The Adam Mockler Show - I Debated a Trump Voter on Charlie Kirk

Episode Date: October 28, 2025

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is someone who escalates, constantly escalates the rhetoric, and is calling Democrats vile, vermin, enemy from within, fascist, communists. But what are they calling Trump, though? They're calling him Hitler. They call him a Nazi. J.D. Vance is calling him Hitler? But he took responsibility, but that's what I'm saying. You're not letting me finish at him. Come on, dude. My name is Adam Mockler, and it's time for America to talk about the issues. That's why today, I'm seated across from a Trump supporter who is here to chat about America's biggest concerns. This is Vashon, a Chicago activist, also known as the Chicago

go conservative. How you doing today, man? Pretty good, man. Thanks for having me today. Both of us get one claim of our own that we have 30 minutes to debate with the other side. After Vashan's claim, we'll go to my claim. Are you ready? Yes, sir. Let's do it. My first claim is that the death of Charlie Kirk was caused by the left. This is the point that I've seen brought up a lot in conservative circles. And I just want to start with the fundamental question. How do you define the left in the situation? I would say the left is particularly the Democrats. So people who support the Democratic Party. Now I wouldn't say the radical left, but if we're just talking about the left in particular, I would just say people who basically support ideologies, progressive

ideologies, democratic leadership and things like that. So I guess my question would be when it comes to shootings or anything of that sort, I think individual responsibility is a huge part of it, especially in the conservative worldview. When somebody does something, that individual is responsible for that. Sometimes these broad sweeping categorizations, like the left is responsible. I feel like that misses the point when this one 22 year old dude is responsible. It's like after Melissa Hortman was killed in Minnesota, I wouldn't say the right killed Melissa Hortman. I would say this crazy dude killed Melissa Hortman. Is that fair? Well, not necessarily because when it came to January 6th, you guys claim that the people who stormed January 6th, it was caused by Trump's

rhetoric. So if we could use that same, if we can use that same analogy for, you know, Charlie Kirk, wouldn't you agree? I would not agree because January 6th was caused by Trump's rhetoric. And we don't have to go too deep into this. But the death of Charlie Kirk wasn't caused by the left rhetoric? We'll get to that one second. But when it comes to J6, Donald Trump, before the 2020 election even happened, said it was going to be stolen.

He said over and over and over, this is going to be a rigged election. Then on election night, he took the stage and declared victory when only 50% of the votes were counted. Then a few months later, he asked certain electors to overturn their slate of electors. And then all of this basically culminated into him saying, be there on January 6th, our country is being taken. And you know what was happening.

But you do, you see, but you're, I'm not gonna say you're being disingenuous, but you're leaving out information when it comes to him asking Nancy Pelosi, excuse me, Nancy Pelosi for those troops. Now Donald Trump did come out and say that we do need some National Guard here because he said there was gonna be very big,

very big, very big. So let me just finish. And even Nancy Pelosi's own daughter, even Nancy Pelosi herself said that January 6th was her fault. This does not pertain to the argument about whether or not Trump's rhetoric caused it. Because listen, he told people, do you know what was happening on January 6th? What happens every January 6th? Well, we do know that there... What happens every January 6th?

Like, on that day, what is happening inside the Capitol? I'm not sure you relaborated? Yeah, no, it's all good. So inside the Capitol, they certify the results of the election on January 6th. That is the certification day. That's why, of course, yeah, of course. That's why Mike Pence was in the Capitol with his hand up, right? So, like, can you see where I'm coming from when I see Trump claiming the election was rigged over and over and over and over?

And then his supporters show up and say, hang Mike Pence. There are videos of them going hang Mike Pence. And it was a minority, sure. But the reason that they're mad is because they think Mike Pence, who was Trump's vice president, they think Mike Pence was stealing the election when that wasn't true. So the only reason, like if Trump never spread that election fraud lie, would January 6th of happened? Um, now that is a good question, but we do have to point out some key facts here when it comes to J6. Uh, do you think that there were people let inside of the Capitol that day?

