Morning Joe - Kirk suspect charged with aggravated murder

Episode Date: September 17, 2025

Kirk suspect charged with aggravated murder Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Cato Institute, conservative think tank, published a study just last week that found from terrorists from the right were responsible for six times more deaths than people from the left. I actually don't want to go tip for tat on this, but what I am asking for is that this rhetoric of blaming one side or the other stop, if you could convey that to the president, and that we actually work on things that are solutions. So could you commit to me, Mr. Patel, Director Patel, that you will do that. Absolutely, Senator. That was an exchange between Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar and FBI director Cash Patel

during what was an otherwise combative hearing before the Judiciary Committee. We'll bring you more of the big moments on that straight ahead. Plus, we'll go through the new details about the man accused of killing Charlie Kirk following his first court appearance yesterday. Also ahead, we'll dig into a highly anticipated meeting today. for the Federal Reserve after the appointment of a Trump ally to the Central Bank's Board of Governors. And we'll bring you a live report from the UK as President Trump makes an unprecedented second state visit to Windsor Castle. Good morning and welcome to morning, Joe. It is Wednesday,

September 17th, along with Joe, Willie, and me. We have NBC News and MSNBC political analyst, former U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill. Joe, a lot to get to this morning. A lot to get to. The opening clip, though, I think an important reminder of exactly where we are right now and where we're sitting as a country, as you do have the president and people around the president trying to blame one side for political violence through the years in America, following, of course, the absolutely horrific shooting and assassination of Charlie Kirk.

But what you heard in that clip, obviously, Willie, was a United States senator who knew and who had worked with the Democratic leader who had been assassinated in her own. home with her husband and then even had their family dog shot dead by a man who had a hit list of 42 Democrats. And so I know it had to be very important for Amy Klobuchar to get that out while she's hearing all the lies. And, you know, we don't usually use that word much as far as try not to. I fail all the time. And I'm sure sometimes. do. We did yesterday, though, when we had the vice president of the United States saying everybody knows that the preponderance of violence in America politically comes from the

left. Well, there have certainly been terrible examples of that with the shooting of Steve Scalise and others during the congressional baseball practice. Two attempts on Donald Trump's live during the campaign. And of course, one of those in Butler, Pennsylvania, came from a family of Republicans, and we're still trying to figure out exactly what his ideological drive was, but still, that is a Republican, someone on the right that's being shot at. And then, of course, the absolutely horrific slaying of Charlie Kirk. And then you have all the examples on the other side. And as Amy said, let's not go tit for tat on this.

But even Cato, an institute funded by the Koch brothers, taken over by the Coke brothers, had a study that showed the overwhelming majority of political violence in America over the past 20 years has been from the right. Now, that changes. And the 60s, it was predominantly from the left. They're just bombings all the time. 70s from the left, that changed in the 80s and 90s. And it's been that way for a while, Willie. But, you know, the idea that we have a president that's trying to divide Americans instead of bringing Americans together at this time is something that's sad and something that's unfortunate

and something that we all need to pray. The president moves past and he tries to bring us together and say, this happens too much on both sides. We need to come together as a country so we can debate the issues and do, actually, I mean, what Charlie Kirk was talking about, you know, prove me wrong. Let's have a debate. Prove me wrong. Here I am. I'm going to tell you something. I'm going to disagree with you. It's going to get tough. It's going to get combative. But prove me wrong. And then, of course, yesterday, Willie, with all that Pam Bondi was saying, you played Charlie Kirk's own word yesterday talking about free speech and just how expansive that is. And now how some on the hard right are trying to stifle free speech, trying to, they're engaging in cancel culture.

