and thank you for your moral courage on this topic.

Thanks for having me on, Charlie. Maine is working on this bill, LB227, that relates to transgender and abortion issues. It basically says not only is Maine going to have shield laws to prevent investigators in red states from getting evidence from Maine, it also creates a cause of action that will let people in Maine sue law enforcement in states that have different laws, even if the connection with Maine is fairly tangential. So if you have a gender clinic in Texas but you're connected with Maine somehow, if you consult with Maine doctors or if you fly someone in from Maine to work, you could potentially, as a prosecutor in Texas, be sued in Maine state court for enforcing laws that are entirely constitutional in your state solely because they don't comport with Maine law. Has there ever been a piece of legislation, to your knowledge, like this? And this is effectively trying to create a sanctuary state for kind of trans surgeries.

Is that is that a good way to frame it? Well, I mean, I think I think it's even more than that. It's reaching into other states to try to punish people in those states for enforcing valid state laws that Maine disagrees with. And I'm not aware of any law like this that's happened in the past. It is completely antithetical to our Constitution, which says different states can have different laws.

They're allowed to choose the laws based on the will of their people. The people of Tennessee don't want Maine law. That's why they don't live in Maine. And if the people who run Maine want Maine laws to be the way they are, they're limited to the territory of Maine for enforcing those laws. So each state needs to stay in its lane and respect its borders. This reaches outside those borders to try to inflict the main policies on every other state, no matter what the people of each state want.

Does that include people that have no affiliation with Maine at all whatsoever or have never been to Maine? I mean, how would this even be stand up constitutionally? Well, I don't think it would stand up constitutionally, but we want to nip this in the bud. You know, the states exist to be separate. The Constitution provides some power to the federal government. But by and large, each state is governing itself and making a lot of important decisions based on the people who are close to that state government.

And, you know, I think the Constitution precludes this law. I hope they don't pass it because it's setting a dangerous trend of states reaching into other states to mess with the business of law enforcement in those states. So you're leading a charge to get more state attorneys general on board to fight this bill. How many other state agencies have joined your fight so far? We've got 15 plus Tennessee on this so far, and this is this is moving pretty quick. So I'm sure there are others that would be inclined to join on as well.

That's just amazing. And so we have a lot of forward momentum here. We've seen basically child abduction laws in California. But is this proposed bill in Maine the most wide sweeping and expansive you've ever seen?

It is. It is because of that private right of action. So not only are they trying to stop law enforcement from enforcing laws based on evidence in that state, but they're letting people reach back into the states that have laws restricting pediatric transgender interventions and letting them mess with those enforcers for doing their job.

That goes even beyond what California has done, and California's law is already constitutionally suspect. Well, Attorney General Scrimetti, anything else you want us to on our audience to be aware of this? And just can you kind of talk generally about you ever thought you'd be involved in using the AG's office when in regarding to the massacring and the butchering of children?

This must be a new phenomenon for you and your office. Well, I mean, you know, we've been busy in Tennessee fighting the constitutional fight on juvenile transgender medical interventions. You know, we have a case that might be going up to the Supreme Court, the LW case, where we won. We were the first state to win in a case recognizing there is not a constitutional right for children to have these irreversible procedures. So this is not a topic that is alien to us, but I never thought we'd have to worry about other states retaliating against us using their state judicial systems. That's profoundly unconstitutional. America was designed with the idea of each state governing itself.

And when people start to try to totalize what their states are doing and inflict their will on other states, that undermines the democracy that makes our federalist system work. Attorney General Scrimetti, thank you so much for joining us and for your leadership. Thank you.

Thanks for having me. Email us freedom at and subscribe to our podcast. So we have a great group of guests coming up.

We have Brendan Carr. We're going to dive really deep into TikTok. I had a great text exchange with Brendan Carr over the weekend, and I look forward to discussing that. I want to dive a little bit deeper, though, into this trans surgery issue. You see, under this idea of gender affirming care, they're able to do some very sinister things. There is no better expert than Dr. Miriam Grossman.

Dr. Grossman is going to be coming here to Phoenix. I started listening to her book. I listen to a lot of books. I read like listening is the equivalent to comprehension of reading is actually even better sometimes.