No, there were three breach points and there were different windows that were broken through. Okay. So there are conspiracies that there were federal agents there that were basically dressed in pro-Trump gear, basically making it seem like they were Trump supporters when they really were not and they allowed people to go inside of the capital now we don't know if that's true or not i don't know if people can prove that or not but in my opinion do i think that they will stoop to that level yes now why do i believe that we can get back on topic yeah because charlie kirk um the death of charlie kirk excuse me they said that the guy was a republican at first and they said that the guy had a trump shirt and that you know tend to not be true because the that was

that was photoshop yeah so you called that out of my channel yeah so yeah so yeah so So you can agree that. So I appreciate that. When we have Charlie Kirk saying that, you know, when he's critiquing the black committee, when he's critiquing LGBT, we know that these people tend to be sensitive about these topics. Now, we know that Tyler Robinson, this is coming from the FBI. I don't know if you trust them or not, but there was evidence saying that he was texting his lover and a majority of people who support LGBT, they tend to be radical leftists. Now, there is no proof of that. That's just my guess. The same FBI that you're quoting said that the girlfriend, boyfriend, whatever, was being very cooperative, was the one that helped turn Tyler Robinson in, and you understand Cash Patel and the FBI said that person was being very cooperative with the FBI. So I don't get, what's the point that you're trying to make? Also, can we back on? I'm talking about the rhetoric, though.

This was after Charlie Kirk died you're talking about. But you're not letting me finish, though. That's what I'm saying. So my thing is this. He had a trans lover. Now, I don't know, like what he was. But listen to me, that's what I'm saying. You have to understand.

And when Charlie Kirk's go up and go to college campuses and say that marriage is only between a man and a woman, Tyler Robinson is probably feeling some type of way about that because he probably wants to marry this he, she, whatever it is one day. You have Jasmine Crockett out here that was literally telling people that all I want for my birthday is to have someone take out Elon Musk. Now, you can sit up there and say that that's, oh, she didn't say he wanted to hurt him, but people are going to take that and run with it. Like, okay, we're going to have to do something like, I can tell you a lemonade Donald Trump, right? A what? A lemonade Donald Trump.

I can say that, right? But then when you say, oh, he said eliminate Donald Trump. No, I said, a lemonade Donald Trump. But you see, but that's what the left does, though. No. That's kind of what they does. They make words tricky, but people inside the left, they know what they mean.

They know, like, they're talking in cold if that makes sense. Yeah. So I heard your argument out. Every time you make your argument about the left, causing Charlie Kirk's death, it seems to be revolved, and tell me if this is fair. It seems to be revolved around him having a trans lover that he wanted to defend. No, it's because of all of the rhetoric that they choose. When it comes to them calling Trump a Nazi, calling Trump Hitler,

have Trump ever guessed any Jews? Wait, I have a question. So politicians should not call Trump Hitler. I mean, they have the right to their free speech. I'm not saying that they can. Do you think it's bad for politicians to call Trump Hitler? It's bad for politicians to call Trump Hillary because that's not true, because that's false. That's a lie.

The only elected official to call Trump Hitler is J.D. Vance. Okay, but he came out and said, but he said that he fell victim to your rhetoric, to the left's rhetoric. He was a Republican. Which Democrat has called Trump a fascist? But a lot of Republicans, hold on. A lot of Republicans don't agree with everything Trump does say, even me, like even when it comes to the 600 Asian kids.

The only elected official to call him Hitler was J.D. Vance. And R.F.K. Jr. made a joke about it. And by the way. He took responsibility, but you're not. People look. Donald Trump called Kamala a fascist 10 time, 20 times. 20 times during the election. Over and over, he called Kamala and Joe Biden

a fascist and a communist. Sorry, I'll let you finish one second, but the idea that Trump's rhetoric isn't divisive as well is absurd. It is so incredibly divisive. Every single day, he says that we are the enemy from within. He posts photos and AI images of Chicago just on fire. This is the U.S. president

who's showing images of cities at war. He says that he wants to go to war with the cities, and I understand that we get to get to this later, but this is someone who escalates, constantly escalates the rhetoric, and is calling Democrats, vile, vermin, enemy from within, fascist, communists. But what are they calling Trump, though? They're calling him Hitler. They're calling him a Nazi.

