The Uniparty Alliance Against Speech with Glenn Greenwald

Hey, everybody. Glenn Greenwald joins the program. We talk about FISA, spying, the war machine. Extremely interesting guest who I've been wanting to have on for quite some time.

They call him a liberal, but is he really? Email us as always. Freedom at CharlieKirk.com. Subscribe to our podcast.

Open up your podcast application and type in Charlie Kirk show. Get involved with Turning Point USA at TPUSA.com. That is TPUSA.com. Starting high school or college chapter today.

At TPUSA.com. Buckle up, everybody. Here we go. Noble Gold Investments is the official gold sponsor of the Charlie Kirk show, a company that specializes in gold IRAs and physical delivery of precious metals. Learn how you could protect your wealth with Noble Gold Investments at NobleGoldInvestments.com. That is NobleGoldInvestments.com. It's where I buy all of my gold.

Go to NobleGoldInvestments.com. They are counting on your surrender. If you give up, they win.

But what if we look back and we realize we were just inches away from victory and that's when we decided to give up. Join us and thousands of American patriots for the summer convention that all are invited to. You're going to hear how we're going to win in 2024. With the biggest speakers in the movement featuring President Donald J. Trump.

We're going to fight and we're going to win. Charlie Kirk. Vivek Ramaswamy. Governor Kristi Noem. Dr. Ben Carson. Steve Bannon. Candace Owens.

Laura Trump. Senator Rick Scott. Congressman Matt Gaetz. Denny Johnson. Jack Posobick.

And more. June 14th through 16th. 2024 is our final battle.

In Detroit, Michigan. The great silent majority is rising like never before. Join us for the People's Convention. This is a new ballgame everybody. You send a message.

We play to win. Register now at tpaction.com slash peoples. Super excited for our guest this hour, someone who I wanted to have on the show for quite some time, who has been a courageous voice for liberty against the national security state and the war machine. He's an independent journalist and also host of System Update on Rumble.

So make sure you guys subscribe to his Rumble feed. It is Glenn Greenwald. Glenn, welcome to the program. Great to be with you, Charlie.

Thanks for having me. Glenn, let's start with this anti-Semitism Awareness Act bill. I mean, you don't like Jew hatred. I don't either. But why is the federal government sprinting to try to create more speech restrictions and to give money to a bureaucratic Leviathan to restrict our freedoms and liberties? Walk us through this. There's many elements here that I find interesting.

Glenn, what is your reaction? So obviously, if you believe in free speech, it necessarily means you defend views not only that you dislike, but often find repellent. Obviously, a big free speech controversy over the past decade has been attempts to silence or control speech in the name of stopping racism or xenophobia or Islamophobia or misogyny, whatever.

Nobody has to say they like those things in order to object to the censorship efforts. And the same is true with anti-Semitism. The problem of what just happened in the House was just to focus narrowly on what they actually did was there's federal anti-discrimination law that applies to places like educational institutions and public accommodations where anti-discrimination is prohibited. And anti-Semitism is already part of the body of discrimination that is already prohibited. What the House just did was that they adopted this massively expansive definition of anti-Semitism that places in Europe and that Israel has been advocating for a long time. And within this definition are examples of the kind of anti-Semitism that is now prohibited. And they incorporated not only this expanded definition into federal law, but also the examples themselves.

The law says explicitly we're incorporating not just the definition, but the examples. And some of the examples are things like saying that a particular Jewish individual seems to have more loyalty to Israel than they do to the United States. Criticizing Israel in a way that seems to impose on them double standards, meaning you're criticizing them in a way that you don't criticize other democratic states. It prohibits you from saying that you think Jewish people are responsible for the death of Jesus. It prohibits you from comparing the behavior of the Israeli state to some of the war crimes or crimes against humanity committed by Nazis. Now a lot of these views might be repellent, but they are absolutely within the realm of free speech to say any of those things. And the thing that's most disturbing is that you're allowed to do it about any other kind of person. You're allowed to say, for example, that, oh, those evangelicals over there seem to prioritize Israeli interests over American interests.

That's perfectly fine. You can criticize other countries in any way you want, including with double standards. The one thing you cannot do is say this expresses opinion about any individual who's Jewish or about the state of Israel in particular. And that's why it's such a direct attack on First Amendment free speech rights. And that's for the reason why, I mean, I don't think it's controversial to say that D.C. is run by a lot of very well-organized and well-financed lobbies. You have Planned Parenthood and the NRA and, you know, Big Tech and Wall Street and pharmaceutical companies. And the pro-Israel lobby is a major force in Washington. But then you also have people in Congress who for various religious or cultural reasons really do love the state of Israel. And then you also have people who believe it's an important component of our national security, which is fine to think all those things, but that doesn't justify assaults on the free speech rights of Americans to protect this foreign country. No, and it certainly doesn't. It doesn't support trying to loop in criticism. The bill is if you're in favor of anti-Semitism, a whole nother wrinkle to this, which is if you're against the bill, sometimes you want more anti-Semitism to occur.

