34 Burst results for "Tom Fitton"
The Charlie Kirk Show
Ben Bergquam on the Anarchic State Once Known As the US-Mexico Border
"What did you see on the border last evening? Well, unfortunately, I saw more of the same the open borders that Joe Biden and the left and secretary Marcus have invited into our country, but we are seeing a few shifts. One of those being China, huge numbers from China coming across and in speaking with Matt Gaetz, congressman Matt Gaetz, again, it was an honor to be out there with him last night, one of the hardest working congressional representatives we have one of the biggest fighters we have out there. But these huge numbers from China, large numbers still coming from the Middle East all over. And the moral of the story is nothing that the left is doing, nothing that Joe Biden is doing is doing anything to slow down this unprecedented invasion of our country. By countries that are hostile to our nation, whether or not the Chinese nationals that are coming in want to get away from the CCP or communism or they're coming as bad actors working for the CCP, then we really don't know that. And that's the reason why we have to have a secure border and legal immigration processes, which have just been completely undermined by this current administration. Play
The Charlie Kirk Show
Charlie Welcomes Congressman Byron Donalds to the Show
"Welcome to the program. How are you doing, Charlie, good seeing you. It's great. So I want to get into the specific news from the House oversight committee, but let's just I want to get a bigger picture kind of answer from you. How are things in Congress? Speaker fight as well in the rearview mirror. Talk about the pace to talk about the results. Talk about how this Congress is currently contrasting with the one that just ended. Well, look, I got to tell you this Congress has actually moved faster and done more things. And even I anticipated, I mean, I was hopeful. It's what I wanted to see happen, but we've been moving at breakneck speed. Obviously everybody pays attention to oversight and judiciary, but even in the other committee's homeland, agriculture, natural resources, my other committee financial services, we're all moving at warp speed. On financial services, I'm on the ESG task force appointed by chairman of mchenry on that task force. I mean, we're really looking into everything. And so, you know, that's really has me optimistic. The second part is, you know, the members want to do the work. You know, the members are excited about being in a majority. They want to hold this administration. Accountable, just like everybody watching your show and people who listen to shows and activists, patriots, conservatives, you know, people who just want to see the country back on track. But for this crop of Republicans is committed to that work. So it's not been a thing where you have members saying, oh, maybe we shouldn't go here. Oh, maybe we should stay away from that. You know, what's The New York Times going to say, you know, what might CNN run? Everybody's like, no, that's just going to get it done. And so that's kind of the attitude in the atmosphere right now. Amongst House Republicans. And I think it's a good thing.
The Charlie Kirk Show
Tom Fitton Explains Judicial Watch's Win Against Voter Fraud in LA
"Talk about another story here, judicial watch sues the Department of Homeland Security for records on election censorship tell us about it. Yeah, I mean, this is one if I think a few lawsuits that have been spawned as a result of the Twitter files release in I think the specific one you're referencing, it looks like these NGOs, these non governmental organizations and government entities were essentially engaging in censorship activities, targeting countless Americans on what is the equivalent of a slack channel. I don't use slack, but sort of a casual approach to censorship and we're asking for the documents. And you know, recall, we don't sue, unless they tell us they don't comply with the law. So the Department of Homeland Security rather than disclose information about their censorship activities is hiding these records in violation of the foia law. And I'm sorry, but when you break the law, especially on sensitive topics like this, in terms of secrecy, I'd suggest to me, and I think to most fair minded people that there's something they don't want us to see. Yeah, and I just want to remind our audience because this was a story we covered rather extensively a couple months ago. The government, thanks to the United States Constitution, the founding fathers put rules for what the government can not do. The government knows this, they don't always follow those rules, but to get creative, they outsource their censorship to other companies because private companies are not bound by the Bill of Rights. They can basically do whatever they want.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Hey, Charlie, good to be with you. Thanks for having me again. Always, welcome on the program. You're one of the few fighters, just like James O'Keefe is, Tom, how should we approach this James O'Keefe? Saga, which is increasingly a circus on behalf of project veritas board. Well, the board hasn't asked me for advice, nor has James, some hesitant to freely give it. I'm hoping they can resolve it. I haven't seen anything that the board has released to suggest the kind of extraordinary action that they took was warranted, especially given the risks to the company. So if I were them, I'd try to walk it back as quickly as I can and resolve the issues they have with James so they can get back to work. How important is James O'Keefe to the movement? Well, you know, I think he has this entrepreneurial spirit and an approach that it's hard to cologne. And so he has a unique approach that was pursued through project veritas, and I think he'll land on his feet no matter what happens, but you know, there are these leaders in our movement and in the nation that, you know, we shouldn't cast aside easily. And I don't think that's going to happen with James. I'm sure hope not. He's incredibly important. I want to talk about the story here. Judicial watch Los Angeles County confirms removal of 1.2 million in eligible voters. This is all because of judicial watch tell us about it. You know, we sued in federal court, it's a few years ago now to get LA county and generally California to get back on track in terms of ensuring that they're taking reasonable steps to clean up the voter rolls, which is required under federal law, the national voter registration act, and it looked like to us. And I think they admitted to this that they hadn't cleaned their roles in 20 years. Under some sort of consent decree they had with the Clinton administration. So long story short is they settled with us. And it was a remarkable settlement to their credit. They committed to over time, cleaning up the roles specifically in Los Angeles County, and they finally reported back to us the results of that work that took years. I think it should have been done more quickly, but it was a settlement, so that's life. And they confirm 1.2 million names were removed. Half of those names it looks like Charlie had been on the rolls and hadn't done anything, meaning been inactive for at least ten years. So this is a remarkable development for cleaner elections in California because it doesn't mean that there's an inactive voter sitting on the rolls. It doesn't mean they're voting illegally. Obviously they vote, they become active. But it's kind of it's a pool of names from which fraudsters can draw. So some moves away, then that's a name potentially that can be easily taken up and then voted on. And so by and that's why there you have these rules requiring them to take reasonable steps to clean up the role. So we've got 1.2 million taken off the rolls in California. This happened looks like over the last year. So they waited to the last minute in terms of the settlement. And then separately we had a lawsuit against New York City that resulted in a settlement that happened after they removed 440,000 names from the roles. And just before that, North Carolina, we stopped our lawsuit after they removed after we sued. 430,000 names, I think. So we're just talking 2 million names in the last year have been cleaned up as a result of litigation by one group, judicial watch. By the way, litigation that in the ordinary course should have been and still should be pursued by an honest Justice Department, but they don't care..
The Charlie Kirk Show
Tom Fitton Reacts to the James O'Keefe Drama
"Should we approach this James O'Keefe? Saga, which is increasingly a circus on behalf of project veritas board. Well, the board hasn't asked me for advice, nor has James, some hesitant to freely give it. I'm hoping they can resolve it. I haven't seen anything that the board has released to suggest the kind of extraordinary action that they took was warranted, especially given the risks to the company. So if I were them, I'd try to walk it back as quickly as I can and resolve the issues they have with James so they can get back to work. How important is James O'Keefe to the movement? Well, you know, I think he has this entrepreneurial spirit and an approach that it's hard to cologne. And so he has a unique approach that was pursued through project veritas, and I think he'll land on his feet no matter what happens, but you know, there are these leaders in our movement and in the nation that, you know, we shouldn't cast aside easily. And I don't think that's going to happen with James. I'm
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"We're going to talk about a variety of topics, some of the big wins from digital watch, including Los Angeles County, confirming removal of 1.2 million ineligible voters from part of a lawsuit, but we are going to lead with the project veritas story. What is the latest? Well, James O'Keefe last evening posted a picture on his social media. Of just what kind of seemed to be a brainstorming session, James O'Keefe was in jeans and a jacket, hat backwards, and a big white board joking around it looks like with his team and a good way, favorable. I loved seeing it, that he's still creating that he seems like he's planning his next moves. Look, the left would love nothing more than to take James O'Keefe out of the game. They would love nothing more. Than to try to make James O'Keefe no longer a threat. You see, James O'Keefe has successfully been able to land more shots on target than anybody else in the conservative movement. Maybe except Donald Trump in the last decade. James O'Keefe tweeted out, those who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who actually do. In a war room at midnight with a few happy warriors making moves. James will keep looks to be in great spirits. However, I don't think we should turn our back on the idea of James O'Keefe having a rightful having a right to still be involved in project veritas, not just involved. It's his organization. What does this show? What does it demonstrate? As someone like James O'Keefe, who has done nothing but win after win after win can be removed like this. And for what reason they say it's because of a $150,000 in black cars which are business expenses we went through that whole thing in great depth and great detail and I thought it was rather persuasive against the board's contention that this was wasting of money and joining us now is another hero who is friends with James O'Keefe. Who I know has strong opinions about this. Tom fitton is with us from dishwasher. Tom, welcome to the program..