J.D. Vance is calling him Hitler? But he took responsibility, but that's what I'm saying. You're not letting me finish out of him. Come on, dude. So my thing is this. Yes, J.D. Vance called him Hitler, but he, as a man, took responsibility for what he said. And he said that I fell for the leftist rhetoric that was caused by CNN, ABC, and MSNBC, all of these left-wing news platforms. So he admitted that he felt victim to that and he took full accountability for that something that the left will never do this is a grown man who says he got tricked and duped while he is like 40 years old

so grown man doesn't get tricked this is the price president you think the vice president can get just tricked so he thought no no that's not what you said if he said it's a grown man so you don't think you don't think adults get tricked every day this is jd vans who was 32 years old at the time and he called trump hitler can you name one democrat who's called trump hitler who's elected. Dude, come on, man. Are you talking about elected as president or vice president or because you do know that Joe Biden exists, right? He called Trump Hitler? He didn't call him Hitler specifically, but J.D. Vance is the only person. Okay, but like I say it before, you're going back to J.D. Vance when I already gave you that. So you think Biden calling Trump a fascist is bad?

If it's not true, then yes. What about when Trump called Biden a fascist? That is true. I disagree. What's your definition of fascism? What is your definition of fascism? An ultra-right authoritarian politician who wants to consolidate power around them. So you don't think that Biden tried to basically weaponize the DOJ against Donald Trump? You don't think that to be true. Do you really want to dig into this one? Do you? I'm asking you.

Do you don't think that Biden weaponize the DOJ against Donald Trump? Let me get into this one very quickly. Donald Trump two weeks ago, and I'll get to the Biden, he posted a photo or posted a tweet that said, Pam, Pam Bondi, I want you to prosecute three people. Did you see this one? It was Comey, it was Leticia James, and it was Adam Schiff. You know what Tisha James is a criminal, though? She's doing mortgage fraud.

Let me finish. Can I finish? The president of the United States isn't the person who decides who's a criminal. Let me finish this one. Donald Trump directed Pam Bondi to prosecute these people, and now they're being indicted. Can you point to me a Joe Biden post

where he says, hey, Merrick Garland, can you do this? You do know Joe Biden is like old as dirt, right? I don't think he's worried about tweets and stuff like that. When did he ask Merrick Garland? He doesn't have the cognitive decline to even make a tweet, in my opinion. When did he ask Merrick Garland to do this, because your entire argument hinges on him asking his attorney general to prosecute this.

And this didn't happen. Well, first of all, we have to look at the facts here. What did Donald Trump do illegally? I can go through the entire list. As far as them tried to get him prosecuted. Falsified business records 34 times, tried to pressure election officials and over the... As far as elaborate with the business records. What was falsified?

Because because in my... I'm sorry, go ahead. No, no, you're really good. Because to my knowledge, are you talking about like the money that they They say he didn't pay back. This is the Manhattan case with Letitia James. It's a Manhattan case that he got 34 felony convictions on. It was falsifying business records.

Now, you do know those are all, like, BS charges, right? You realize it went through a grand jury of peers, and then the entire trial played out with Donald Trump's lawyers getting to pick the jury. The lawyers get to pick the jury. The jury of Trump's peers heard that case. But this is the most liberalist city that you can do this. And this is the most disingenuous thing that they could have ever done. They've chosen the most liberalist city you could literally choose.

It's where it happened. Okay. But my thing is, they took advantage of that, knowing that New York is fairly liberal. Can you at least admit that it seems like Trump is doing the exact same thing, but even worse, when it comes to Comey? And it seems like Republicans are admitting this, that he's just openly asking for Commy to do this. I mean, that's not really relevant, in my opinion. When it comes to the rhetoric, it is. You have so many people on the left.

Because Trump is a fascist. That's why it is. In your opinion, he's a fascist. But you have people. Okay, so why not call out Jasmine Crockett for saying that she wants, you know, somebody to whack Trump upside his head or she wants somebody to smack Trump upside his head? Please do not ask for violence against politicians. That's not what our side should do.

That is not what America should be about. Do not do that. Can you do the same for Trump? Tell him to stop using his divisive rhetoric. Okay, but you have to elaborate what is divisive. What he's saying is divisive. Do you want me to go through a list? Go ahead.

He calls Democrats the enemy from within. He spread lies about election fraud. He says Democrats are fascists, communists, are rule. But they say the same thing about him, though. When I was doing that debate just a bit ago, it seems like Republicans are genuinely under the... It seems like Trump thinks that Democrats want to destroy the entire country. So he says... I didn't make that claim.