So, Glenn, I want to highlight this, though. Speaker Johnson bypassed the committee process. So typically these things get marked up in a committee. This was thrown onto the floor, bypassing a promise that he made that everyone would have 72 hours to read the bill. This is while all the campus protests that are happening, the vast majority of which is constitutionally protected speech. Glenn, can you go deeper into kind of the pressure campaign where it seems D.C. can only agree on a couple of things, spying on America, borrowing money we don't have, restricting speech and financing wars that don't matter? Glenn.

Yeah, absolutely. First of all, let's go back to when the members of the House of Representatives successfully removed Kevin McCarthy from the speakership. Actually, first they refused to put him as speaker until he granted a variety of concessions that even a lot of Democrats admitted were necessary reforms to the House because Nancy Pelosi before Kevin McCarthy, even Paul Ryan before him, and now Speaker McCarthy had consolidated so much power in House leadership. And in the speakership position that basically the rest of the House were just decorative.

They were just kind of there and had no power whatsoever. And obviously that's not the way the House is supposed to work. So they demanded all these reforms to ensure that the speaker couldn't control everything, that members of Congress, as you say, had the right to read things, had the right to pass things through committee, had the right to control what gets to the House floor. Mike Johnson, even after he watched Kevin McCarthy get deposed for violating all those, he made those promises again. He is now systematically violating almost every one of them because he knows that the Republicans cannot remove him because the Democrats have promised that as long as he serves their agenda, which he has done very faithfully, including reversing his long held positions to do so, like opposition to more funding for the war in Ukraine, keeping that horrific war going. He was on my show where he talked about the evils of worthless eavesdropping and said, we will never renew FISA without reforms. He then led the way to renew FISA without reforms at the behest of the CIA and the Biden White House. He swore that the FBI does not deserve a brand new federal headquarters building by spending nine billion dollars to build it.

That was one of his main complaints about the FBI. And then he oversaw the appropriation of that money. So he has the protection of the Democratic Party as long as he does their bidding to do anything he wants so he can ignore all those promises he made to the dissatisfied members of the more populous wing of the Republican Party because he has the protection of Hakeem Jeffries and Nancy Pelosi and the rest of them. So to take this bill and throw it onto the House floor, and there were, you know, overwhelming support of both political parties.

There were only 21 Republicans who voted no, 70 Democrats who voted no, so overwhelmingly both caucuses agreed. It's because they see this political opportunity to claim that there's rampant anti-Semitism in the United States, that Jewish students are being endangered, creating the kind of moral panic that we've had about racial minorities or trans people that they're, you know, subject to hate speech that might incite violence. Or a genocide against them, and therefore we need to control speech. The same mentality just directed to a different minority group.

And there's obviously a lot of political benefit to doing this among powerful groups and therefore neither political party wanted to get on the wrong side of that. So wait, Mike Johnson went on your show trying to brag about is that did I hear that correctly that he spoke to you about FISA protection? When was that?

That's that's. Yeah, it was just like three months before he became a speaker. It was the day that FBI Director Christopher Rouet went to the committee and he grilled them. But, you know, but these were like, Charlie, these were like passionate convictions he was defending. You know, they weren't just throwaway lines from my show. He elaborated on them. He's a constitutional law professor.

And so imagine my amazement to watch him then lead the way, not just a yes vote, but lead the way strategized to ensure those things pass. No, I just I think that's such a powerful point because he also came on our show and was complaining about some FBI thing. And, you know, we debate this sometimes what motivates these people or turns these people?

I mean, are they weak? Are they blackmailed? I want to have you riff on this, Glenn, because it's our audience is like 99 percent. He's blackmailed. And I'm not totally convinced of that. I think it's just the weight of the security state just collapsed him. That's my working theory.

Glenn, what is your reaction? Yeah, we do know that political blackmail has been used by the U.S. security state agencies for a long time. J. Edgar Hoover had dossiers on many political officials. That's how he was able to run the FBI for six decades. Everyone was petrified of him. But I don't like to make blackmail accusations without evidence.

And we have none in Mike Johnson's case. I think it's more that, you know, when he was asked, why did you change your mind? He said, oh, I went to a briefing. They like bring these people into the bowels of American power, you know, the Situation Room, the like blinking NSA room, and they have people with medals on their chest, very powerful people come and treat them like dignitaries and say you're in real power now. And that means being responsible and understanding our need to spy on Americans without warrants. And they know that that power that they now have, this kind of prestige getting into the inner circle, is dependent upon them serving an agenda that they had long said they opposed. And human nature craves power and they're willing to make those compromises to do it.