You have the free press going, wait a second, hold on. The right is now doing what we've been attacking the left for doing for years? And the answer is, on so many fronts, yes, they are, Willie. And I just, I pray that as a country, we can get past this. We can mourn the passing of Charlie Kirk. We can come together and do everything we can do to make sure something like this never happens again. Charlie Kirk was all about free speech. That was the whole idea, having an open debate.

step up to the mic, debate me on anything, I'll debate you. We might not like a lot of what he said, might not have agreed with it, but that's the point. You got to have the debate. He invited people to step to a microphone and have that conversation and exercise their free speech. And unfortunately, what you just laid out, Joe, is not something the president is following to this point. Every time he gets the chance, he talks about this being a problem of what he calls the radical left, of lunatics on the left. and you just cataloged some of the awful incidents we've seen, murders, attacks. January 6th, by the way, somehow keeps getting left out of the conversation when we talk about

political violence. It's all there in front of us, and let's hope, Joe, that we can turn this down, but it starts at the top, and it's going to take more than Senator Klobuchar asking the FBI director to pass along a message to turn down the temperature. It needs to come from Donald Trump himself. Well, and, you know, Willie, another thing. thing that the vice president said in his podcast, and that podcast was that, oh, Democrats are running around, jumping up and down and celebrating this. Republicans would never do that.

Well, actually, I haven't seen a major Democratic figure to that. I've just seen one after another express the most profound shock, elected leaders, at least, from what I've seen. I don't go into the bowels of the internet, because I prefer to stay sane. But I haven't seen Democratic leaders do anything but talk about how tragic this shooting, this assassination was. I do remember, though, the president of the United States continually making fun of and mocking an 82-year-old man who was attacked in a savage political attack that almost killed him. It would have killed him if the police had not showed up in time. And his target was Nancy Pelosi.

And somehow that was a punchline. That remained a punchline. I remember being shocked. Well, first of all, I remember being shocked by hearing all the lies coming from the right. And yes, not just from the Internet, but from people that I knew calling me up going, You know the guy that attacked Paul Pelosi was his gay lover for years. I mean, that was going around for several days. And that was their first reaction.

And then the next reaction was to mock and ridicule an 82, 83-year-old man who was fighting for his very life. And that started at the very top with President Trump. So when I see these crocodile tears about how the Democrats somehow are being too callous in the wake of this just absolutely tragic assassination, can't help but just think, do these people not think we have video? Do they think we have no memories, that Americans have no memories? I remember the Republican Party of California laughing, laughing and ridiculing Paul Pelosi, an entire crowd, and just asking what, I may have asked it on the year. What would their parents think of them?

What would the people who raised them think of them for laughing and mocking an elderly man who was a political. target and who was trying to be killed and who will never, never be the same after being savagely attacked in his own home. And again, dead silence, dead silence from so many people in the administration who were shocked now when the leading Democrat in the Minnesota house was shot dead in her home, her husband shot dead in her home, their dog shot dead in their home, another senator shot eight times, his wife, a vet shot nine times, and a hit list with 42 Democrats on it. This is not tit for tat, as Amy Klobuchar said. This is just a country that is in desperate need of a president who will bring us together. And we are, as we are, as

we say, we are in the conversion business here. I don't care. If somebody starts bringing us together, then, you know, I'm a Baptist. If it takes 15 verses of just as I am to get them down to the front of the church and recommit their life, that's fantastic. But Willie, we've got to get there and we got to get there with a president who has to get there and start working. working to bring us together. Let that be his legacy instead of tearing us apart. Because tearing us apart will only hurt the Republicans. Tearing us apart will only lead to massive democratic victories next year. This is what happens in America when you see, when you see the finger

pointing and the yelling and the scapegoating. That doesn't work here. We are Americans. they will actually appreciate a president that brings us together. But my God, we are so far from that right now, Willie, it's sad. And this would be a moment for it, wouldn't it, when everyone almost universally horrified, but what we saw one week ago today in Utah, obviously, as we've said, there are people on the extremes. There'll be a columnist here or there,

a contributor here or there, who says something that we all find abhorrent. Don't take that and make that representative of entire group of people. That's extremism. Normal people. 90% of Americans, 99% of Americans were absolutely horrified and disgusted by what they saw in Utah. And yes, we did see it with our own eyes. Talking to progressives privately, horrified. How can this happen? How can we make it stop? That's where the country is. And the president would be wise and smart, hopefully, to guide us in the right direction here. Let's get into some of the details. A suspected shooter in the killing of conservative activist, Charlie Kirk, now has been formally charged with aggravated murder. Utah prosecutors say they will seek the death penalty in this case. 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, also facing charges of obstruction of justice and witness tampering, along with a number of other counts.