No, but Donald Trump right now is attacking Act Blue and all of these packs that Democrats use for fundraising. And see, and this is where you guys are failing to realize. He wants your party to get the hell together. You people are insane now. Yes, he is, dude. And listen, if you don't understand that the... By calling us the enemy who need to be terminated, he's trying to remove our fundraising apparatus. Dude, because you have to understand where Donald Trump is coming from when it comes to the corruption inside of the Democratic Party.

Do you realize that all of the corruption that Joe Biden has done and his entire family has done with the CCP, the China Communist Party? Even Byron Donald's called this out in Congress, and they put that into order. So a lot of people would call Trump out on him, what, having bad breath of some shit. I don't know. But you guys will never call out Obama when it comes to him spying on the Trump administration. Did Obama ask his attorney general to prosecute people directly? This is rhetoric that has never been seen before in American. I do want to return back to the rhetoric and the Charlie Kirk point because that is the main point we're trying to talk about.

I think that there is a fundamental incongruence between the way the sides speak. I think that every single Democratic politician immediately condemned the shooting of Charlie Kirk. Every Democratic politician said, this is terrible. Unless you can name one that didn't. No, no, no, you're right. On the right side, the Republican politicians, most 99% of them condemned the shooting of Melissa Hortman, but there were a few that were making fun of it.

It was Representative Andy Biggs. And Democrats won't make in front of Charlie Kirk? Elected Democrat. We're talking about... Not elected, not elected, but we're... But these are different standards. You can't hold someone on Twitter. Okay, okay, but here's the thing, though, right?

No one cares about these elected official Democrats. They care about people like Hassan Piper, Destiny, Harry Sissons, all of these internet clowns. These are the people that they're looking at. Hassan Pike, now, Hassan was disgusted by the shooting. Hassan was disgusted by the shooting. Let's be honest, man.

Me personally, I think he was fake crime, but that's just my opinion. Hassan Piker is disgusting, in my opinion. This guy basically quoted, let's bathe in their capitalist blood. Do you want somebody like that to be a leader of the left? No.

So my thing is this. You can't, well, besides Nick Fuentes, you can't find nobody on the right that is that radical. Yes, I can. That has that much a big of an audience? How about this? Laura Lumer, who has access to the president of the United States.

Laura Lumer is an absolute whack job right now, and she has direct access to the president. We can go through. Donald Trump just held a press conference two days ago where he brought in a bunch of random Twitter personalities who say crazy shits. I just, do you think there's a different standard between an elected official?

Do you think their words mean more than a random person on Twitter? You think it's the same? No, no. I mean, do you believe in free speech? Of course. believe in facts. I don't care if they're an elected official. I don't care if they're a homeless bum on the street. If that homeless bum on the street is telling me the truth besides that elected official, and we all know politicians lie, dude. That's why we don't like politicians

anymore. Trump is not a politician. He's not a politician. He's not a politician. Okay, now maybe now he is when it comes to foreign policy, he might be. But when it comes to trying to keep America first, no, he's not a politician. He's absolutely. He's like the most, dude, who is the chair of the R&C right now. It's Lara Trump. Donald Trump has embedded his family into the Republican National Convention so deeply that his daughter-in-law, Laura Trump. Who led the campaign for the Biden administration? Who exactly? Who? I don't know. Hunter Biden did. Hunter Biden did not lead the campaign. He was one of the, okay, he did. He probably specifically did it. He was an advisor. Okay, he was an advisor. He didn't lead the campaign. Was Hunter Biden. Okay, Hunter Biden is

very, very corrupt. And first of all, and second of all, they tried to use Biden as a, I guess as a brand like Donald Trump. Now, Trump been a brand before he ran for president. You do not right. He has the Trump Tower. He has Trump International. He's been in movies. He's been in TV shows.