I think that it's that more than anything else. So, Glenn, let me ask you the I want to dive into this. Can you talk about this kind of these shows that the intel agencies put on in these skips?

I think this is really important where no phone, no staff. So it's just Speaker Johnson. We kind of call this the woo woo show where they kind of show you a lot. But it's like half truths and half lies from all of your excellent reporting that you've done.

What happens in these skiffs? And how could Mike Johnson go from a fire-breathing Fourth Amendment advocate on the Glenn Greenwald show to a capitulating Bush-Cheney spy on everything that moves hack? You're working hypothesis, so please. Yes. Yeah. I remember when we were doing the Snowden reporting, which went on for two and a half years, and it was we were able to show that the NSA in secret, even unbeknownst to most members of Congress, had converted the Internet into a range of mass domestic warrantless surveillance directed not just to foreign populations, but the American population as well. It was obviously a big deal. It made a lot of it was a lot very controversial because no one knew that the U.S. government and the NSA were doing that. And the NSA, a couple of months after we began, invited 60 Minutes into like the secret parts of the NSA.

And the 60 Minutes was so exciting. They were like showing the camera with the like codes being opened on the door. They love all these toys. You know, people get enamored of them, thinking like this is some kind of futuristic world and they're so grateful to be let into the inner sanctum, even though if you look at the 60 Minutes report, it was just so funny because these were just conference rooms with nothing in them. But because they were presented as like the secret spaces where a super important thing happened or we see like the situation room, people feel good.

They feel like important getting access to those, you know, and and think about how Mike Johnson is being treated like. I mean, he's third in line to the presidency. Now you think he wants to go back to the backbenches of Congress.

So he's obviously willing to do anything. And, you know, even though we're very critical, a lot of us are about these security state agencies, there's also part of our brain that has been implicated for a long time with the image that, you know, what happens in the CIA, what happens in the NSA and the FBI is super sophisticated. The most highly secretive stuff, you know, and important stuff that sometimes actually does catch criminals or terrorists or protects the country.

And I think even for people who are critical of those agencies, once they're embraced by them and once they get welcomed in and presented with like top secret, super secret documents, they really get hypnotized by it. I remember when Obama ran for president in 2008, he presented himself as a constitutional lawyer. Americans had turned against the exodus of the war on terror. He promised to uproot all these neocon and Bush-Cheney domestic abridgments of civil liberties in the name of war on terror. And he gets into office and within two months, you know, he's in love with David Petraeus and he has all these like Princeton and Harvard educated generals in his office. He loves special forces. He loves drones. And not only did he not uproot any of those proper programs, but he continued them and in a lot of ways expanded them. The very programs that he swore over and over that he faced his campaign on uprooting. Remember, closed Guantanamo and all these interrogation programs.

And none of that happened. And I think it was because he was so enamored too that he got to like have these secret briefings. These guys have been around for decades. They know how to manipulate newly elected presidents or newly elected House speakers. Yeah, that's such a good point. And the Obama one is perfect because even more than Mike Johnson, a lot of his support back in 07-08, I'm going to close down Gitmo.

I'm going to give people a lot of time to read bills. You know, it's out of control what Bush-Cheney has done. And I think that McCain was going to lose no matter what. I think it was just an Obama wave year. But the margins of power. I think a lot of people said, hey, I think he had a lot of cultural libertarians that voted for him, a lot of privacy security, you know, concerns of people that were concerned about privacy behind him, his support. And he did none of it.

In fact, he was even worse in some ways for domestic spying and civil rights abuses than anything we've seen in recent memory. Look, for over 10 years, Patriot Mobile has been America's only Christian conservative wireless provider, the only. And when I say only, trust me, they are the only one. Patriot Mobile is a proud supporter of the show, and I am proud to partner with them. Patriot Mobile offers dependable nationwide coverage, giving you the ability to access all three major networks, which means you get the same coverage you've been accustomed to without funding the left. When you switch to Patriot Mobile, you're sending a message that you support free speech, religious liberty, the sanctity of life, Second Amendment, our military, veterans and first responder heroes. They're 100 percent U.S.-based customer service team, make switching quite easy. Keep your number, keep your phone or upgrade.

Their team will help you find the best plan for your needs. Just go to patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972-PATRIOT. Get a free month when you use offer code Charlie.

Join me and make the switch today. That is patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972-PATRIOT. That is patriotmobile.com slash Charlie, patriotmobile.com slash Charlie or call 972-PATRIOT. They have all three major networks. Check it out right now. Patriotmobile.com slash Charlie. So, Glenn, the journalism that you did with Edward Snowden was hero's work.

It's legendary. And it really opened my eyes as a young activist of, wow, the government really is spying on us. Of course, they're lying to us.