The suspect appeared in court virtually for the first time yesterday, remaining silent as the charges against him were read. Also yesterday, prosecutors revealed new details about the hours after the fatal shooting, including a series of messages between, the suspect and his roommate, who also was his romantic partner. According to charging documents, Robinson texted his partner shortly after the shooting about a note left under a keyboard, which allegedly said, I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and I'm going to take it.

The roommate later texted, you weren't the one who did it, right? To which Robinson responded, I am. I'm sorry. The roommate then asked, why? Robinson wrote back, I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can't be negotiated out. Prosecutors also said yesterday, Robinson's mother, who recognized him in the images released by law enforcement,

told investigators her son had recently become more pro-gay and trans rights oriented. That's according to his mother. When asked whether the suspect targeted Kirk for his transgender views, Utah's attorney general said, that is for a jury to decide. Let's bring in MSNBC,

Justice and Intelligence correspondent Ken Delanyan. Ken, good morning. So these text messages, especially along with some of the other evidence, get us a little bit closer, though not all the way to motive. What else are you hearing about the shooter and what may have brought him to murder Charlie Kirk? Good morning, Willie. Well, Utah County Prosecutor Jeffrey Gray read out those details yesterday. And they did, as you said, reveal new details about how his family recognized him in the dramatic moments where they negotiated his surrender to authorities. And then a few new details about motive and about how he planned the crime, although there are still lots of missing pieces.

So first with the family, what the charges and the charging documents reveal is that it was his mother who first recognized him through the photos, thought that those blurry surveillance photos showing the man in the ball cap and sunglasses looked like her son and showed those photos to his father, and he agreed. And then they also recognized the rifle, which it turns out was a family heirloom. It was his grandfather's bolt action rifle. The father messaged his son asking for the son to send a picture of the rifle, as if to offer some evidence that he wasn't the killer. And the son ignored the messages, according to these documents. They then got in touch with a family friend, who's a deputy sheriff, who convinced this suspect to turn himself

in. He at first had said he wanted to kill himself rather than turn himself in. The family friend called the local sheriff, who expressed incredulity, of course, and then got authorities over there. In terms of the text messages that reveal a little bit more about his interactions, what it shows is that, first of all, he was in a same-sex relationship with another man who was transitioning to be a woman. And he acknowledged that his father, his family was essentially right wing and his father was diehard MAGA. That's all it says about that. But that's a dynamic that I think investigators are going to explore further as they grapple with motive here. And as you said, he cryptically and briefly disclosed to his roommate that he was the shooter and that he had done this because he

believed Charlie Kirk was spewing hate. And as he said, some hate can't be negotiated out. But what's clear from the text and also from the fact that authorities are not charging him is that the roommate had nothing to do with this and was incredulity. It was shocked by all this and is now cooperating with authorities. What these texts and this new evidence doesn't reveal really is this subject's path to radicalization. What websites was he searching? What discord chats was he a part of? What was he saying online? There's been some reporting both in the Washington Post in New York Times, that at first he was confronted with some of his friends online, and he passed it off and joked about the shooting in denying that he was a shooter, and then later in a different

Discord chat, admitted it and apologized, but there's no evidence that he's ever expressed any remorse for the shooting itself. And he did say in these documents that he spent a week planning this. And the other thing that becomes clear from the picture that's created here is this was a lucid and rational act by this person. And by that, I mean, there's no evidence of an insanity defense here. He clearly knew what he was doing and he tried to get away with it. He actually talks in these texts about trying to retrieve the gun and hoping that this will be a secret until he dies of old age. And then gradually he realizes that, you know, there's a lot of evidence out there and then he's going to be caught and that that getting away is impossible.