But, you know, when I'm on the run and working out or in the car, I try to listen to a lot of books. And I started listening to her book, Lost in Trans Nation, and I was blown away. If you are even indifferent on the trans issue, you need to check out Dr. Miriam Grossman's book, Lost in Trans Nation. She is a tough cookie.

I'll tell you what. She is an actual clinician. She's not just an academic.

She's not just somebody up in the clouds. She is the A team of the A team on the trans issue. And what she highlights is that first and foremost, the majority of the people who are targeted under this gender affirming care have autism. They're on the autism spectrum.

So that just out of the gate should tell you something. So these are people that might be a little socially awkward. These are individuals that are suffering under something that is very, very hard to measure, very, very hard to overcome, very, very hard to deal with.

And why is it that a disproportionate majority of the people that get into the transgender cycle of self-destruction get into the gender dysphoric mindset also of autism? Well, Dr. Miriam Grossman has a theory on that, and she's going to join us to discuss. And last week, there was some huge breaking news about WPATH, which is the world. We should have covered this.

We ran out of time last week. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health, WPATH, was exposed last week in a New York post op-ed for pushing experimental gender surgery for minors with zero regard for the irreversible damage caused. The international group even pushed for the experimental procedures designed to create sexless bodies that resembled department store mannequins. WPATH documents demonstrate it's controlled by gender ideologues who push aside concerns about whether children and adolescents can consent to medical treatments that WPATH members privately acknowledge often have devastating and permanent side effects.

Look, it's very simple. We're not going to stop until every single gender affirming care clinic in the country is shut down, period. Got to shut them all down for kids. Adults, we can have another discussion. I think there's a good argument that they should all be shut down for every age.

Let's build a coalition on the kids, on the minors. These kids, these kids are not allowed, all the things are not allowed to do. They're not allowed to buy liquor, not allowed to drive a car. They're not allowed to even, I think like rent a movie, like there's age verification across the board.

You can't get a tattoo. You can get your breasts removed without parental consent. And new evidence shows that you now can get life altering chemical castration drugs sent to you by Amazon without parental consent. Jordan Peterson has a bombshell interview about that, by the way, where Jordan Peterson recently sat down with a couple in Montana and their daughter was able to get chemical castration drugs without them knowing via Amazon delivered to their house in the state of Montana. We are butchering an entire generation.

If they can't kill the kids in the womb, they try to give them the ability to go into a gender affirming clinic and start the cycle of self mutilation, destruction. This is one of the moral issues of our time. And by the way, it's big money for big pharma. Big, big money. They're making a lot of money. Hey, everybody.

Charlie Kirk here. We're all getting the sense that we're being lied to. Well, that's because we are. Suspicious events are unfolding. Even worse, it's hard to believe what anyone has to say about it.

And we all know the mainstream media has their own agenda. That's why you need to trust your gut and take action. It's time to prepare. Get started at Load up on three month emergency food kits packed with ready hour foods from mypatriotsupply. You will save $200 per kit.

These kits provide over 2000 calories every day. Serving over 3 million families since 2008, mypatriotsupply is equipped to help yours achieve self-reliance. Go to and stock up on as many kits as you need from mypatriotsupply. They ship fast and free and arrive in unmarked boxes.

Order by 3 p.m. and your order will ship the same day. Save $200 per kit at That is They ship fast and free and arrive in unmarked boxes. Order by 3 p.m. today.

They're a wonderful, wonderful product, so check it out right now at They're going to try to make this whole thing on Christian nationalism. They're going to try to make it all about the people of faith.

They need to sit in their corner and come to heal. If you ask any one of our pastors we deal with, and by the way, let me get the details. This Thursday I'm speaking at a church, Influence Church with Phil Hotzenpiller. It's in Anaheim, California. That's on Thursday.

And then on Sunday I'm speaking at Calvary Chapel San Juan Capistrano. If you ask any one of the pastors that we talk to, they want a restoration of the U.S. Constitution. That's it. Are you really a radical for wanting the U.S. Constitution? We want to see the Constitution restored. That is what unites us.

People of different faiths, backgrounds, people of no faith. That is the center point. That is how we should respond to every single media inquiry and just hold up the Constitution. This is what we want, a restoration. Now we can talk about what inspired the Constitution. What inspired the Constitution was Judeo-Christian morality.