It's worse than we could ever imagine. Outside of your reporting just last year, FISA's own inspector general said that they violated the FISA statute 278,000 times, 278,000 times just in 2023. How do you process your incredible groundbreaking journalism last decade and the lack of legislative victories? How do you think about that?

It's such a good question. I really got a hard lesson in how D.C. works because when we first did the reporting, especially what people were most shocked by was the fact that the U.S. security state had been turned inward on the domestic population. The whole idea, if you go back to the National Security Act of 1947, the kind of legislative framework that created the deep state in the name of fighting communism first and then terrorism once communism fell in the Soviet Union, was that the kind of ultimate taboo was that this machinery would be directed inward toward the American people. It would be directed inward toward the American population or American soil and be involved in our domestic politics. It was always supposed to be it was going to only be directed at foreign adversaries.

And you had a lot of people inside the U.S. security state, especially after 9-11, like William Binney and ultimately Edward Snowden and others who became whistleblowers, who were very dissatisfied and angry that what they had been taught to expect from these institutions that they had devoted their lives to was being violated systematically. When we did this reporting, there was a bipartisan bill sponsored by this newly elected Tea Party right wing Congressman Justin Amash from Michigan who co-sponsored it with this old African-American civil libertarian liberal John Conyers. And the union of those two signified this emerging bipartisan consensus that for the first time since 9-11, we need to start to roll back some of these powers, things that got invested in the Patriot Act, in domestic spying, the FISA acts of 2008. And it really looked like it was going to succeed. And it was the Obama White House that called Nancy Pelosi and said, you need to do whatever you need to do, call in every favor, make every threat to get this bill stopped.

It failed by about six votes as a margin. And there is an article you can Google it in Foreign Policy magazine, obviously an institutional journal, where the headline is how Nancy Pelosi saved the NSA. And that is why I've been so fascinated for so long by this potential to unify people on the left and right around these populist issues, around the opposition to the U.S. security state.

Because there's always been a long time strain in right wing politics that has been very suspicious of the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, all those federal agencies. And obviously there's been a strain of that on the left. The problem is, is that establishment forces still prevail even with the rise of all this populism. And until that changes, it's going to be very hard to combat.

Yeah. And what I will say, though, is that the people are with us and that the everyday rank and file American does want to restrain the Leviathan and does want to try to have a check and balance on their power. And this is why we're trying our best to reform the Republican Party. And I want to just have you comment on that, Glenn, because if, you know, rewind seven years ago, us having a dialog would like shock people now.

It's like, oh, yeah, it kind of makes sense. I'm kind of more of that populist right. I don't trust the government. I don't like the fact they're spying on us. I agree with you completely on the privacy issues, on the war issues. Do you think that just looking at this as a journalist, analytically, in the Democrat Party, it feels as if that the voice of privacy concerns has been muted, if not stifled?

Where on the right, it certainly is ascendant. And just looking at the vote tally, more Republicans voted for warrant requirements than even Democrats did. What do you make of this, Glenn? Oh, there's no question that Donald Trump transformed writing politics in very positive ways, including creating this massive space to not just begin questioning the U.S. security state, but to be aggressively critiquing it. Obviously, they tried to sabotage not just his presidency, but first his campaign. I mean, the rushgate fraud emanated from the bowels of the CIA and FBI. They were constantly passing anonymous falsehoods to The New York Times and The Washington Post that showered themselves with pollsters for reporting it.

Remember during the 2016 campaign that an FBI lawyer illegally lied to the FISA court to get warrants to spy on Carter Page, and he ended up having to plead guilty and then leave the FBI because of it. The way it's always worked is there's been a massive opposition and skepticism toward the U.S. security state in left-level politics and strains of it in right-wing politics. You go back to Pat Buchanan. He hated neoconservatives.

He hated the deep state. Ron Paul did way better than anyone thought in the 2008-2012 elections, going into deep red districts and ranting about the evils of these institutions and the neoconservative ideology in general. It was really Trump that needed like a very charismatic figure.

Ron Paul wasn't charismatic, as great as he often was, but he has exploded it. And now at the same time, because liberals in the United States monomaniacally only think about Trump, everything is through the prism of Trump, watching there be growing skepticism toward these agencies. And the Republican Party had the opposite effect of massively increasing support for and trust in these agencies because they began perceiving these agencies, the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, Homeland Security, correctly as political allies. These last couple of weeks could be a masterclass, Glenn, of anybody who is trying to understand American politics, where in the last couple of weeks, the U.S. Congress has reauthorized FISA, obliterating the Fourth Amendment.