But it was very clear that he knew what he was doing. he tried to get away with it. There's no evidence whatsoever that he was irrational other than the fact that the act of violence itself was irrational. So that's what I mean when I say there's a lot more we need to learn about what influences were being brought to bear on this person and what path he went down to get to this horrible place, guys. We'll continue to follow this.

We have other news to cover as well, including something Joe referred to earlier, Attorney General Pam Bondi facing backlash from both sides of the aisle over her comments that the Department of Justice will absolutely target anyone engaging in hate speech. She made those comments in a podcast interview with Katie Miller, wife of President Trump's top advisor, Stephen Miller, adding, quote, there's free speech and then there's hate speech. Bondi later tried to clarify her comments, writing on social media, quote, hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence, is not protected by the First Amendment, it's a crime. Many conservatives continue to push back, including Fox News analyst Britt Hume, who wrote someone needs to explain to Ms. Bondi, that so-called hate speech,

repulsive, though it may be, is protected by the First Amendment. She should know this. House Speaker Mike Johnson also weighed in, saying in part, quote, we do not censor and silence disfavored viewpoints. People in America are allowed to say crazy things. The late Charlie Kirk himself posted last year, quote, hate speech does not exist legally in America. There's ugly speech. There's gross speech. There's evil speech. And all of it is protected by the First Amendment. President Trump was asked about Bondi's remarks yesterday by ABC's Jonathan Carl. And what do you make Pam Bondi saying she's going to go after hate speech? Is that, I mean, a lot of people, a lot of your allies say hate speech is free speech.

You probably go after people like you because you treat me so unfairly. It's hate. You have a lot of hate in your heart. Maybe they'll come after ABC. Well, ABC paid me $16 million recently for a form of hate speech, right? Your company paid me $16 million for a form of hate speech. So maybe they'll have to go after you. Look, we want everything.

to be fair. It hasn't been fair. And the radical left has done tremendous damage to the country, but we're fixing it. We have right now the hottest country anywhere in the world. And remember, one year ago, our country was dead. And now Washington D.C. is fixed. And I fix it. The mayor was fine. The mayor was just fine. Okay. The mayor had the sick city for many years. He's been for many years. The one to fix it was me and my people, and it is so safe. You should take your beautiful wife tonight and have dinner down there. You won't be shot. You won't be accosted. You won't even be looked at incorrectly by anybody. So, Willie, there's so much to sort through there. First of all, Donald Trump goes from sort of this stream of consciousness situation where he is,

goes from sort of WWF fighter mode to Moralago concierge. You should take your beautiful wife down, out to, he knows John Carl. He's the first person who's ever said that John Carl's heart is filled with hatred. He knows it's not. He knows John Carl and likes John Carl. But this is what happens in the day's time. an attorney general who says, I'm going after people who say things that we don't like, that we call hate speech, when prodded along by the interviewee saying, hey, when do we start

putting handcuffs on people for saying things that they think are hatred? And you see how quickly this is the most extreme version of, and I know Clare will talk to this too, about what our law professors talked about when they warned us of a, quote, slippery slope. This was a slip and slide that was like going down from like Mount Kilimanjaro. It went very quickly from a stupid thing an attorney general said to a stupid thing that a president said to to do the very things, Willie, that we have heard people on the fore right push back on for years, the very things they hated they have now become. I mean, Elon Musk, the free speech absolutist. Remember, we need to let everybody say the most offensive, horrible, dangerous things, basically, online. And we have to do it

because we're free speech champions. Those old Twitter people weren't. And of course, the free press, who I commend them for actually coming out, going, wait a second, guys, this is what we've been warning against. And think about all of the battles on college campuses. What were those battles about speech codes, politically protected speech. Like, my God, I mean, it's, it is Willie. You, you said it yesterday in so many ways. These people are doing the very thing they have been campaigning and screaming against for a decade now. It's amazing. Weaponization of government. They're talking now about going after organizations they view as leftists. They view as funding, left wing. We're going to use the government to go after that.