Drives them nuts when they say that. But even if you don't acknowledge what inspired it, that's fine. Let's just apply it. Let's read it as it was intended. As James Madison would say, that it's the structure of the U.S. Constitution that is its most important. It's a beautiful document. As we said before, the Constitution spreads power over space and time.

It does not concentrate all power in New York or all power in L.A. or all power in San Francisco over what, hundreds, thousands of miles. And over time, you cannot take over the entire United States government in less than in six years, because the Senate comes up totally in election every six years. So the founding fathers, they wrote about this repeatedly in the Federalist Papers. They put a preference on deeply held beliefs that last.

Think about all the beliefs that haven't lasted. This is why we're not a democracy and why we are a republic. I want to point out to you the brilliance of what the founding fathers gave us and why, if we had a democracy, not a republic, how awful the country, you think you're in a bad spot?

Imagine this. BLM, everybody was on board for racial justice. If we were a democracy, democracies move fast, they're rapid, they're instantly responsive to the passions of the people, we would have had reparations. How about during COVID? There were people talking about jailing the unvaccinated. If we were just the democracy, not a republic, and we played to the emotions and the immediate passions, what would have happened? How about Ukraine?

School lockdowns? But opinions change. Now, it's not impossible to effectuate change in a republic. The founding fathers wrote, though, that these must, these changes must be things that can weather debate, current events, wars, famine, drought, natural disasters. If your views, for example, the abolition of the unspeakable evil of slavery, Thaddeus Stevens, John Quincy Adams, the great abolitionists, they held that belief and they held that belief and they held that belief and they held that belief over a period of time. And then they eventually were able to abolish slavery. Republics slow down the legislative process, and that can be so frustrating at times. But it is tempting to want to have the instrumentation of your government move rapidly, not to mention the Constitution recognizes who the sovereign is, the people, and where do your rights come from? They come from the divine. Whatever your picture of the divine is, it comes from the eternal.

That is the game changer. You cannot have a free society if you believe rights come from the state. It is impossible. You can only have a free society if you recognize that there is an all-powerful being that granted you those rights. And that's why the Declaration and the Constitution are key and lock. They come together, as Dr. Larry Arnn would say, and the founder's key. That's why it says one of the course of human events becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands that have tied them to another. This is an eternal call. The framers didn't just put God into our founding documents, their belief in God was the driving and animating force of the Constitution.

So every time they mention Christian nationalists just say, I'm a constitutionalist, I'm a Christian, but I'm a constitutionalist, and I want a restoration of the Republic. Let's talk real risks and real safety for a second. Right now, banks are juggling debts under the radar. Commercial properties, cars, credit cards, they're owed on.

It's a bit much, isn't it? Makes you think of the 2008 financial crisis. There's a smoother way to handle your finances. I have turned to gold and silver. In fact, I'm holding silver in my hand right now from noble gold investments. It might be traditional, but it's reliable, not just shiny objects.

There's some stability in these uncertain times. If you're interested in exploring this path, noble gold investments can guide you. They know their stuff about precious metals for IRAs and 401ks. And here's a little nudge, a one fourth of an ounce gold standard gold coin free with qualifying account only this month. When you're ready, invest with the folks at noble gold investments.

They'll help you figure out if it's the right move for you. No pressure, just options. You can claim your free gold coin and secure your family's financial future. Just use promo code gold. What is your hedge right now against a coming collapse? The market is primed for a correction. Go to right now. Colin Plume and the team at Noble Gold Investments. They're terrific, responsive, ethical, honest. Go to right now.

That is Joining us now is Brendan Carr. Brendan is really terrific and I've known Brendan for a while. And Brendan Carr, I think, is still on the FCC commission. I think that's right, isn't it, Brendan? Yeah, I'm still here, you know, a little bit of version of Republican deep state maybe, but I'm still a commissioner at the FCC.

I'm here actually for another five years was confirmed as well to another term. Well, terrific. So well, Brendan, we're excited about you coming on the program. We were texting and you have some strong opinions about this piece of legislation that is moving through the House to, I don't know, ban TikTok is the right term. Walk us all through it, Brendan.

We have plenty of time. So kind of do a comprehensive overview. Yeah, this is a really smart, narrow, targeted legislative bill that would require TikTok to divest its ties, its connections back to the CCP, but then would otherwise allow it to continue to operate here without that national security threat. Now, of course, if TikTok or more really the CCP does not agree with that divestment, in that case, it couldn't do business. But there was some confusion, I think, because there was other TikTok bills that have been introduced, including in the Senate, that got a lot of pushback from the conservative right.