They passed this anti-Semitism bill, which is just awful, trying to restrict speech, the First Amendment, and then $100 billion in foreign funding of war. And I really want to spend a good amount of time on this, Glenn, which is the proliferation of the war machine and the further funding of it has weakened American, not just American fiscal strength, but it's also it's destabilized regions around the world. What what do you make of the continual push for Ukraine funding, despite any sort of any sort of victory in sight, whatever that might be? We see leader after leader say that the funding of the Ukraine war is the most important thing happening in the world. It seems as if that agreement, not disagreement, is actually the center of power in Washington, D.C., agreement on financing the war machine. Glenn Greenwald.

Yeah. So let me just go back quickly to President Obama, because at least in foreign policy, the people he really revered were these kind of like realists who were in the first Bush presidency, like James Baker and Brent Scowcroft. Eventually, Obama started thinking about the world through that lens. And one of the things he was attacked for by the kind of national security hawks in both the Democrat and Republican Party was his refusal to confront Russia over Syria and Ukraine. And his argument was Ukraine is always going to be a vital interest to Russia because it's right on the most sensitive part of their border. Ukraine is never going to be a vital interest to the United States. And of course, we're not going to risk confrontation with the nuclear power over who rules various provinces in eastern Ukraine. And he didn't want to send arms to Ukraine, lethal arms, so as to not provoke the Russians. He was attacked by Marco Rubio and John McCain, Joe Lieberman, all those kind of people. What changed, Charlie, was that in 2016, when the most cataclysmic event ever happened for American liberals, which was the defeat of Hillary Clinton by Donald Trump, they needed some way to explain this.

Like, how do you explain something so terrible can happen in their minds? And they settled on Russia. They decided to claim there were a lot of villains, but principally it was Vladimir Putin, whose interference in the 2016 election, so goes this fairy tale, elected Donald Trump. And ever since then, the Democratic Party has viewed Russia as the mortal enemy purely for reasons of domestic politics. They think that they're the reason that Trump got elected. And then you join those people. There's no, not a single no vote in the Democratic caucus against funding the war in Ukraine, not one, not one dissenter.

It's unanimous. You join them with the standard Republican Party, warmongers, national security hawks who occupy a lot of these critical committees. And you have a huge majority of members of Congress who want to fuel this war, even though Ukraine has no chance of winning. They're fighting with an involuntary conscript army of people who know they're being sent as cannon fodder. And the only people who are profiting are corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs close to Zelensky and the arms industry in the United States, as well as the U.S. security state that always gets more power with more war. But those are the people who ultimately run Washington because you look at polls, as you say, and people universally say, we want to stop being the police of the world.

We don't want to be involved in more foreign wars. And yet D.C. does not care. Glenn, there's a new story out this weekend that the amount of sell of millionaires in Ukraine has gone up, that the amount of people. Did you see the story? Congressman Corey Mills posted it.

Your reaction? Obviously, war has always had a huge profit component to it. I mean, some wars are just some words are necessary. But in wartime, people who are in the business of war profit greatly. And for a long time, Ukraine has been notorious for being the most corrupt country in Europe.

There's all kinds of graph. There's all kinds of bribery. There's everything going around. So when you send, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars and just drown with that amount of money. And by the way, there's no safeguards on Rand Paul one time or twice proposed an amendment. Just put an inspector general like we did in Afghanistan where they found billions of dollars in fraud.

He got accused by Mitch McConnell of being a Kremlin agent for wanting that. So there's no safeguards. Of course, this money is disappearing. Of course, it's going into secret bank accounts offshored in Switzerland. That's enriching corrupt Ukrainian officials.

They're just having Americans pay for their personal enrichment. It is. It is remarkable. Everyone should check out his rumble page system update with Glenn Greenwald.

It's terrific. As we draw near to another critical election, it's not about casting your vote. It's about elevating your voice. A Mac is more than just a senior discount organization. They unite like minded patriots committed to preserving our cherished values and actively opposing the leftist agenda.

Just look at their recent victories. A Mac members helped to push forward an investigation into the practices that inflate drug prices, successfully defeated rank choice voting in order to protect traditional voting methods and also help block a federal takeover of elections. As a Mac memberships grows, Washington listens.

Every new member strengthens this movement. If you love America, visit a Mac dot US slash Charlie to become a four year member for just thirty dollars. A Mac is not only better for America, it's better for you. Membership gives you access to the A Mac magazine, free Social Security and Medicare guidance, money saving discounts, trusted news, sweepstakes and more. Take advantage of our election year sale. Four years for just thirty dollars by joining the over two million members.

They can't ignore your voice. Join now at a Mac dot US slash Charlie. That's a Mac dot US slash Charlie. Glenn, I want to play this piece of tape here. This is from this last weekend at the McCain Institute Sedona Forum, which I encourage you guys to check out that website.