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Noble gold investments is pleased to let you know that gold is the best investment class for 2022. According to long-term trends dot net, gold has actually outperformed the S&P 500. Dow and Bitcoin for 2022. So what are you waiting for? Open a gold IRA or silver IRA with noble gold investments. This month and receive a free one fourth ounce American gold eagle coin with every qualified IRA of $50,000. You can't go wrong with noble gold investments and their thousands of 5 star reviews. Hey everybody, today Charlie Kirk show Tom fitton talks about the big wins that judicial watch is enjoying Byron donalds talks about the Biden crime family and more email me freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com and get involved with turning point USA Today at TP USA dot com that is TP USA dot com. Buckle up everybody here. We go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running The White House folks. I want to thank Charlie, he's an incredible guy, his spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job. Building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, turning point USA. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Brought to you by Andrew and Todd a Sierra Pacific mortgage for personalized loan services you can count on, go to Andrew and Todd dot com, the wonderful Andrew and Todd dot com..
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"You gotta walk me through the strategy for one three. Because so one three, just for everyone knows, Speaker of the House vote Matt has come out against Kevin McCarthy and has said under no circumstance am I going to vote for McCarthy and so what's the plan? What's the strategy? Who do you think should be speaker Matt? We need a name. Well, I would vote for Jim Jordan for speaker. I'd vote for Andy Biggs. There's actually probably 221 of the 222 that I'd at least be open minded about. It's ridiculous to assume that only Kevin McCarthy can lead the Republican conference. And I think more important than the individual are the rules and the values and the strategy that the House of Representatives will have on the 4th of January and beyond. Okay, I agree. 7 of my colleagues. 7 of my colleagues has signed a letter that lay that out in Technicolor. They want single subject. They want to plan on spending. They want conservatives on key committees, and they want the motion to vacate the chair that existed for centuries until Nancy Pelosi changed it. McCarthy seems to prefer the Pelosi approach, not the Thomas Jefferson. I agree with that. So what you're saying though is that potentially it's not about Kevin, it's about if these concessions can be made, then maybe a deal could be struck. Is that right? Well, what is disheartening and what led me to my view that I don't think Kevin's going to be our speakers that Kevin has said under no circumstance will he consider the Jeffersonian motion to vacate, he is only going to agree to something. I'm ignorant on this. What is motion to vacate the chair? Sorry to interrupt map. Go ahead. For centuries, any member of Congress could call a vote of no confidence on the Speaker of the House and all members would have to cast that vote and it would determine whether or not that speaker would continue. Now, John Boehner got removed when Mark Meadows did that because he realized that members were going to have to take a tough vote or vote against him. So it's a mechanism to keep these speaker accountable to the membership. And we're not asking for crazy things. We just want to pass appropriations bills separately. We want to have 72 hours to read the bills. And the fact that Kevin McCarthy has been recalcitrant against the Jeffersonian motion to vacate disqualifies him from consideration in my eyes and in the eyes of a growing number of House Republicans. Now, I guess the counter argument and I'm sure you guys can figure this out is one of just turn every day someone could do a motion of vacate the chair or does it take a certain amount of votes or just go to voice vote. Could it potentially derail the business of Congress? I don't know as Elena. I guess it could, but in hundreds of years, it was only used less than 5 times. So that would defy history. Also, like if the Democrats did that every day, if every day we had the prayer, the pledge and the motion to vacate. I mean, I could see them. By the way, if they did that, there's no way any Republican could vote for a Democrat motion to vacate. And so I think it could actually be a unifying force if used by the Democrats, but it's an accountability measure for Republicans who feel like otherwise Kevin will lie to us. So the fear that I have and other people have is, okay, let's say it goes to one three. You guys say we're not voting and then it goes to conference and then we're just so close to hope it gets sorted out there. Matt, I have very little faith in kind of hope as a strategy right now. So give me some confidence. Give our audience some confidence that that circus will result in a stronger country. I will point the audience to a piece that was just published in Politico this morning, busting the uni unity speaker bubble. So this totally debunks the hoax that somehow like Fred Upton or some moderate Republican is going to be speaker. It debunks the hoax that it's going to be a Democrat speaker. We will get to a Republican speaker. Now it might not be on the third. There might be a slight delay. But I would rather take a little bit longer and get it right. Kevin McCarthy. You acknowledge, but to at least acknowledge there is a risk. There's a risk that this thing could get out of control. I mean, there's the uni party would love nothing more, I mean, you're saying that it's a political piece I haven't read it. Kevin McCarthy, Kevin McCarthy is the uni party's candidate. That is obvious, right? And he's also recalcitrant on these rules changes that I would think any American would reasonably agree to. Like giving us 72 hours to read the bills, having a single subject with Germany so that you're not voting on the farm Bill and the war in Yemen at the same time or the national defense and word. Like we had to do last week. So those are the demands we've placed on McCarthy. He's unequivocally said he would rather not be speaker than agree to some of the things in this memo. And so at some point, we have to move on. This is not a doomsday. It might take a little longer, but ultimately, if we get a speaker responsive to the membership and agreeing to rules that will open up the house so that we can do a good job for our constituents, that's what's better for the country in the long run. If those concessions are made, or at least open to voting for Kevin for speaker, well, I have yet to see any deal that doesn't require some element of trust to bind it together. And since I don't trust Kevin McCarthy, that's why I am not voting for him. Now, if somehow, someone can bind some deal together that is not in any way reliant on trust. I'm always open minded, but right now I'm not going to vote for Kevin. It is good. So Matt, we got to make sure the house stays Republican. My number one mission is you got to make sure the house stays Republican. We can't lose it through a process. Matt see this week at an am fest. Thanks so much. Appreciate it. Can't wait. Thanks so much for listening, everybody..
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"On it. But what can Republicans do coming into January about these Twitter files? Well, I think the first thing we have to ascertain is whether or not the testimony we've already received was just untruthful or untruthful with malice and intent to lie. And so I think that there is thorough review that is actively ongoing right now to get into the documents that have been produced by Twitter, the testimony that has been given by their executives and then to bounce that off of what we've learned and there may be criminal implications to that and Congress may have to make a referral on that, which is typically what happens when Congress feels aggrieved as a result of people lying. Beyond that, I don't think you're going to get any of the election interference charges that some are calling for because the federal election commission in response to a complaint I filed said all of this is legal actually that Twitter is allowed to discriminate against some viewpoints and is allowed to shadow ban people based on their ideology and that that's an appropriate action for a company. I certainly don't think that's true. So it may be as much legislating around some of these issues as much as it is ensuring that there's a regulatory action because there may not be a regulatory violation of law. I do think there's good eating as I said earlier for state attorneys general who can have broad claims who can have deceptive and unfair trade practices claims in Florida. We have a deceptive and unfair trade practices statute. Most states do. And I think that that's going to be very fruitful space for litigation. So I want to cut 5 here. The boy king says that one of the reasons Trump was banned because of his own trauma play cut 5. The events of the 6th happen. And if you talk to content moderators who worked on January 6th, myself included the word that nearly everybody uses is trauma. We experience those events not some of us as Americans, but not just as Americans or as citizens, but as people working on sort of how to prevent harm on the Internet. And we saw people dead in the capital. Why not? Dead in the capitol. Yeah, I mean, were they traumatized by that? I was going to say, I mean, based on what we now know, ashleigh babbitt, who was, in my opinion, illegally and immorally assassinated by a black, I think it was Secret Service capitol police, whatever I think he was capitol police. Yeah, and Michael Byrd, is that right? Anyway, and he gets away with it. No investigation and then Republicans defend him. As far as officer Brian cis Nick, I believe he actually died afterwards for unrelated health complications and reasons to this day I guarantee if you take a poll sicknick, thank you. If you take a poll people still think that there were dozens of police officers that were murdered that day, just not true. Anyway, so but he says it was my own personal trauma. Matt, this goes to your point about there was way too much power in this person's hand. Way too much. And then you have DHS DNI in the FBI having weekly meetings. And one of the slack channels Matt, he's so casual about it. He basically tells his other buddy that was working there. Hey, I got to go to the Aspen institute and do this stuff. Can you fill in for me on one of our meeting today with the FBI? And it was struck me because this was a regular occurrence. This was like having an kind of like, okay, we got this calendar thing, the FBI is coming in. They got their badges. This wasn't something remarkable. It was routine. And I could tell you there's great interest on the judiciary committee to ascertain the content of those discussions. And you know Charlie, just like I do, that in a lot of cases, that's the DoJ people in the FBI people. Auditioning for their next jobs with big tech. Well, that's evolving door between DoJ and big tech and how they get paid. It's a down payment for the big bucks. Because they work at DoJ, they're earning 75, $80,000 a year, which is a nice wage. But they want to go earn 506 107 $100,000 a year. And that's how they audition. Sorry Matt interrupt you. No, you see it with James baker himself. You see him go from being one of the kind of deep state operatives around the Trump Russia hoax to then appearing in Twitter and scrubbing information that would have demonstrated the culpability of the people who were violating the terms of service. And departing from the public statements of the company regarding censorship. So it's oftentimes the same people just wearing different hats. But we want to know what was said in those meetings and particularly when you add the FBI and DoJ trying to convince Twitter and meta for that matter that certain information derogatory to the Biden family was Russian disinformation. We're going to have to get to what the actual basis is for that. And it goes to the clip you played where mister Roth is talking about his personal trauma. Well, I don't think that our access to the digital world ought to depend on how some woke topan in Silicon Valley is experiencing their personal trauma on that particular day. There ought to be verifiable standards if we aren't going to break up these companies and I wouldn't suggest we break up Twitter quite yet. There should be some sort of regulation more akin to a public utility rather than an entity that's just able to act on these whims. And while it's certainly a great thing that Elon Musk is putting all this information out to the country, we should not rest on the notion that well, Elon owns Twitter, so everything's okay now. There's a lot of this discourse that goes on outside of Twitter and Twitter was in bad hands. Might now be in good hands, but it could fall back into bad hands. And so I think we need to have a standard that is transparent where people have process and that way they'll be greater confidence that the conversation going on in the digital square is in fact a legitimate one, not some operation by the FBI. No one voted for Yoel Roth. No one knew even existed. And he had more power than the elected that the sovereign voluntarily gave power to. That's wrong. I don't care what your political affiliation is. It's wrong that some brat, who's also a degenerate, by the way, and writes about really weird and creepy stuff is able to police speech like that. It's immoral, unconstitutional. It's a civilizational issue..