And this bill responds very directly to those concerns and it moves in a much more narrow way. So for instance, it only applies to an app that is controlled by only four countries, which is China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. So it's only narrowly about apps that are controlled by those four foreign governments. Second of all, it's not just enough that they're sort of controlled by those foreign governments. They have to ultimately be a national security threat as well.

And then third, there's going to be process on top of that, including public process. So some of the concerns about this giving the government power to go up for individual users, that's not at all in this bill. The argument that it could be sort of any application the government doesn't like, not in this bill. But TikTok is a very real national security threat. This is something that Trump led on in 2020. And frankly, like a lot of things, Trump was ahead of the curve.

And how you see years later, people say, oh, yeah, Trump was right. This is a big national security threat. So people are coming together from Chip Roy in the Freedom Caucus to the chairs of committees to advance this bill. So can you just go further into the contrast between the last bill and this bill? Why don't they just name TikTok by name? They don't do that in this bill, is that correct? This bill is narrow about TikTok and it does name TikTok by name. In fact, some people have said, is that a bill of attainder problem to name a specific company in a bill? And it's not.

Not at all. The Constitution is clear about that. As long as the actual thing the bill is doing, it doesn't constitute punishment in a judicial sense.

If it's forward looking, which is what this is, it's no bill of attainder. So in the main, it is a TikTok bill and it's about just allowing it to continue to operate. People love it.

I don't use it, but some people love it. They can continue to do it as long as the ties to CCP are broken. But then there's a small piece at the end that says, yeah, in a very narrow circumstance, if there's a similar app that, again, only if it's controlled by CCP, North Korea, Russia and Iran, would the government be able to take action? But again, in that context, it's really not new authority. It's not expanding authorities.

It really just a way, in my view, sort of further narrowing it in. Again, very different than a lot of the other TikTok bills out there that raised some concerns on the right. So the can you just help educate our audience on the national security threat specifically that TikTok poses?

If you were to try to convince someone that knows next to nothing about this topic, what would you say to try to convince them? Yeah, you know, TikTok is fundamentally different than other social media out there. And, you know, far be it for me to defend Facebook or Google.

I've been with you wailing away on them. And frankly, we absolutely have to do more to rein in big tech, whether they're in Silicon Valley or in Beijing. But the reality is that TikTok is fundamentally different.

And here's why. For years, TikTok represented to US lawmakers that US user data, sensitive data doesn't even exist in China. And then in 2022, a blockbuster story came out that shows that that's nothing other than gaslighting. Leaked material shows that, quote, everything is seen in China. And the everything is not your average cat video. It is search and browsing history, keystroke patterns, biometrics, location information and personnel in Beijing have already used that to spy on the location of specific Americans. TikTok is different because their parent company ByteDance has a CCP cell literally embedded in its leadership.

Its parent is subject to this 2017 national security law in China that compels it to spy and not disclose it. And TikTok is different because there's been independent risk analysis that has shown that there's cybersecurity issues with that app that are by this malcore measure more than twice as bad as Facebook and Google. So do we need to rein in Facebook? And I've seen President Trump talk about this again, rightly so.

Yeah, we need to do that. But there is something very different about TikTok that's a national security issue that is different than the very concerning issues with privacy and data flows and censorship. We've got to do TikTok first and then we absolutely have to come in, as President Trump and others have said, and take care of the discrimination by big tech that continues.

Well, and it's a little revealing to me, too, because TikTok is majorly protesting this bill. And you have to wonder, well, they could still operate. They just have to sell to an American company. Now, is that the data aspect or they can no longer have any ownership of TikTok whatsoever? And who would potentially be an interested buyer in that?

It's a good question. So the bill actually doesn't even require it to go to a U.S. company. I've seen some people be concerned and say, well, is this about going to a U.S. company that might be sort of beholden to the CIA?

No, not at all. All it has to be is just not a company or entity that is effectively controlled by those four foreign adversaries. There's been a lot of people that have sort of put their hand up and said, yeah, I'd love to continue TikTok going as long as it breaks from fight dance and CCP control. I think, you know, when Trump was president, there was discussions about Oracle being in play. I don't know if that would be the case now or not.