I was flipping through it earlier. The McCain Institute is really kind of the Uniparty center of power. And if you go look through the speakers from George Soros Open Society Foundation to, you know, Uniparty senators and the Republican and the Democrat Party, they had a breakout. You'll love this, Glenn, which is how to survive America first, as if, you know, we must get over this chapter of people that actually want to put the nation state first. This one piece of tape, though, is remarkable, which is about that Mitt Romney says we must ban TikTok because people are learning the truth about the Israeli Hamas war on TikTok.

Therefore, we must ban it. This is regardless of your position on the Israeli Hamas issue. I happen to be pro-Israel. This is a reprehensible comment by Willard Mitt Romney.

Play cut 38. A small parenthetical point, which is some wonder why there was such overwhelming support for us to shut down potentially TikTok or other entities of that nature. If you look at the postings on TikTok and the number of mentions of Palestinians relative to other social media sites, it's overwhelmingly so among TikTok broadcasts. So I know that's of real interest and the president will get the chance to make action in that regard. So is what he's saying here, Glenn, is that on the Israel Hamas issue, one of the reasons we want they wanted to ban TikTok is to censor war footage.

What's going on here? So this bill to ban TikTok has been lurking in Washington for years now, and it didn't get anywhere close to commanding a majority of members of Congress because it's a very extreme measure to take to ban an app that a third of Americans voluntarily choose to use. Even if you're somebody who is very hopish against China, first of all, our policies of funding foreign wars has been better for China than anything. They go around the world exploiting this resentment against the United States for fueling wars everywhere.

That's one of China's best assets. But the other point is the fear of China wasn't enough to get the TikTok ban passed. If you go and look at every major news report and the statements of the main sponsors of this bill, what they will tell you is the same thing Mitt Romney said, that what finally got Congress willing to embrace such an extreme bill was that they were concerned that there was too much Israel criticism circulating on TikTok. In other words, if there was too much pro Palestinian activism being allowed on the platform that they weren't censoring enough. And that is the reason why they finally decided to either force the sale of TikTok to a company that the U.S. government can more directly influence and control for content moderation decisions like they do with Facebook and Google or to ban the app altogether. And as you say, even if you're adamantly pro-Israel and want the U.S. financing all their wars in the military or whatever, this is about free speech in the United States. This is about the idea that if a platform doesn't censor enough of the views of American citizens, even young leftists are still American citizens under the Constitution, that that platform should be banned.

And I think that's what's so disturbing. And by the way, let me just say one more thing about the McCain Institute. We once did a report about who funds the McCain Institute.

Just Google it. It's like all the major arms dealers, all the war machine think tanks. That's where all their money comes from, unsurprisingly.

Yeah. And I want to dive into that because it's really I totally agree with you. Donald Trump just broke so many of these people because now the McCain Institute unabashedly has presenters from the Open Society Foundation.

Just like it's just OK. Sure. I mean, you know, George Soros's presenters are a lot on stage where before they would try to hide it. Now, they have Democrats and Republicans speaking at this McCain Institute Sedona Forum.

But again, the the disagreements they have are not actually over anything necessarily consequential. You have here Senator Bill Cassidy, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, you know, you have Admiral Linda Fagan from the Coast Guard. You have all the warmongers and senators where outside of the populist right with like Josh Hawley, Rand Paul and maybe a couple other voices, J.D. Vance and a couple people on the left, which in the Senate it's even less that the Washington, D.C. is fenced in around a complete agreement for what exactly. How would you then describe that, Glenn, to someone who is not as political? What do they have an agreement on? Invade the world, invite the world, neocon politics.

How do what is their vision of success look like for someone that is still trying to understand and comprehend this? Yeah, I think the main ideology is one of warmongering, of interference militarily in foreign countries, of fueling financial wars, foreign wars. Obviously, what defined John McCain's foreign policy was that he never saw a proposed war that he was opposed to.

He wanted to go in everywhere, not just invading Iraq and Afghanistan and bombing a bunch of countries, but also regime change in Syria, regime change in Libya. He went to Kiev with Christopher Murphy, the Democrat senator from Connecticut. You have that. Yeah, that's back in 2014. And the snow woman, Amy Klobuchar.

Yeah, keep going. Yes, that's right. And Victoria Nuland also went with them. She handed out like bakery goods, which I'm sure she always keeps in her purse, like doughnuts or whatever. She shared some of them, probably reluctantly with the protesters. But they had a huge bipartisan showing like, why do we care so much about who's governing Ukraine?

That was when the Democratic elected president of Ukraine was raised. That's what John McCain always stood for, which is very aggressive, interventionist foreign policy, not just to defend American borders, but to interfere in other countries, changing their government. And his main ally was Joe Lieberman, who in 2000 was Al Gore's running mate to be the Democratic nominee for vice president. So you constantly hear, Charlie, you know, in the media, oh, the two parties are so radically different. There's no bipartisanship anymore. They can't stand each other. The reality is they agree on most consequential things. They disagree on culture war issues, a couple of other kind of ancillary issues.