The Charlie Kirk Show
Is Twitter a Crime Scene? Matt Gaetz Shares His Thoughts
"Later on, I want to talk to you about the House leadership kind of contest and race and where we agree and where we might not agree. But we'll do that in a second. I first want to talk about Twitter. You were specifically named by the degenerate boy king Yoel Roth, pushing internally to ban you. Following January 6th, your reaction, Matt. Well, it's no surprise that the woke tops that want to define the very nature of the truth itself didn't like something I said. And what's interesting about the reference to me is that there was no violation of Twitter policies. And so they were trying to use this awesome power that Twitter has to really shape the discussion that we have throughout the world. And in this country, and they wanted to ban me despite any violation of those rules. And when we see that through the context of what they did to you, basically just trying to suppress your reach because you're effective, you see a common thread. If you were an effective conservative voice on Twitter, they were first identifying you as the problem and then subsequently trying to figure out how to torture their own set of rules to try to constrain that. I believe that this evidence unlocks a ton of litigation opportunity for state attorneys general to go after Twitter for violating their own terms of service and engaging in fraud on the consumers.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"We just think about that. Let's take a step back. We've got this gargantuan advising government. Billions of billions of dollars, but if they don't give judicial watch documents, those government agencies have to go into court when we sue and explain to the court why they're not giving us the documents or when they're going to give them to us. And they have to explain if they're withholding anything, why is there withholding it? And I mean, that's an awesome, awesome leveling of power between the American people and their government. So this is why the left hates the rule of law. So, you know, those things that seem challenges to us, we know what needs to be done and we should embrace what the left is attacking. Embrace the rule of law, embrace the idea that the courts provide some check on the system, embrace Congress's powers under the constitution to not spend money where it's being used and misused and abused, and of course embrace our core constitutional rights, which are God given. The constitution actually just codifies what God has granted us. As such as the First Amendment rights to free speech, association, and to petition our government, that's all part of the First Amendment, the left would have you believe would have you forget about those two second ones. The association and the petition your government. That's a core right too, which is what this whole Twitter fight's been about. They don't want us to criticize the government. That's right. Well, I think there needs to be a flurry of lawsuits very soon. And I'm not sure what the success can be, but it should be, it needs to be repudiated and not tolerated if a government agency by proxy uses a private company to do what they themselves specifically. Can not do. We got a lawsuit already underway in California against the Secretary of State's office there. They were getting Twitter to take down tweets. But specifically with judicial wash, they got YouTube to take down a video of mine about judicial watches work judicial watch video. Just before the election. And so we sued the Secretary of State's office for that violation of our civil rights. So we're not standing idly by and just complaining about it. We're going to court to figure out what went on and hold them accountable where we can..
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"The gift of life, this Christmas season, Charlie Kirk dot com and click on the banner. You mentioned crimes committed by our government, I believe one of the reasons why we are seeing people on the conservative side get angrier and angrier is we see citizens have to be indicted and put in prison for crimes they did not commit, they have to see their apartments rated for things they did not do. James O'Keeffe, Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump, the list goes on. And yet we see blatant naked, proud criminality by our government. What can possibly be done to hold the crimes of the government accountable? Well, we have to use the tools available to us under the law to end the constitution for accountability and a check. And there are a variety of tools ranging from impeachment from Congress to funding fights in Congress. Also, you have civil claims that individual citizens can bring and hopefully there are honest administrative employees, people in the executive branch in the law enforcement area who are willing to look at their own, but as we know that's been almost fool's goal in terms of looking for that to happen because the Justice Department and the FBI in my view are irredeemably compromised and we need to think about how we start over in terms of organizing them or in the case of the FBI, maybe even disbanding them and figuring out other ways to enforce federal law through an investigative agency. You guys have done a little bit of this. You've done it a lot. I shouldn't say I should say, but it's been some of it's been successful where the American people can technically go to the courts and say, my government is breaking the law, but those are tough lawsuits, aren't they? They take time. They take money and the government almost always seems to get away with it. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. You know, you win some, you lose some in California. You know, they have this broad liberal standing position that taxpayers can challenge a legal conduct by the government, misuse of tax dollars for illegal illegal activity. And they had quotas in California. They were trying to impose on private boards of directors and we went and sued under this theory of taxpayer standing. And we won. So, you know, there are opportunities even in blue states to enforce the rule of law. And certainly, you know, the example of judicial watch is we're famous for foia, right, Charlie..
The Charlie Kirk Show
How Do We Hold Twitter Accountable For This?