I saw Kevin O'Leary from Shark Tank. I saw in one interview said that he might be interested. So there's any range of actors, either U.S. or non-U.S., that could step in and they could continue to be an interesting counterweight to Facebook and, you know, Google and others that are out there.

Yeah. So I guess there would then be a bidding process. And then I would love to see it just completely banned. I think that it's it's a societal toxin. What are the legislative prospects of this bill?

It's in really good shape. Look, it was 50 to nothing bipartisan in the House Commerce Committee. And now Leader Scalise has said it's going to come to a vote on the floor this week. Speaker Johnson has been really good on this bill, leading the way on it.

Chair, Congress Chair Stefanik, as well as an original co-sponsor. Look, there's a lot of look at Congress and they say 118th Congress, you've had a tough run, tough to get stuff done. Frankly, I think usually the problems come from over-legislating, not under-legislating. But this is an example where, you know, the 118th can step up and say we can still get big, important things done for the American people on national security and on a tough issue. It's an issue where there's technology and it's fast moving.

But this is the right, smart approach. I like this bill more than some of the other ones that were out there. So so, Brendan, what would you say to some of the critics that say this is just YouTube and Facebook deploying their lobbying power on on the rest of the basically on D.C.?

Because they're so worried. They're just trying to throw a big curveball into TikTok's plans. Do we have any evidence that the big tech companies are heavily lobbying for this? No, not at all. Look, I've been deeply involved in these efforts.

I haven't heard anything at all from any of those tech companies. And I agree that we shouldn't be taking actions that ultimately going to sort of give these entities more power to engage in sort of abusive practices. That's exactly right.

But that's why the divestment is so smart, because it could go to some entity that would be a counterweight to those, but yet not a counterweight that is to the communist left of those existing ones, because it's beholden to the CCP. And again, people talk about free speech and First Amendment. Absolutely. This bill can protect that. And just real quick, the Supreme Court draws a distinction between regulation based on content on the one hand and regulation based on conduct on the other. In fact, there's a Supreme Court case, Arcara Books, where the government shut down a bookstore because the owner was using it to run a prostitution ring out of the bookstore.

He went to the Supreme Court and said, you can't shut my bookstore down. This is quintessentially First Amendment activity. The Supreme Court said, no, this is about the conduct taking place there, not the content. And that's the same with TikTok. So it's not the free speech rights of the Americans that are on TikTok.

Of course, they should get to express their views without government interference. The problem is that TikTok has been engaging in these conduct of moving data back and surveillance and espionage. The other analogy I'll give you is it's like someone could take a pen and they can write the most salacious anti-American propaganda they want. There's nothing the government can do about that, rightfully. But if you take that same pen and you pick a lock and you break into a building with it, that's a problem and you're going to lose the pen and you can't sit there and defend and say, well, I was using it to speak as well. So this is a bill that's targeted to the con duct of TikTok, not its content.

That's why it would be consistent with the Constitution. Brandon, thank you so much. Appreciate your time. Thank you. Thanks.

Good to see you again. Thanks. Email us freedom at Charlie Kirk, dot com and subscribe to our podcast. I look I think that TikTok is a societal toxin, so I'm open minded to it. However, I just wonder and worry about giving Joe Biden and the government the ability to ban apps that we don't like.

So I I need to read the legislation. I need to I need to think about this. I need to dwell on it. I mean, for example, we use telegram all the time and they say that telegram is a harder case. And it is apparently Russian owned telegram, or at least Russia inspired or Russian connected.

And so it remains a big question. The world is in flames and biodynamics is a complete and total disaster, but it can't and won't ruin my day. Why? Because I start my day with a hot America first cup of blackout coffee. It's 100 percent America and zero percent grift. Blackout coffee is 100 percent committed to conservative values from sourcing the beans to the roasting process, customer support and shipping.

They embody true American values and accept no compromise on taste or quality. Look, you got to check out right now, blackout coffee dot com. Slash Charlie or use coupon code Charlie for 20 percent off your first order. That is blackout coffee dot com slash Charlie.

Be awake, not woke. That's blackout coffee dot com slash Charlie. Check it out.

Promo code Charlie. So this is the question I want to open up for you guys. Do you think we should ban tick tock? And I'm currently undecided on the issue.