But by and large, far more is done in Washington on a fully bipartisan basis. And I think the foreign policy, the reason John McCain is such a worship figure and George Soros's son, Alex, was president at that conference as well, unsurprisingly, is because the two parties, the establishment wings share that view of foreign policy, that we should be always engaged in war, always financing wars, always intervening in other countries. And this, more than anything, like I said, is what's helping China. That's why there's so many countries going toward China, because they exploit the narrative. Look, when America runs the world, they bomb you, they invade you, they engineer coups.

We're just here to do business with you. I mean, are they wrong? I mean, look at our foreign policy project. I mean, I'm not a China fan at all, actually, but look at our foreign policy portfolio over the last 10 years. Displaced Gaddafi made ruin of Syria. Look what's happened with Ukraine and Russia. We can't keep the Middle East in order.

I mean, the military industrial complex has broken more countries than we can even name off the top of our head. This is cut 39. I believe this is Mr. Graham.

This is a separate visit. This is McCain, Lindsey Graham and A.B. Klobuchar in 2017, encouraging those Ukrainian troops to play offense against the Kremlin.

2016, play cut 39. Your fight is our fight. 2017 will be the year of offense. All of us will go back to Washington and we will push the case against Russia. Enough of a Russian aggression. It is time for them to pay a heavier price. I mean, I want people to imagine a bunch of Russian senators going to Mexico City and saying that to us.

Glenn. Yeah. In 2014, there was basically a coup against the Ukrainian president who was Democratic elected another year of his term. Constitutionally, they financed huge numbers of armed militias to go outside the presidential palace and one American official after the next.

And both parties came and encouraged those protesters. So imagine if there were armed militias funded by a foreign government outside the White House and then you had Russian senators or Chinese officials coming there and encouraging them, you know, promising aid to them, telling them to keep going, handing out food to them. Imagine the level of interference that that would be viewed as and that's what the United States was doing in Ukraine. So this idea like, hey, why did the Russians consider what we were doing in Ukraine to be such a provocative presence? Obviously, if you had the Russians or the Chinese, as you said, in Mexico City for more than a decade interfering in their internal politics, financing their military, giving them lethal arms, encouraging them to attack the United States, we would consider that a pretty grave threat as well. We almost had a nuclear war when the Soviets at the Cuban government's request put nuclear weapons in Cuba. So obviously, we know how we would see it. And it was very predictable that that would provoke a Russian invasion of Ukraine. Top officials in the United States has been warning that for years that if you interfere too much in Ukraine, it's going to force the Russians into Crimea and eastern Ukraine. Either they ignored it or they wanted it. And now we have this war funded by the John McCain's of the world, the Joe Lieberman's of the world, the Lindsey Graham's of the world.

And it's completely bipartisan. In closing, you're glad I know you got a dash. Plug your show, please, and the important work you're doing. And second, I asked this question of our guests recently.

What are you seeing that gives you hope? Yeah, so thanks, Charlie. Our show is on rumble because of its free speech policies. We air every night at live at 7 p.m. Eastern.

It's called System Update. And as far as what gives me hope, it actually is that there is a growing sentiment in right wing populist politics that had for a long time been primarily the province of left wing politics that identifies these institutions as the enemies of the American population. And this neocon ideology is the enemy of the American population where it wasn't really there before.

I think Donald Trump is primarily responsible for that. This ability to come together as people across partisan ideological lines is what ultimately we need to do. I love it. Glenn, I completely agree.

And check out his show. It is terrific. Glenn, thank you so much. Great talking to you, Charlie. Have a good day.

Thank you. And I want to just repeat what Glenn is saying there. This is why we're going to win in the end.

We've got a lot of stuff to organize. We've got to fix the RNC and all this. There is more that unites the commoner than divides us. I'm not talking about the protester up at some encampment. No, I'm talking about the everyday American.

Glenn is supposed to be a liberal. And here we are dialoguing, agreeing about adventurous foreign wars, how we have to rein in Northup Grumman, rein in the war machine. It is the people against the kingdom of Washington, D.C. It is the citizen against the beast. That is the framing. It is whether or not we are going to be a republic or an oligarchy and oligarchy is the rule of the few.

And that is it makes sense, doesn't it? Trust the experts. Give more power to the FBI. Give more power to the CIA. I thought it was so illuminating, eye opening and moving what he said about Mike Johnson. Mike Johnson was Mr. FISA reform. When he becomes Speaker of the House, he gets a couple of woo woo sessions with the intel agencies. Whatever you want, man. You got some blinking lights.

Sure, spy on me harder. But the people are with us. That is why face to face advocacy. What we do on this program, what we're doing on our podcast is so important.