"You were one of the leading voices and judicial watch was one of the only organizations to uncover the nonsense around Russia gate. I believe it was your lawsuit that actually got us the Peter struck stroke smirk text messages. I could be wrong, but I know you guys were involved in some of the discovery there and some of the foia requests. But the same blueprint, the same behavior that they used for Russia gate, seems that they now used for Twitter gate in 2020, which is we are going to use the intelligence agencies to then have third party actors, whether it be Perkins cooey, whether it be a dossier, whatever it might be, they're still calling the shots, but they do it a step removed. So Tom, failure to hold people accountable for what they did with Russia gate. I think is directly correlated with this behavior that we saw with Twitter. Yeah, and in this case, you had the Trump administration kind of taking a step back. And it does go back to Russia date. Because the Trump administration or folks within the Trump administration were scared as a result of the ferocious attack on Trump over 2016 in his election. And they bought into hook line and sinker in the idea that the Russians colluded and interfered in our election and a substantial material way. And in response to that, they took it upon themselves to police the Internet. And start evidently here targeting Americans for censorship through Twitter and such. And so these are deep state actors who made up crap against president Trump. And then use the resulting political blowback to continue to censor Americans they didn't like. And one of the dangers is that it's escalated that they did it on the sly in 2020, but now they're doing it in a forthright manner under the Biden administration where you have The White House calling in the heads of these big tech companies and being quite blatant in brazen in asking them to censor Americans about issues that get in the way of their political agenda.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Who are the leaders that change the world. Their professors, coaches, and mentors. They're servant leaders willing to invest and inspire others. They serve with a purpose, preparing others to shape their communities and influence their professions. Our exceptional degree programs will equip you with the skills and Christian character that set you apart and prepare you to lead with significance. Say yes to your purpose. Visit regent dot EDU slash learn more. Hey everybody, ten to Charlie Kirk show Tom fitton walks through what laws were broken by the FBI and DHS for what they did with Twitter. And then Matt Gates and I talk about the Twitter files and then have an interesting conversation about who should be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives. You don't want to miss it. Email store fox is always freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com getting involved with turning point USA Today at TPUSA dot com and get involved with America fest come to America fest this weekend. The biggest speakers in the whole movement, Tim pool, Steve Bannon, Matt Walsh, Candace Owens, a.m. FES T dot com that's am fest dot com. Buckle up everybody here. We go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's running the white house folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy, his spirit, his love of this country. He's done an amazing job. Building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, turning point USA. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Brought to you by the loan experts I trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific mortgage at Andrew and Todd dot com. Joining us now is one of the most important people in the conservative movement, one of the most influential. And one of the most, let's just say, powerful is one way to say it, but they just, they are so results driven and oriented and I love them. It's judicial watch Tom fitton joins us right now. Tom, welcome back to the program. Hey, Charlie. Good to be with you. Appreciate the good word. I mean it. So Tom walk us through your analysis of the Twitter files. Most specifically, what if any laws were broken by our federal government? Oh. Well, there were, I think, four batches of Twitter files put out there. And as it relates to government intervention in Twitter censorship activities, you have two categories. You had these regular meetings taking place with the FBI and DHS and who knows the office of director of national intelligence prior to the election. And they been cagey as to what those meetings were about, but the context around that time, obviously, was the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story, but not by not only Twitter, but by Facebook and others. So the question is, were they telling or suggesting Twitter to take this material down? It's not clear that happened, but certainly regular meetings with a private company to persuade or talk about the leading or censoring any material would raise significant First Amendment concerns just generally. But more recently, one of the more recent batches I think it was either batch three or batch four, you saw that the FBI specifically asked to tweets be taken down. And that to me raises significant legal concerns. I'm no lawyer, but I've been doing this too long. And I've been doing this longer than I care to admit to in terms of figuring out what the FBI is supposed to do and what it's able to do. And when it's not able to do, is to track the social media accounts of individual Americans just because they don't like what they're saying about election debates and then go to a private company and get them to take it down. That ought to be the subject of a serious criminal investigation. The victims of that type of activity may have civil claims against the FBI and anyone else involved in this. And I just saw in just the news over with our friend John Solomon, he highlighted the deposition testimony in the Missouri and other lawsuits about Twitter censorship or big tech censorship of this FBI, special agent mister Chan out in San Francisco. And he said these censorship requests were being approved at the highest levels before they went to places like Twitter. So that's a real major revelation and there ought to be Hector paying..
The Charlie Kirk Show
Judicial Watch's Tim Fitton Unpacks the Twitter Files
"Us now is one of the most important people in the conservative movement, one of the most influential. And one of the most, let's just say, powerful is one way to say it, but they just, they are so results driven and oriented and I love them. It's judicial watch Tom fitton joins us right now. Tom, welcome back to the program. Hey, Charlie. Good to be with you. Appreciate the good word. I mean it. So Tom walk us through your analysis of the Twitter files. Most specifically, what if any laws were broken by our federal government? Oh. Well, there were, I think, four batches of Twitter files put out there. And as it relates to government intervention in Twitter censorship activities, you have two categories. You had these regular meetings taking place with the FBI and DHS and who knows the office of director of national intelligence prior to the election. And they been cagey as to what those meetings were about, but the context around that time, obviously, was the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story, but not by not only Twitter, but by Facebook and others. So the question is, were they telling or suggesting Twitter to take this material down? It's not clear that happened, but certainly regular meetings with a private company to persuade or talk about the leading or censoring any material would raise significant First Amendment concerns just generally. But more recently, one of the more recent batches I think it was either batch three or batch four, you saw that the FBI specifically asked to tweets be taken down.
The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
The Enemies List of the Secret Sensors
"I'm continuing my discussion of investigative reporter John Solomon's bombshell report on the outsourcing of censorship by the Biden, well, Biden regime. I'm not gonna hesitate to say it. They're acting like totalitarians. They don't really deserve to be called anything other than a regime. So they have an enemy's list. And who's on that enemies list? This is what is kind of revealing because the enemies list is now been disclosed. It's been uncovered. And here's who's on the list. I'm just going to read some of the names. Real James Woods. Gateway pundit, Donald Trump Jr., Tom fitton, Jack bishop. Eric Trump, Charlie Kirk, Mark Levin, James O'Keefe, Richard grenell. Harmeet Dylan, a Breitbart News. Robbie starbuck. So you have this list. These are the bad guys from the point of view of these of the Biden administration. They're also the bad guys from the point of view of these left wing nonprofits. So the working together to shut down the opposition and let's remember some of these guys, Robbie starbuck was running for Congress. So you're talking about election interference. You're also talking about silencing important influencers in the days and weeks leading up to a presidential election. Think about this. And they don't hesitate to do this. So to look at some concrete examples, well, Marjorie Taylor Greene is also on the list. I'm a little disappointed. I'm not on the list. He goes, no, no, no, no, no. But hey, I'm a little surprised I'm not on it, but nevertheless, to look at a couple of examples. They're going off, they want to restrict Paul gosar. Why? Because he's sharing project veritas videos about the about the Minnesota cash for ballot harvesting scheme.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"That's what I'm afraid of. And I think that that's what the establishment is actually hoping for. Yeah, I just, where is the breaking point between this insane environmental green ideology and just the reality of living in a decent place? I mean, the Netherlands is a beautiful country and it's not just the Netherlands. It's all these Western European countries. And of course, they're a little bit more heavy handed with kind of government programs, but they're decent and nice places to live. And I mean, the quality of life will plummet in these countries. I mean, explain to me how on earth these leaders are justifying the suicidal actions to turn a vibrant decent society into a second or third world country. I do not understand that. So it's ultimately it is emotional blackmail, so there's definitely a part where our leaders quite literally will say we just have to do this because we have to stand with Ukraine and we have to fight against the evils of Putin. So this is just something that we are going to collectively have to bear, which again is all a lie. For example, my country, the Netherlands, we have the largest natural gas bubble in the European Union under our northern soil. But they're not touching that, they say, because, well, first of all, fossil fuel is bad. You know, we have to get rid of it altogether, but also because it would cause, for example, minor earthquakes, and that would cause cracks in houses of people who live in the north. And instead of saying, okay, we're going to offer those people sufficient compensation for the damage that will be done to their houses, we're just not going to touch that gas at all. And now we have the highest energy prices in Europe, and they're saying there's nothing we can do about this. It's all because of Putin and they laid a blame with everything and anyone but themselves. Yeah, and so I just can't imagine that is popular. And so can you talk into some detail exactly kind of the costs here. You sent out a couple tweets here. You said the Dutch government claims it can't afford to lower the income tax because it would cost about $4 billion per 1%. Yet they're spending $25 billion on a made up nitrogen crisis to expropriate our farmers and a $17 billion on immigration. It's all a choice. It's all a matter of choice. They want you to be poor and also this sort of ideology is coming into America. Isn't it, Eva? Oh, absolutely. Yeah. What I really want people to understand from this is that this is a matter of choice. So first of all, you know, our governments have been doing insane things to make the cost of living incredibly high. And they're not talking about those. So we're not talking about all the lockdowns that they force on us that absolutely wrecked our economy. They're not talking about all of the money that they've printed, you know, that is now being used for things that do not serve the interest of the people, like, for example, this nitrogen crisis that they are using to expropriate our farmers. I'm sure you've heard of that in the media. I've talked about a trillion times. So it is a matter of choice. €25 billion for a made up nitrogen crisis that is going to cost what food shortages. €60 billion for a climate transition that does not need to happen. €17 billion a year in the Netherlands for immigration that causes all sorts of problems among which housing problems, for example. All of these crises are created. And the only thing that I can think of is why they're doing this is because they want you to feel that chaos. They want you to become poor so that you will accept any type of government control from them when they step in and offer a so called solution to the problem that they have created. I hope every American is listening to this very carefully. This is exactly where they want to take our country. This is all designed with the great reset, which is to break the back of vibrant, wealthy, decentralized living, and make it dependent on the state. This is a canary in the coal mine if I've ever seen one. And just phenomenal commentary and reporting, Eva, thank you so.