cancel culture. We're going to go through and find people who said the wrong thing about Charlie Kirk's murder and report them to their bosses and get them fired. And then free speech, of course, being the biggest one there, that now we're going to consider hate speech somewhere outside the First Amendment under Pam Bondi. And Claire, it goes without saying the president didn't answer the question there because there's not a good answer to it. I mean, there is an easy answer, but there's not a good one when your AG is out there saying that hate speech is different from what's protected under the First Amendment. Somehow you got from a question about free speech to Jonathan Carl's dinner plans in D.C. last night. But everything we've seen since the awful grotesque

assassination of Charlie Kirk in terms of how this administration has begun to use it now as a lever of power, what do you make of it? Yeah, you know, it's interesting because you all have been talking about that this was a moment, this horrific act of violence that was motivated by everything that should never motivate someone to kill another person, that it's pretty obvious that's a moment. And, you know, when you're a leader, there's an instinct that kicks in, that should kick in. Okay, this is a moment that I am supposed to lead. This is a moment where 9% of the country is in agreement.

And I can step out in front of that and bring down the temperature and do a lot to to repair my image with people that are very skeptical in this country. That's what should have happened after this horrific act of violence. That's what the president should have done. When he got that question, that instinct should have kicked in, and he should have walked Pam Bondi's comment back. We are upset right now because of what happened to Charlie Kirk and the Attorney General was feeling that,

and she said something that is being misinterpreted, we're not going to censor our opponents. And Pam Beondi, look what she's done within the MAGA movement. First, we've got Epstein, where she said, I've got the list on my desk. Then she trashes the legacy of Charlie Kirk. If Charlie Cook said, I want a legacy, he probably would have said free speech. He would have said, I want it to be that you can go out and say whatever you want to say. And in America, there are no handcuffs. And instead, what Pam Beondi does is she trashes that legacy and threatens cuffs for anybody who says anything that they disagree with.

And urges that people be fired if they say things that are seen as inappropriate. Yeah. So I just think when Trump got that question yesterday, it's what you would think for anybody who's a normal political leader, it would be a softball right over the place. that he could take and turn into a situation where he would be admired even by those who don't like him. And he can't do that. His instincts are so wired to, I'm the best, I'm the one, I'm the only one, and everyone else besides me sucks. And that's what his instincts are. And it is a terrible instinct for President of the United States. And we see it every day in many different things he does. And this is a good example. And still ahead on Morning Joe, we'll go live to London

for a look at the day ahead for President Trump on his second state visit in the UK. Plus, we'll go through the big items on the agenda for the Federal Reserve as it wraps up its two-day policy meeting, including an important decision on the future of interest rates. Also ahead, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer will join us on the heels of the short-term spending package. released by Republicans to avert a government shutdown and a reminder. The Morning Joe podcast available each weekday. You can listen wherever you get your podcasts. You're watching Morning Joe.

We'll be right back. Just about half past the hour, live look at the White House. President Trump is actually in London today, where he's set to be greeted by the prince and princess of Wales before being formally welcomed by the king and queen in an arrival ceremony that is set to begin about 30 minutes. From now, the President and the First Lady arrived in London last night. They are staying at the Winfield House in central London that serves as the residence of the U.S. ambassador to the United Kingdom.

Let's bring in the co-host of our fourth hour, staff writer at The Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire, and NBC News International correspondent. Raf Sanchez, live from London. Raff, just first of all, just go through what we expect to see today. Well, Mika, good morning. It's going to be kind of a split-screen day here in the UK. On the one hand, you're going to have the presidents and the first lady hosted by the royal family at Windsor Castle that is going to be a day of pomp, circumstance, pageantry. And then here in central London, you're going to have a lot of politics. We are expecting thousands of British protesters to take to the streets of central London a little bit later today to make their displeasure at the president's presence in this. this country known. So it's going to be totally apolitical with the royal family and then extremely political here in London. Just in terms of what we're expecting, in the next couple of minutes, the president, the first lady, are scheduled to leave Winfield House, the American ambassador's residence, which is in Regents Park here in London. They will fly to Windsor Castle and that will

basically be the end of their time in London. This whole trip is designed to keep the president outside of London where there were very large protests during his first state visit back in 2019. Unlike previous presidents, including President Obama, President Clinton, President Reagan, President Trump has not been invited to address Parliament during his state visit. So today he will be, as you say, greeted first by the Prince and Princess of Wales and then hosted by the King at Windsor Castle. They're going to spend the day doing a number of sort of military ceremonies. President Trump will visit the crypt where the late Queen Elizabeth is buried.