That's why you matter in the grassroots. I know it can, you know, wear you down a little bit. I know because, oh, boy, it's it's tougher than ever. It is.

But it requires grit and requires resolve. Three star General Michael J. Flynn, head of the Pentagon Intelligence Agency, knew all the government's dirty secrets. He was one of the most respected generals in the military. Flynn knew what the intel world had been up to. He understood its funding.

He ordered the first audit of the use of contractors. This set off alarm bells. The explosive new documentary, Flynn, deliver the truth, whatever the cost, and covers the facts behind this scandal. Flynn told the truth. He was the most dangerous person for Donald Trump to hire. I find out the worst enemy that I'm going to face in my life is right here in America. They took my assessment and they wanted me to change it. I was like, not changing it. They had to get rid of Flint with in-depth interviews, archival footage and never before seen personal record to the man behind the headlines.

I just felt like I was drowning. Flynn, deliver the truth, whatever the cost. Available now. Watch it today. Go to SalemNow.com. SalemNow.com. Why are young men trending conservative? Well, there's this scandal out of Oxford, Mississippi. So there was a scandal over the weekend, allegedly, and it really has the media upset and even some weak-kneed conservatives running for the hills. There's this ultra viral clip of a morbidly obese anti-Israel protester facing a group of frat bros who were counter protesting and they were mocking her, mostly because she makes Lizzo look skinny. One of those protesters in a short clip is seen allegedly making King Kong type noises at the woman. This somehow is a huge story, bigger than the southern border, clipper than all this. You guys be the judge for yourself. I'm not defending this alleged behavior, but it's a college campus, a bunch of frat bros. Get over yourself.

Play cut 31. So I'm not even convinced that guy at the end is actually doing what they say he's doing. And there you have Michael Orr, who is being held back by the university police. And now Ole Miss is launching this massive probe into the guy that you saw for two seconds at the end of the clip in a baby blue collared shirt on racism. You see, we called this on Thought Crime last week. Remember I said how long until they play offense against the frat boys? Well, here we go. Well, this young man has now been kicked out of his fraternity because national frats are super weak.

This is insane and ridiculous. He got kicked out of his fraternity, Phi Delta Theta, which has disavowed him. Ooh, disavowed him. How many people have been disavowed over, I don't know, the encampments where you guys have set up yourselves on campuses across the country? He might be expelled over this. And to my knowledge, I don't know of any anti-Israel protester that has been expelled across the country. No one will get serious heat for justifying and celebrating Hamas's atrocities on October 7th.

So let's be 100 percent real. What is the worst possible interpretation of what this young man did? The worst possible interpretation is he was being a smart aleck, rude college frat bro to a woman on the other side of a protest.

That's it. He didn't throw her resume into the garbage because of her skin color, something the left does all the time. He didn't violently intimidate her like the leftist protesters do all the time. He didn't commit assault or robbery or murder like the criminals. The left, they go, they put them on street, on street without bail all the time. The left wants to ruin this young man's life. They want him punished worse than the rioters, thieves and literal murderers. They want him to become unemployable when at this very moment, the Biden regime is literally suing sheets, a gas station chain for refusing to hire violent criminals. It's a true thing. This is a propaganda, this is the propaganda campaign that the left runs nonstop.

We have to learn to resist it. They want you to think that a young man making noises for a few seconds on a college campus is bigger than the violent crimes and mayhem the left wing rioters commit every day. Why are young men moving right?

Because of the unequal application of justice and power. This is a young white man who might have done something foolish for two seconds, might have been under the influence of alcohol. Who knows? He's a frat boy. Issue an apology, move on. If he actually did the worst thing. The worst possible interpretation is like, okay, he was being a jerk.

But to the left, he's a young white man. So it's worth destroying his life. Here's cut 32. Same guy offering Lizzo $100 to do a single push up.

Play cut 32. I love that these frat boys, that's not the same guy, by the way, different guy. I love that these frat boys went to the streets and challenged these maniacs. It's about time.

It's about time the masculine energy in this country is ascendant. I'm not defending what this kid allegedly did. I am defending young men holding up old glory, getting out there in the streets and saying, we're not going to take this anymore.

Not violently, but saying, you know what? We're not going to allow you to take over this campus in Oxford, Mississippi. And they're trying to destroy the rise of the frat boys. They're trying to destroy the rise of the masculine energy. They want young men to be watching pornography, sitting at home, smoking weed. Young men are tired of being treated like murderers, while the left treats murderers like heroes. For every young man out there, every young man out there, and every young white man in particular, I hope you're watching carefully. They want you dead.

They want your entire life to be obliterated. Remember that in November. Fill in your ballot and chase your friends and send them a message. Thanks so much for listening, everybody. Email us as always. Freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com. Thanks so much for listening. God bless.