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"We've been a huge critic of what's happening of the western involvement in Ukraine. Of course, we're no fan of Vladimir Putin. He's a thug, he's a war criminal, all those different things. But the west involving ourselves in the continuation of the war in Ukraine is making European life more expensive and is making western life really it's putting into jeopardy and there's been one journalist that's really been on top of this, a brilliantly. And I'm going to do my best to pronounce your last name, but it's Eva, Vladimir dinger brook. Did I say that Eva? Welcome to the Charlie Kirk show. Thank you. Yeah, you got it. That's all good. All right, good. Well, welcome to the program. You've been doing some phenomenal journalism and some terrific coverage of this. I want to play cut 26 and then get your reaction play cut 26. So how is all that spending working out? Are we winning the war in Ukraine? Have we bankrupted Vladimir Putin like Joe Biden claim we would? The ruble just hit a 7 year high against the U.S. dollar in June. Take a look at this chart comparing the Russian ruble against the Euro. Russia is doing well. Europe is not doing well. At all. Now Joe Biden is calling for an unconditional surrender from Vladimir Putin. Here's the weird thing. By any actual reality based measure, flood Putin is not losing the war in Ukraine. He is winning the war in Ukraine. Evo your reaction. Well, he's obviously right. He's winning the war in Ukraine and the Dutch people, the European people in general were the ones that are paying the price for the choices that are establishments have made. So instead of sanctioning Russia, they're basically sanctioning their own people. And, you know, when you talk about the life in Europe becoming more expensive, energy prices becoming more expensive, that's not a little bit. So in my home country and the Netherlands energy prices are up by 300%, meaning that ordinary households people usually spend about a 120 to €200 per month on their energy bills are facing energy bills up to a €1000. Sometimes, you know, if they have a big family, even more than that. And then let alone other businesses, you know, small to medium businesses, the energy bills that they are going to have to be paying. It's just not something that's fathomable, not something that's doable. And this is going to break a lot of people quite literally. Yet, so just kind of speaking from a European standpoint, not so much American. I mean, is the average person in the Netherlands, are they upset about this? I mean, energy rates are skyrocketing in the governments are just lying to them. What is the reaction to the everyday middle class person that just runs their life and they're not necessarily a political activist? What's the reaction in Europe? So people are definitely nervous. Obviously, it's a little bit of a silence before it is storm situation because it's still summer now, but people are getting their new energy bills and their energy suppliers are riding them and telling them, hey, this is a new monthly rate that you're going to be paying. And people are definitely worried. But what they don't seem to recognize, which is something that I noticed Tucker was a little too optimistic about in his segment, actually, is that they fill the sea that this is all a direct result of the choices that are establishment has made willfully. So this is something that could have and should have been avoided and doesn't have just to deal with the fact that there is a war in Ukraine. And also has to do with the fact that our government obviously has been pushing this Green New Deal has been pushing climate agendas and they want to get rid of fossil fuel altogether. So this is not a natural disaster that is suddenly hitting our governments and our people hard. This is by choice. And that is something that I noticed Europeans don't want to think about. They don't want to see that. And that is what worries me about the future. So when they are in fact going to face dark and cold winter, dark and cold winter, which they will, are they going to see that that is the direct result of our establishments actions or are they going to beg them for help and are they going to be willing to give up their freedom and give up basically their wealth again to the state in order to basically survive?.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"It's just, it's so extraordinary. It's so third world. So Tom, what is a special master and do you think we're gonna get one in this situation? I don't know whether the court is going to grant this request. The fact that this request has gotten so far in the federal court system is remarkable and is a positive sign for the Trump team, first we beat them, frankly, was not just judicial watch. It was The New York Times. They supported this transparency, too. And other big media companies. And the Justice Department didn't want to release anything. So they lost there. And then they lost against president Trump over the special master fight. We're the one gets appointed. I don't know. There should be a thorough examination by an independent judicial appointed official of these records that not only seriously protects the president's prerogatives in terms of attorney client privilege, which isn't the only issue here as I've highlighted. If the theory is all these records are personal, that issue needs to be adjudicated because if it turns out that there was no basis to suggest that these records were government records that were in the purview of the archives, the FBI or the Justice Department, every single one of those documents should be turned back to Trump. And in the lease you should be given apologies. We'll see what else in terms of accountability, which is a whole other matter. But so in closing here, Tom, what sort of, what sort of grievance can Donald Trump put forward now? I mean, what's the prevent this from just rating them rating every single political opponent now? The precedent here is just is just, it's hard to even wrap our heads around. Tom, what can possibly be done to stop this? Is there anything that could be done? Well, he may have civil rights claims. I'm no lawyer, but you know the fact is the civil rights are violated and typically you can sue when that happens and there's an egregious violation of your rights as I believe has already happened with Trump not only here, but another situation was that the FBI and of course the degree there was a criminal misuse of government resources for political purposes to target him, there should be criminal investigations into what went on here. You know, I don't know how much more evidence that we need to share that the FBI is fundamentally corrupt. The Justice Department is happily willing to use and abuse the use of force to target its political enemies. People who do that shouldn't be in power. They should not be in addition, there should be the opposite of not in power. They should be held accountable and potentially criminally. Tom fitton, thank you so much for joining us phenomenal as always. You're welcome. Thank you, Charlie. Look, in the good old days, we Americans argued about which policies to pursue to improve this beautiful country. Charlie Kirk here, too often we find ourselves arguing about whether or not America is great or not, or whether we should be ashamed or whether we should love America. The reason for this is simple. For too many years, too many of our schools have been neglecting to teach young people about our great heritage of liberty, presenting them instead of dishonest narrative of America as a fundamentally unjust or racist country..
The Charlie Kirk Show
Tom Fitton: Will the Court Grant a Special Master for Mar-a-Lago Case?
"Tom, what is a special master and do you think we're gonna get one in this situation? I don't know whether the court is going to grant this request. The fact that this request has gotten so far in the federal court system is remarkable and is a positive sign for the Trump team, first we beat them, frankly, was not just judicial watch. It was The New York Times. They supported this transparency, too. And other big media companies. And the Justice Department didn't want to release anything. So they lost there. And then they lost against president Trump over the special master fight. We're the one gets appointed. I don't know. There should be a thorough examination by an independent judicial appointed official of these records that not only seriously protects the president's prerogatives in terms of attorney client privilege, which isn't the only issue here as I've highlighted. If the theory is all these records are personal, that issue needs to be adjudicated because if it turns out that there was no basis to suggest that these records were government records that were in the purview of the archives, the FBI or the Justice Department, every single one of those documents should be turned back to Trump. And in the lease you should be given apologies. We'll see what else in terms of accountability, which is a whole other matter.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"There's so many different questions I have here. The first of which is Tom, you're not the first one to say cash Patel came on this program and Mike Davis said this as well on Steve Bannon's program. It was very clear. The president has the ability to declassify whatever he wants to declassify. Why is this even debated Tom? What do you mean they changed their mind or changed the law? Did Congress change a law that we are unaware of. This seems so unbelievably transparently cut and dry. Again, I'm just a layman here looking at this, but I keep on hearing people say that like you, okay, you could declass whatever he wants, then what's the controversy here really Tom? Help me explain that. Well, the controversy is about what the nature of these documents are. And I'm highlighting for you that there's significant court precedent, the prior Justice Department, legal position, prior archives, legal position. Remember, we sued the archives over this very issue. And so their prior position had been, if he has it after he leaves office any records, including potentially classified information, they're presently personal. And so I saw when a back in February, this issue first popped up, my first response was, heck, we lost on this very issue. And now the Justice Department, all of a sudden, is saying that these records are presidential or potentially should be turned over to them under the law. That's completely at odds with their prior position. And when you have lawyers and we have a Justice Department or federal deep state agencies change their position, you know it's not about the law. It's about politics. I mean, of course it is. I just, I find it extraordinary that we are raiding homes of a former president over paperwork. And I mean, so someone said the other day on television, some low IQ talking head on MSDNC. They said, well, you know, the documents weren't secure there at Mar-a-Lago. Mar-a-Lago's under Secret Service protection at all times. Have you tried going into Mar-a-Lago? How exactly are those documents not secure? Don't worry about that. Go ahead. Charlie, they're not classified. You know, they may not like the idea that the president has the ability to declassify records when he's president or take them with him as part of his constitutional prerogatives as president under the presidential records act. So I mean, maybe nervous about that, but the reality is the law didn't allow them to go and grab them back like that. And, you know, to tell a court otherwise and to suggest that the law did was fundamentally dishonest, and frankly, I don't understand why the court signed on to this because he had before him because at least they had the, you know, they couldn't completely hide the debate from the court. And if I were to court and I saw that there was this dispute about the fundamental nature of the records, I would have told the Justice Department, you go back and you litigate this and you figure out what whose records these are and then come back to me because I'm not going to let you rate the president's former president's home based on, as you highlight a records dispute. Now, if a court found their classified, you know, that's one thing. You know, and the other solution could have been the president could have said to president Trump could have said to them all. Take the records, you know, you're concerned about them. I understand. By the way, they're mine. But I'm going to give them to you. And he should have and still should. And he still can preserve preserve his rights there that these are personal records and now they want to change the game and change the rules and change the law, but their personal records and my whole point is that there was never a basis to launch a criminal inquiry here. At best, there was a debate simile that could have been had. They weren't interested in doing that because the rule is not to enforce the law, but it is to destroy Trump. But Tom, you know, the kind of mantra of judicial watch is no one is above the law. And I don't know if you noticed that The New York Times kind of ran with that one liner calling for the indictment of Donald Trump. And I mean, just if we talk about records and we talk about the preservation of information, what did Hillary Clinton do exactly? You were on the front lines of exposing all of that. I mean, this is outrageous. This is even being remotely entertained while Hillary Clinton goes in bleach, but emails and start smashing things with hammers, your thoughts. Yeah, but she didn't have a right to any of those records she had unlike president Trump's prerogatives as president. She had classified information stored on an unsecure server while she was a government official in stole those records, tried to hide and destroy them. And the Justice Department in a State Department, we've essentially had to force them into figuring out what went on here, and they didn't want to take the strong legal action that would be necessary according to their new theory of the law here. And on top of that, still Bill Clinton has those tapes we talked about that include presumptively classified information. Are they going to rate his home still? This is all bunk. Let's not, you know, I know we have to talk a little bit about and should focus on the legal insufficiency of what they've done on the lawlessness, but that just highlights this. It's not about the records. It's about Trump and in theory to agree it's about the records as we can talk about a little bit later, it was more about not what Trump had, per se, but what Trump had on them. Unbelievable..