And then at the same time here, these protests are due to get underway around 9 a.m. Eastern. Protesters are expected to march down this main thoroughfare in central London. They will gather at Parliament. And guys, if the president thought he was leaving the Jeffrey Epstein scandal behind, when he left Washington, he has another thing coming. A number of demonstrators actually projected images of the convicted sex offender along with the president on the walls of Windsor Castle last night. Four people have been arrested for that. And I can tell you, actually, the main scandal roiling British politics right now is to do with Jeffrey Epstein.

The British ambassador in Washington was fired last week after it emerged one that he had signed that same birthday book, that President Trump is alleged to have signed. He denies that, of course. And two, a number of pretty damning emails emerged between the ambassador and Jeffrey Epstein, who he knew before he took up his post. Now, British police say that they have not changed their security plans for President Trump's visit

in response to the assassination of Charlie Kirk. But they are certainly very conscious of the heightened political tensions in the United States. They are very conscious that President Trump survived, assassination attempts last year. And so we are looking at what is going to be the biggest security operation in this country since the coronation of King Charles two years ago. So, Raff, certainly President Trump has made no secret. He's excited about this trip, deems it a great honor, his words, to get the second state visit. But you're right. There are two

potentially thorny issues on the agenda, White House age, preparing the president that they may come up. One, you hit it already, the Jeffrey Epstein matter. So tell us if there's going to be a moment here today, tomorrow, where the president, perhaps the prime minister, alongside whether they would face questions from the press. There's a moment where something that could be shouted about Epstein. But then secondly, is there a sense there from folks you're speaking to in London? Is the prime minister going to use this moment to push President Trump on Ukraine? Because there's been growing anxiety in Europe that the U.S. has still really not offered

much in the way of security guarantees. Trump has really still not put any meaningful pressure on Russia. to end this conflict. Yeah, Jonathan, they say all politics is local. I can tell you the top priority of the British government during this trip is the economy, is trade. They are hoping to convince President Trump to ease some of the tariffs that he applied to the UK, especially on steel.

But certainly after that, Ukraine is going to be towards the top of Prime Minister Kirstarmer's agenda. As we have seen in recent months, President Trump threatening repeatedly to impose news, sanctions on Russia and then finding reason after reason not to do it, most recently saying that he will not impose those new sanctions until NATO countries in Europe stop buying Russian oil. Now, two things can be true at once. It is the case that the European allies do continue to buy Russian energy in general, both oil and gas. That money goes directly into Vladimir Putin's war machine. The Europeans say that they will phase that out by the beginning of 2028. But it is also the case that the president seems to continually find new reasons not to follow through on those sanctions on Russia.

And I can tell you that on this side of the Atlantic, there is a really heightened state of urgency about this, given those Russian drones that flew into Polish airspace last week and were shot down by NATO jets the first time that we have seen NATO forces directly open fire on Russian aircraft since the start of Vladimir Putin's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Yes. All right, NBC's Ralph Sanchez, thank you very much. And coming up on Morning Joe, FBI director Cash Patel will be back on the Hill today for another hearing this time before the House Judiciary Committee. We'll take a look at that and what happened before the Senate yesterday. And we'll preview another high profile hearing on Capitol Hill today as the former director of the CDC will testify exactly three weeks after she was fired. by HHS Secretary, RFK Jr. Morning Joe, we'll be right back. Hey, welcome back to morning, Joe, with 641, TJ, and one of his better shopper four shots, Of course, hanging half out of the helicopter right now to bring those shots to you. Wow.

Really, he's gotten so much better. Really has. It's pretty crazy. Yeah, he's. Yeah. He's great. He's great. He's all right.