I think tick tock is societal poison. And I just wish people would make the actual argument here. OK, they mine your data. They're turning your kids, your kids trans and gay. That's what they're doing.

That's the whole ballgame here. They're turning your kids trans and gay. That's what's the by the way, this is not some sort of talking point. They are the jet fuel of the trans agenda. They are the transmission of the woke virus.

People complain about the woke virus, its people complain about the woke virus, its ability to infect society is largely thanks to tick tock and data privacy. Yeah, I get all that national security. I agree. Can we get the Palmer lucky clip, by the way? I like Palmer a lot. Smart guy. I know him. Billionaire from California.

The Chinese Communist Party, their modern day Nazis. I totally agree. Ban it. But it's going through all these calisthenics. Oh, well, it can still exist. Get rid of it.

Has no redeemable value. And they're running all these advertisements. Yeah, I'm Earl the farmer and I use tick tock to film my pigs when they're born like enough. OK, like this.

This is to cure. Try to pandering white right wing propaganda. Can you get that tick tock ad they ran during the State of the Union of Earl Earl the pig farmer?

Yeah, we educate a lot of people. Let me just tell you about tick tock. We have made dozens of attempts here on this program at 20 Point USA to have a tick tock page. And the alphabet mafia, purple haired jihadis there, they kick us off every single time. We're not even able to have a tick tock, basically.

And any sort of semblance of like, you know, somebody who's a fan started the fan page. It gets struck down. They are the worst for free speech censorship. Facebook is way better. You just want to talk about like honest Facebook is a far freer, better platform for us to be able to get our opinions out than YouTube and tick tock.

Here's how it works. Rumble is the best, obviously. And then but what truth social and rumble are in the same category, then X, then Facebook, Instagram, then YouTube, then tick tock.

If you want to talk the spectrum of speech. And Twitter exit has completely changed the game. It's completely changed the game, but it doesn't have the same traffic. YouTube is a constant battle.

Praise God, we just got over the strike. How many YouTube views are we getting a day right now? Two million, almost almost two million YouTube views a day. It's almost three million.

We're doing very well. Instagram, almost four million a day. Wow. Instagram, I think we have a streak going of over one hundred and thirty reels in a row, over a million views. One hundred and eighty. We have one hundred eighty videos in a row on Instagram that have over a million views.

I have a video on Instagram where I'm just debating some kid on inflation or something. It's like eight million views. And these are like real views. And tick tock does not even allow us to participate. So I say get rid of them.

So I got to read more about this legislation at the same time. I say, wait a second. If it can be used against tick tock, can it be used against rumble? Can it be used against telegram? Can it be used against Twitter and X?

So I get a little bit hesitant. Twitter has Saudi ownership. OK, yeah, so we have about three to four million YouTube views a day. And by the way, we haven't even scaled our YouTube to where we want to get to yet. And Instagram, we are we're doing very, very well. So we know these platforms intimately.

So I can speak from authority. Tick tock is the worst. Not only are they the worst for they making your kids gay and trans, not only the worst for all the lies against Israel, all the lies against America, all the lies in favor of Hamas, but the dancing videos and stuff. It is it does not allow us an opportunity to compete. I wouldn't mind tick tock if we could have a page. We get struck down hate speech, hate speech, can't misgender them. So, for example, on tick tock, if I say that there's only men and women.

You get kicked off. If I say men can't give birth, kicked off a tick tock. If I see that, if I see that, you know, the race stuff that we have a colorblind society, hate speech, we have been kicked off dozens and dozens of times. Tick tock is the Harvard University of social media platforms.

That is how restrictive they are on speech. By the way, let's also be clear. Tick tock makes people more miserable.

It fries people's attention span. We have to make a better argument if we're going to get rid of this thing. Get rid of it.

Don't just say, oh, yes, sell to an American company. Nuke it. Get rid of it. It's terrible. It's a tap dancing around about, you know, data privacy. It's weak.

It has no teeth. It doesn't get to the essence of it. We have the gayest generation in history. We have kids that are turning trans like a 4000% increase in trans identification of kids. You think they just come up with that on their own?

They're scrolling through a tailored algorithm that CCP oligarchs designed for them to make them question their gender identity. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us as 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
Whisper: medium.en / 2024-03-12 06:14:52 / 2024-03-12 06:29:15 / 14

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