The Charlie Kirk Show
Tom Fitton: The Government's Prior Position on Declassifying Documents
"There's so many different questions I have here. The first of which is Tom, you're not the first one to say cash Patel came on this program and Mike Davis said this as well on Steve Bannon's program. It was very clear. The president has the ability to declassify whatever he wants to declassify. Why is this even debated Tom? What do you mean they changed their mind or changed the law? Did Congress change a law that we are unaware of. This seems so unbelievably transparently cut and dry. Again, I'm just a layman here looking at this, but I keep on hearing people say that like you, okay, you could declass whatever he wants, then what's the controversy here really Tom? Help me explain that. Well, the controversy is about what the nature of these documents are. And I'm highlighting for you that there's significant court precedent, the prior Justice Department, legal position, prior archives, legal position. Remember, we sued the archives over this very issue. And so their prior position had been, if he has it after he leaves office any records, including potentially classified information, they're presently personal. And so I saw when a back in February, this issue first popped up, my first response was, heck, we lost on this very issue. And now the Justice Department, all of a sudden, is saying that these records are presidential or potentially should be turned over to them under the law. That's completely at odds with their prior position. And when you have lawyers and we have a Justice Department or federal deep state agencies change their position, you know it's not about the law. It's about politics.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"That's why we are here. Brought to you by Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific mortgage for personalized loan services you can count on, go to Andrew and Todd dot com, the wonderful Andrew and Todd dot com. Joining us right now is a great American patriot. He runs one of the most important organizations. That's right, one of the most important organizations on the planet. Judicial watch. And he has been on the front lines of the affidavit fight, it's so funny. Tom, welcome to the program as soon as I saw all this stuff happening with the corrupt judge and I said, oh, I bet I really hope judicial watch is on it before I could even think to text you. I got an alert judicial watch files a lawsuit and all this. So I want you to spike the football on the affidavit. Get your take. I want your take on what's contained in there and then we'll go from there and just again, phenomenal work on judicial watch. Tom, the floor is yours. Thank you, Charlie. I appreciate the good word there. And you know, we've been litigating federal records laws and fights about them for nearly 30 years. So I mean, we saw that this whole fight with Trump and, you know, which culminated in this outrageous rate on his home was a sham. We had litigated this issue about ten, 12 years ago, over Clinton records. He had tapes he kept in his sock drawer, tapes his depicted him talking to foreign leaders and members of Congress. And we took the position of the Justice Department's taking now. Those are presidential records that potentially classified get them. And they told us to go jump in a Lake. They said that presumably if the president has them after he leaves office, they're his. The court said no one can second guess his decision to keep records like that personal versus presidential. And then of course they changed their legal position when it came to targeting Trump. And so we knew it was a sham, and sure enough, as soon as we saw this outrageous abuse of political raid, we asked the court to unseal the records, the media followed our lead, and we won, you know, a we forced the release of the warrant, and then B, we were forced to force the release of the affidavit that Justice Department wanted to release not one iota of, and the affidavit shows, there was no good faith basis for the raid that the archives asserted authority and power over former president Trump. It didn't have, which means their legal position under the law is they're supposed to take care of presidential records they have. They're not allowed to, and the law gives them no power to go after a president and say, those records should be presidential, give them to us. And so if I were president Trump certainly this affidavit confirms, they don't have a leg to stand on. I go back to the court and I say, look, you know, this material was turned over. I tried to play nice here. But in the end, these are my records personally, and I want them all back. And I went to court recognition that what they did here was an abuse of power that hasn't been seen in American history before..
The Charlie Kirk Show
Tom Fitton: Judicial Watch Forced Release of the Warrant & Affidavit
"You know, we've been litigating federal records laws and fights about them for nearly 30 years. So I mean, we saw that this whole fight with Trump and, you know, which culminated in this outrageous rate on his home was a sham. We had litigated this issue about ten, 12 years ago, over Clinton records. He had tapes he kept in his sock drawer, tapes his depicted him talking to foreign leaders and members of Congress. And we took the position of the Justice Department's taking now. Those are presidential records that potentially classified get them. And they told us to go jump in a Lake. They said that presumably if the president has them after he leaves office, they're his. The court said no one can second guess his decision to keep records like that personal versus presidential. And then of course they changed their legal position when it came to targeting Trump. And so we knew it was a sham, and sure enough, as soon as we saw this outrageous abuse of political raid, we asked the court to unseal the records, the media followed our lead, and we won, you know, a we forced the release of the warrant, and then B, we were forced to force the release of the affidavit that Justice Department wanted to release not one iota of, and the affidavit shows, there was no good faith basis for the raid that the archives asserted authority and power over former president Trump. It didn't have, which means their legal position under the law is they're supposed to take care of presidential records they have. They're not allowed to, and the law gives them no power to go after a president and say, those records should be presidential, give them to us.
The Dan Bongino Show
Tom Fitton: Dr. Fauci Is a Political Operator
"Hire people in big government like Fauci He's a public servant He's not your orthodontist He's not your podiatrist He's paid by you Tom fitton and me a handsome salary and then the left protects him as if he's beyond reproach It's not personal I don't know the guy I don't want to have coffee with him He works for us and he's made some clearly bad decisions That's right and supposedly he's supposed to be an apolitical appointee meaning he's a civil servant more or less The highest paid civil servant in all the government but he's supposed to be a political And it's clear his decision to retire with Biden's the end of the Biden administration released the first term shows that he considers himself to be a political operator And I tell you when you look at these documents what's so frustrating about them is that we're being told and with some good reason that coronavirus the COVID-19 was a massive issue right Countless deaths The destruction of autonomy is the destruction of livelihoods and freedom that we're still suffering under Yet we're getting information showing the FBI was looking into how potentially develop we're getting information showing that Fauci and his people were sending money by the bucket falls to China not only to move on institute but other groups in China that evidently were doing gain of function type research And the media pretends it's no big deal In fact it's the biggest deal that one could come up with when you're looking at what government did in a way that may have endangered the public health in ways we hadn't seen in world history before
The Dan Bongino Show
Tom Fitton: Why Is Dr. Fauci Really Retiring?