He's great. So, hey, I want to follow up really quickly. You're talking about people, conservatives, people in the right, who were also very concerned of what Pam Bondi said yesterday. the Wall Street Journal editorial page has quite an editorial. Pam Bondi needs a free speech tutorial in it. They say the AG seems to think hate speech is illegal. Charlie Kirk knew better.

We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech, the Attorney General said. Waltzit Journal wrote, Kirk would want a word. quote my position is that even hate speech should be completely and totally allowed in our country the most disgusting speech should absolutely be protected why as soon as you use the word hate that is a very subjective term kirk said in a video posted by his group in 2020 then all of a sudden it is in the eyes or it is the implementation of whomever has the power and Kirk, the Wall Street Journal editorial page goes on and talks about how Kirk had talked to people at Oxford about the fact that Great Britain didn't have a First Amendment and because of it, they were going around arresting comedy writers who were saying things that they didn't agree with politically.

The Wall Street Journal editorial page said the AG didn't recant her statement on Monday that the Justice Department might prosecute Office Depot or its ex-employee. employee who refused to print a Kirk vigil poster. It's just absolutely insane. And then they end up with this line, Willie. Maybe Ms. Bondi should quit appearing on podcasts about Charlie Kirk until she listens to some Charlie Kirk podcasts, Willie. Yeah. And the journal op-ed, which is very tough toward Ms. Bondi, the Attorney General, quotes Charlie Kirk also making the point that many people make when they talk about this idea of hate speech is that it's a dangerous place to go because hate speech is in the eye of the person with the power. And we don't want to go down that road. The Journal also saying that the Attorney General should stop acting so much like

an activist on social media and cable news and just do her job and uphold the Constitution. So some tough words in there this morning, Mika, for Pam Bondi. Yeah. Moving on now, 238 years ago today on September 17, 1787, the founding fathers signed the United States Constitution, which has become the world's longest surviving written charter of government each year. Philadelphia's National Constitution Center honors this historic event with a day of educational and interactive programming, and this year, the Center is launching a bold new phase in its effort to engage Americans in the founding principles of liberty, equality, and democracy.

Joining us now, President and CEO of the National Constitution Center, Jeffrey Rosen, to tell us more about what will be happening. Fill us in. It's so exciting on Constitution Day, and happy Constitution. Constitution Day, to launch this amazing new civic toolkit for America 250. So we have an interactive Declaration of Independence with America's greatest historians writing about the big ideas of the Declaration and the Constitution. This is Danielle Allen on equality, Robbie George on Liberty, the great Gordon Wood on government

by consent. The Yale Law School scholar Akeel Amar has annotated the entire Declaration of Independence It's clause by clause, so you can click on those words, all men are created equal, and find that they came from thinkers like John Locke, and then were played out in the Massachusetts Constitution, written by John Adams, or the Pennsylvania Constitution, written by Benjamin Franklin. There are biographies of the signers, questions for teachers and for adult book groups. It's just this incredible feast of light and learning, which in these troubled times is so exciting to learn from. So I want everyone to go online, check out the interactive Declaration of Independence and the America 250 Civic Toolkit and let the learning begin. So, Jeffrey, you mentioned these troubled times. And I think that's something important to underscore here about this document, this living document, is the idea that, first of all, we have so many Americans don't learn their history and their civics like they used to.

It's become, sadly, far less of a priority in our schools, it seems. So talk to us about why it's so important for people to understand the history of this, but also why it's so relevant now to this moment in U.S. history. The founding fathers believe that unless we learned about history, then the Republic would fall. It would go the way of Greece and Rome. We would surrender to demagogues like Julius Caesar, because only by studying the principles of liberty and government, and this is really important, the habits. of civil deliberation, will we actually listen to one another and not descend into violence? This question that you've been talking about this morning, in America, we rule by reason rather than passion, by persuasion rather than violence, is the centerpiece of the American idea. And it's a tough line to draw, as you've been talking about, we do not respond to our opponents

by violence. We do it by deliberation. And we also don't censor hate speech. Because in America, only speech that is intended to and likely to cause imminent violence can be censored. That's how much we value speech. It has to literally be on the brink of provoking violence before we'll censor it. There's a really inspiring fact that Americans have disagreed from the beginning about the meaning of those ideas we talked about, liberty, equality, and government by consent, but they've been committed to the process of civil dialogue and deliberation about it. I have a new book coming out about how the battle between Hamilton versus Jefferson ignited all of American history.