"But I wanted you on today to comment about Doctor Fauci Now judicial watch is one of the finest organizations out there folks They've gotten to the bottom of so many scams By the way involving swamp rats from both parties which I love But Doctor Fauci he's retiring Tom and kind of suspicious the timing of that right Like what's up with that Well I found a curious that just a day or two after we announced that the FBI at least had been investigating his shady data function grant to the Wuhan institute that they have been dishonest about in dissembling about since day one he announces his retirement And when you look at this latest batch of documents we obtain under a freedom of information act lawsuit you'll see a we now know that the FBI had been investigating him back in May 2020 at least the grant that is at issue which is the gain of function research grant And going back as far as 2016 his people were concerned about the gain of function gain of function research they were funding in China Now compare and contrast that to Fauci's testifying It's not gain of function research It's clear with gain of function research That's what the record show they were worried about And the description is gain of function research And on top of that the FBI wasn't even believing it because evidently they were investigating it So I have no doubt that he's retirement has more to do with his fear of accountability than wanting to spend more time with the family
The Charlie Kirk Show
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Fast. I want to talk to you about two other things. John Durham and Elon Musk slash Twitter. Elon Musk and John Durham, what on earth do they have in common? Well, you know, they're both on the wrong end of the left. You know, and under the Trump administration, special counsels, we were all supposed to fall down and worship them, right? Robert Mueller. Oh no, John Durham. He can't be trusted. And he's going overboard and prosecuting the Clinton gang. Excuse me, the Biden gang. Or I get confused sometimes as to what we're supposed to be prosecuting since they're all tied together. You know, the same thing with Elon Musk. I don't know where he stands on politics. You know, my guess is that he has, well, the evidence is he supports free speech, which is kind of like ought to be the price of entry in terms of public discourse these days. But activist investors were the left told us where the savior of the corporate world. Having these activists come in and demanding accountability from corporations on issues other than the stock price. And here we have Elon Musk doing something similar with Twitter on behalf of First Amendment values by all accounts and you would think he's Genghis Khan coming in and trying to destroy the Internet. But both need to do a lot in my view. Obviously Durham has been slow. Three indictments include one which resulted in a kind of a disaster of a plea deal. The two more recent ones have been substantial, but if they're the end of what he's doing, it's going to be week T, they're the beginning. It could be great. And I must, you know, he's putting his money where his mouth is, you know, billions of dollars of investment in Twitter to have a say by all accounts and how Twitter is run and to try to rein in, I would hope the abuse that Twitter continues in terms of lying about why it's censoring conservatives and obviously just censoring conservatives. So he can't act soon enough to rein in that abuse by. The corporation, you know, I would have my view is there's liability for the corporation such as Twitter and these other big tech corporations, you know, not because of section two 30, but because of fraud. You know, they're lying about what they're doing and why they're doing it in terms of censorship. They're lying to users. They're lying to regulators. They're lying to shareholders like Elon Musk. And there needs to be accountability about it for it. So Tom, we have about two minutes remaining coming up the next hour, we have the second part of our actually the first part of our conversation airing with Catherine engelbrecht and Greg Phillips all about the 2000 meal deal dinesh d'souza's upcoming film. Not sure how familiar you are with that. But what can be done legal in at this point to actually arrest some of these people that outwardly committed felonies and get to the bottom of what happened in these key states? Well, if the evidence warrants it, there should be prosecutions at the state level. I mean, the federal government is going to do it. It's the Biden administration is going to undermine its own elections story. So you need honest state prosecutors and officials willing to pursue the leads and evidence that have laid out there. And also eliminate these opportunities for fraud that were put in place largely in 2020 that resulted in what I consider to be a ruined election that people don't have confidence in, half the country thinks was rigged with good reason and we can't have disruptions like that anymore. The leafs if everyone was being honest on both sides and we would work together to make sure that we're confident that the votes are counted of eligible voters in a way that reasonably protects against fraud. One side has zero interest in doing that. In fact, they want to eliminate the few remaining bars the fraud or making it hard, making the few remaining ways to make it more difficult to engage in fraud. It's well said, Tom fitton from judicial watch dot org Tom, thank you so much, keep up the great work. And we got to have you back on if Durham ever really moves. I'd like to have you back on and unpack that with you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for listening everybody. Email me your thoughts is always freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com and support the Charlie Kirk show at Charlie Kirk dot com slash support. Thank you so much for listening. God bless. For more, on many of these stories and news you can trust. Go to Charlie Kirk dot com..
The Charlie Kirk Show
Tom Fitton: What Elon Musk & John Durham Have in Common
"And Elon Musk slash Twitter. Elon Musk and John Durham, what on earth do they have in common? Well, you know, they're both on the wrong end of the left. You know, and under the Trump administration, special counsels, we were all supposed to fall down and worship them, right? Robert Mueller. Oh no, John Durham. He can't be trusted. And he's going overboard and prosecuting the Clinton gang. Excuse me, the Biden gang. Or I get confused sometimes as to what we're supposed to be prosecuting since they're all tied together. You know, the same thing with Elon Musk. I don't know where he stands on politics. You know, my guess is that he has, well, the evidence is he supports free speech, which is kind of like ought to be the price of entry in terms of public discourse these days. But activist investors were the left told us where the savior of the corporate world. Having these activists come in and demanding accountability from corporations on issues other than the stock price. And here we have Elon Musk doing something similar with Twitter on behalf of First Amendment values by all accounts and you would think he's Genghis Khan coming in and trying to destroy the Internet. But both need to do a lot in my view. Obviously Durham has been slow. Three indictments include one which resulted in a kind of a disaster of a plea deal. The two more recent ones have been substantial, but if they're the end of what he's doing, it's going to be week T, they're the beginning. It could be great. And I must, you know, he's putting his money where his mouth is, you know, billions of dollars of investment in Twitter to have a say by all accounts and how Twitter is run and to try to rein in, I would hope the abuse that Twitter continues in terms of lying about why it's censoring conservatives
The Charlie Kirk Show
Zuckerberg, Chan Not Making Similar Donations to Elections This Year
"Extraordinary announcement came out today, which is a great announcement for the security of our elections and the integrity of our elections. Mark Zuckerberg Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, have said they will not give another $400 million for this next aid of elections. The nonprofit that distributed most of the $350 million in donations from Zuckerberg to election offices in 2020 said Monday that it won't disperse similar donations this year after backlash from conservative suspicions that the contributions tilted the outcome of the presidential race towards Biden. This tells me a couple different things. Number one, it shows that the backlash that Zuckerberg has received has really bothered him. And it should bother him. I don't know Zuckerberg's intentions. I don't. But what I do know is that Zuckerberg is not exactly excited about further alienating half the country. By the way, on Facebook and Instagram, it's conservative content that performs way better than left wing content. If it wasn't for all the algorithm changes and all the games and the thumb on the scale that Facebook plays.
The Charlie Kirk Show
Rankings: Which States Handled COVID the Best?