It's called The Pursuit of Liberty. And it ends with the fact that after Hamilton dies in the duel, Jefferson places a bust of Hamilton across from his own in the central entrance hall of Monticello. You can still see it there today. He views Hamilton not as a hated enemy to be killed or destroyed, but a respected opponent to be engaged with. We've got to get back to that spirit of civil deliberation if we're going to keep the republic.

Well, and of course, Hamilton and Jefferson made Washington's cabinet meetings dreadful. They couldn't stand each other when they worked together. You can say the same thing about Jefferson and Adams. And my God, a few things are more inspiring than the love that they hated each other politically. But the love that they grew to share with each other in those fun. words of both of them on on the eve and on July 4th, 1826. I want to, I want to, I want to just talk for a minute. I want to get since, since this is your job to, to study the Constitution, to focus on the Constitution, to promote the Constitution, to live with the Constitution

daily. I'd love to get your perspective about where we are, because often people, people, come up to all of us. What's going to happen? Is this Germany in the 1930s? Is this Italy in the 1920s? And I always say the same thing. I say, you know, we're going through some very, very difficult times. But those countries did not have 238 years and James Madison and Alexander Hamilton on their side. And I think perfect evidence of that is an op-ed or an editorial. We read this morning from the Wall Street Journal, comparing us to one of our closest allies, Britain. In Britain, if a government doesn't like what a comedy writer says, they can pass a law and arrest them. In America, we had a president and an attorney general say things that went against

the First Amendment, and immediately, both the left and the right might as well have broken out in like a song from from hamilton everybody was on the same stage together going no we're Americans you don't do that here so put all of this put this great time of challenge together with this great document and tell us where you think we are you put it so well when you note the love that adams and jefferson had for each other think of that the election of 1800 the country could have descended into civil war. There was violence imminent in the streets, and we were just as polarized then as we are now. What are their last words to each other before they die on July 4, 1826? Adam says, I know very little, except that I love you with all my heart and soul.

What an extraordinary affirmation of the idea that these political enemies are civic friends. And you're so right that what distinguishes America from Britain and from every other democracy in the world is that we're committed to we the people ruling, and truth can only be discovered through the process of reasoned deliberation. In Europe and in Britain, the king decided what was true by authority. In America, the people rule, and by listening to each other, and through the marketplace of ideas and through our commitment to free speech, truth slowly emerges. These are polarized times, but we have been through very dark times before, before and after the civil war, throughout the unrest of the post-reconstruction era,

the civil rights era, violence has been imminent. And yet, we are united by our devotion to these ideals. And it's very significant, as you said, that the Wall Street Journal expresses the fact that liberal as well as conservative justices and citizens are committed to this shining principle of rule by reason, and that in America, we, we, uh, only suppress speech if it's intended to and likely to cause imminent violence. That is something to celebrate on Constitution Day, and it's going to keep us together in the very challenging times ahead.

President and CEO of the National Constitution Center, Jeffrey Rosen, thank you so much. His new book, The Pursuit of Liberty, how Hamilton and Jefferson ignited the lasting battle over power in America will be available next month. And Mika, I just, again, the story for those that don't know it. They need to look it up and read it to their kids if they don't know it. On the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, you had John Adams and Thomas Jefferson on their deathbeds, staying alive until the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. And Adam's final words were, at least Jefferson lives.

Jefferson had died a few hours earlier, but they're examples of two people that loathed each other in the political arena, but came to love each other outside of it serves such a great example for all of us today. So, yes, Jefferson does live, Adams lives, Hamilton lives, Madison lives. They live in what they have left us, the legacy they've left us, and let's pray that that's enough. get everybody through these terrible troubled times. I believe it is.