"Who handled COVID the best? Who handled the Fauci virus the best what states were the ones that were able to withstand the damage both with death, education, businesses. So there's a study out of the national bureau for economic research. And based on this article and I'm reading a little bit into this, but not too much. It seems as if they did a blended metric where they put death rates, business closures, education outputs all into one. So they didn't just do death rates. They didn't just do case rates. They didn't just do business. They put it all into one. How they weighed it, I don't know. But it seems to be a very non partisan group. It doesn't seem to be as if this is a partisan. So what the national bureau for economic research came out and said, is they ranked what states did best in response to the Fauci virus. The national bureau of economic research is an American private nonprofit research organization tied to the MIT and Harvard, the Massachusetts institute for technology and Harvard. So this is as nonpartisan as it's going to get. Okay? The state they say that did the best, despite their ridiculous politicians, but they have great people. Utah. Second best South Dakota. Remember governor Kristi Noem was just attacked from every direction for her response to the virus. Then interestingly, Vermont, which I could be an outlier, I don't know how they responded to a lot of different things. Also a very rural state. So that's something to think about. Then Montana led wonderfully by our friend and supporter of turning point USA governor gianforte, then number 5, ah. No, I'm sorry. No, number two is Nebraska. I got myself messed up. Number two is Nebraska led by governor ricketts number 5 was Kristi Noem. Sorry I was going through this too quickly. And yes, I do know the difference between Nebraska and South Dakota. And then number 6 Ron DeSantis, number 7 New Hampshire,
The Charlie Kirk Show
The FBI, Pfizer, and Deep State-Pharma Collusion with James O' Keefe
"So James, I want to ask you about the story that broke yesterday. You guys have a tendency to break news very late in the evening. I'm sure there is a science to it or there's a reason to it. And it says DoJ documents obtained by judicial watch, Tom fitton, great guy, confirms existence of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Pfizer about your organization project veritas tell us about this James. That's right. Tom fitton that judicial watch, who's a friend of mine, he issued a foia request into the Department of Justice for all communications between The New York Times and the DoJ and Pfizer pharmaceutical and DoJ. And shockingly, a document which was came back from the Department of Justice FBI indicating they do indeed have communications between the FBI and Pfizer regarding communications regarding project veritas and myself. So we released these documents last night. I made a video about it. And the question is, why on earth is Pfizer pharmaceutical talking to the FBI about journalists or journalism, Charlie? And further, you know, the CEO of Pfizer had made a statement back in November. I think it was November 9th, where he said that he has been talking to the FBI about disinformation and dark, dark groups. He's clearly referring to groups like project veritas, even though we're not dark, where the opposite of dark. And also we to Charlie remember, we did two stories about Pfizer, one whistleblower within Pfizer Melissa mcatee and emails showing that they were hiding information. Those were the vice president of Pfizer's words, not mine, and also a scientist within Pfizer saying antibodies are stronger than their own vaccine. So I reported on this as journalists do or are supposed to do. And now we come to find out that the FBI is talking to Pfizer about
The Glenn Beck Program
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Glenn Beck Program
"All about the growing authoritarian state and it is growing rapidly rapidly. We have ben shapiro on In about an hour to talk about it tonight. My special is all about surveillance. It's called biden's new domestic terrorism threat. You you need. See something that has just been rubber-stamped. Nobody really talked about it. The plan to combat domestic terror from the white house. It is truly terrifying. What they're doing and somebody who has been on this for a long time is a guy who's hasn't been on twitter since january eighth because he was suspended for tweeting about hydroxy cleric win which i've taken hydroxy caloric win when i stopped taking it. I got kovin. I don't know maybe it's a coincidence. I don't think so anyway He hasn't been on twitter but he has been busy. Why was the fbi monitoring the bank accounts of dc residents on january sixth from judicial. Watch dot org. Tom fit and joins us in sixty seconds program. Sally wrote in a couple of short and sweet lines about our dogs experience with rough green. She says my dog bruno now cries because he loves his dog food. So much rough. Greens is amazing. I don't know what that means Does he like. He's like adam schiff over his bowl is like this is so good writing in But i do wanna talk to bruno here for a moment bruno. I don't know exactly. What is with you but i i do frequently cry because i love my food so much so i don't even put rough greens on my food. And i still do that. So i can't imagine what you're going through and just keep it up. It's not dog food. It's something you sprinkle on the dog. Food the supplement. That's filled with all of the things that make your dog healthier and happier. Get a free bag of rough greens. Just for your dog to try out. It's a small little bag. They just want you to try for few days to make sure that your dog will eat it and like it. And if they do then just Get a bag of Rough greens and watch the change in your dog over a couple of months rough. Greens dot com slash beck rough. Greens dot com. All you pay for shipping. Get the free bag right now. You can call eight three glenn. Thirty three eight three three glenn. Thirty three or rough greens dot com slash beck. Tom bitten president of judicial. Watch author of a republic under assault and tom. I don't think there is a better phrase than that for what is happening to our country. Right now it's been ongoing and it's Accelerated with the beginning of the biden administration. That as you've highlighted is used a january six As a as an excuse to target and spy on all of this political opposition. And i just don't mean donald trump their theory of the case is everyone who has questions about the legitimacy of the biden election and it has questions about election integrity generally or supportive of trump conservatives. All should be treated as if they're terrorists and quote enemies of the state has the left wing new york times lawyer Choose me writer admitted and and a twitter yesterday. So let's go through some of the things that the government is doing. That are absolutely unconstitutional. And also things that should horrify americans. I don't know if they don't know about it or if they do they just don't care but this is a different country. Talk to me about the different things they did. For instance bank of america. Yeah and it's not clear if bank of america did this because they were asked or because they were excited to do it and just volunteered. They sent over reportedly the financial transaction data. Meaning if you use your debit card in dc on january six or the surrounding area was sent over assuming presumably to the fbi. Airbnb data was sent over hotel. Transaction data was sent over. It looks like he's financial records were poured over By bank of america and sent to the fbi and who knows how many other banks. So we've we've asked for information from the fbi about what was going on here and glenn they gave us the They can't confirm or deny the die. After deny after refusing to respond to the request as law requires they sued and they said well. We can't confirm this information exists which to me is a non denial denial bright and and what. What right do they have to withhold. That information well you know. Admitting they have the information is going to be a scandal. The detail of it is another issue here. We can't even get them the fess up that they were spying on us. We also have a lawsuit against the post office that was targeting social media profiles of individual americans and examining them. Who knew your postal. Your post office had the ability to spy on your social media content. So i talked about this. Select committee on the hill. That's what this is about and one of the other angles sweat committee. We all should be concerned about is the fact that adam schiff is on it and taken the legal position litigation which tissue watch that the house of representatives specific and congress generally has the unbridled ability to subpoena. And take your private information whether it be phone records in the case of giuliani. That's exactly what they did or financial information. Who knows what else and without quarter or through station so this isn't like how did this happen. This is this is not legal rights. it's not legal. Well they say it is and no court is restrained them yet. So i fear. This january six committee which is a never ending committee. It's gonna be a a a a show trial there's no date that's gonna add for which it's gonna end so it's going to be a to committee for lord knows how long is going to target citizens and groups who oppose biden and spy on them by taking their records unconstitutionally in my view. What are the. What are the odds that that i'm being spied on. I think the odds are high that you're on the target list You know tucker. The story tucker roman shows that you should presume you're being spied on. What my my operations. I just presume free phone conversation. I have every email i said. is is subject to monitoring by the government. I just i. I think you know it. Just it makes it And and americans who are active in politics should a similarly presume it. You just don't have to be a leader Now we know they're going after citizens will. I know that there are senators. That i have spoken to. That are so paranoid now. They won't speak around any kind of Any kind of device and they'll only really kinda talk to you outside and and they. They believe they're absolutely being monitored By our national security apparatus well we know. The nsa's able to pick up virtually everything. Yeah and the issue comes down to who utilizes the intelligence that the. Nsa has a box who goes rooting around in that box. We already know that the biden administration is run by a man who did it to general. Flynn in unmasking him. There's been no There's been there's been no sanction for anyone who's unmanned anyone during the obama.
The Glenn Beck Program
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Glenn Beck Program
"Is exactly like the black tom. Event which which pierced and broke every window in lower manhattan. It is the reason we can't go up into the torch anymore of the statue of liberty because the explosion was so big it actually broke the arm of the statue of liberty. And woodrow wilson. Knew exactly what it was. Everybody who is involved knew what it was. It was german terrorism. They came over here to blow up the munitions that we were sending to the allies in for world war one. They couldn't have those munitions come so they blew him up just in new jersey. It destroyed so much it was a big big deal. Woodrow wilson said. It was the capitalist. That did it and then it was just brushed aside for a while. And we're looking into it. We're looking into it but nothing really happened. And then when fdr needed to round up the japanese he used that fear. We've just found out what happened in like nineteen sixteen. We just found out what happened with black. Tom and it was the germans. And if the germans can do that the japanese will do it here. So we've got to act on this now. This is just the predecessor of something bigger. That is coming and they are building the foundation. Thank you so much. Pat pat graham leashed by the way we do. Have this nick thing. You hear this real quick. Now wait until after the commercial. Yeah i want to I wanna talk a little bit about lifelock lifelock every day. We put our information at risk on the internet. Any in an instant a cybercriminals could steal what your sometimes even harm your finances and credit. That's why there's lifelock they'll help you detect a wide range of identity threats and they'll work with you to fix it if there's a problem data ends up getting compromised because nobody can prevent all cybercrime because it's too expansive and it's changing every day. And they know that that's why they have people staff to clean it up in case something slips through save up to twenty five percent off your first year at lifelock dot com. Use the promo code beck call. One eight hundred lifelock one. Eight hundred lifelock or lifelock.
The Glenn Beck Program
"tom fitton" Discussed on The Glenn Beck Program
"Virtue. Let me tell you about built dot com. Who did you hear what. Boris johnson is doing in england he is. He is now putting together his own. Little junk food credit score. Wait until you hear this. You wanna talk about authoritarian at as hell because he's getting in shape and so he wants to lead the nation into getting a shave all so he can force everybody. I want you to know. Built bar is good for you. It will help you lose weight. It'll help you keep the weight off. It'll help keep healthy. But it does it in a candy bar doesn't in a really really good one hundred percent chocolate candy bars. The only way. I can describe it. It's not right to say it's a protein bar even let technically is what it is. I think it's a candy bar Here's the here's the great thing right. Now they have nine different flavors. You can get a mixed box you can try to of each of the nine flavors and they are really truly amazing. I mean you should do. They should do a test. You know enjoy has not mounds. Don't so ob mounds. They're they're coconut bar. I don't think you can tell the difference built bar. You can find them at built dot com. Use the promo code beck fifteen say fifteen percent off your next order Your mouth and your body is going to thank you for it. It's built.