This guy's even been on WWE. This guy's like literally my childhood. I haven't even heard of, I don't even know what the fucking Joe Biden is until Barack Obama was elected. Okay? So my thing is this. Why the hell can Hunter Biden basically monetize off of his year? dad, which he definitely was, even when it come to lobbying with the Ukrainians

and the, I don't want to get you banned by saying, can I say Jewish? Can I say Jews? Okay, yeah. And, you know, lobbying for the Ukrainians and the Jews and stuff like that, I mean, let's be honest, you guys don't want to call that stuff out, Hunter Biden's laptop. The guy literally had child porn

on his laptop. No, he did not. He did. No, he did not. Do, did you not see this laptop? He was smoking crack. He had basically... You're making this No, I'm not. You were making this up. He literally, he literally had borderline naked little girls on that laptop. The DOJ was investigating Hunter Biden under Biden's term. And they didn't, they didn't, it was for, Biden's or? Wait a minute. Listen, Biden directed his own DOJ, not directed, Biden's own DOJ, without Biden's knowledge, began an investigation into Hunter Biden. Just like the autopian.

No, no, can I ask you, can I ask you, do you think Pam Bondi, the current attorney general, would ever investigate Don Jr. or anyone? No. because Trump asks her and directs her to investigate. How about this? I'll make a truth with you. I will say Hunter Biden's dealings with Burisma, which was the Ukrainian energy company, I will say that that's not good. You shouldn't use your dad's name to do

that. Can you say that Donald Trump starting Trump coin and making $2 billion off of crypto fees and American people is not good? That's monetizing... I can confirm or deny that I don't follow I don't believe in crypto. I mean, now if it's true, if you can prove that, then yes, I will concede to that point.

Can you prove it? Yes, of course. Go ahead. Do you know that Trump coin exists? You can see that part. Oh, yes, Trump coin exists, but I don't know the breakdown of the Trump coin. Do you think a lot of people bought Trump coin? I'm pretty sure they have. I'm pretty sure they have. Donald Trump's net worth has increased a fewfold, for a few reasons. It's the transaction fees for crypto. It's not even the crypto itself. You get these transaction fees from it. But also, literal billionaires from China, like Chinese-born entrepreneur Justin's son, gave $80 million to Trump, and Trump dropped an SEC investigation.

At this point, we're kind of just arguing about which side is more corrupt. So I think we should take it back a second because I think the entire conversation was centering around Charlie Kirk and the way that we got here was talking about fascism. and then from fascism, I think we were talking about corruption. But let's bring it back down to Charlie Kirk. Do you have any final statements on this? My thing is, if the left didn't push all this hateful rhetoric and if, you know, the Trump administration didn't allow this to happen so much,

I'm pretty sure Charlie Kirk would be alive. Pam Bundy already came out and said, if you threaten a official or all of this, you will go to jail. And, I mean, I haven't seen anyone to get locked over a held accountable for anything. They're supposed to be draining the swamp right now. I mean, Trump, what's going on right now? Trump has created his own. So that's debatable as well.

And in my opinion, if officials like Jasmine Crockett, like these are actual leaders of the Democratic Party, people like Jasmine Crockett that are inciting violence on the president of the United States, on people that are in Trump's administration at the time, Elon Musk, I think those people needed to be held accountable. And it would have basically showed the message to all Americans that if you basically threaten anybody in our government, whether they're on the right or the left, you will be held accountable. Really quickly, if you're enjoying this video and you want to be a part of the next shoot, then click the top link in the description. We shoot this show in Chicago. So if you're in the Midwest, we'd love to have you on or a Trump supporting family member on. We are currently casting for Maga Father Debates Liberal Daughter. So if you fit that mold, click the top link in the description. Thank you and back to the video. I guess I want to ask a question. This is going to be, this is going to take this in another direction. Do you think Charlie Kirk was right about the Civil Rights Act? Or do you think that his view was like racist on it? No, no, it wasn't racist, excuse me. He was definitely right about the Civil Rights Act.

Can you clarify? So a lot of people was playing this clip of Charlie Kirk saying that he was racist. And when I watched a video, and I can't quote what he says specifically, but he said the Silver Rice Act was good until they use it as a Trojan horse to basically add more ideologies and rhetorics when it come to America. The LGBT, DEI and stuff like that, which basically ultimately helped white women in the end, not black people. So, I mean, I digress with that point. But I don't necessarily see how him saying that that's racist. No, you're right. You're right partially, I think. So this is a debate

that I've been having a lot with people about whether or not Charlie Kirk thought the Civil Rights Act was good or bad. And what you're saying is true. He would generally say this. He would say the Civil Rights Act was a mistake. And he was doing that to kind of rage bait people, right? Like just to say something inflammatory. But then he would back it up by saying because it's led to DEI policies that aren't good in modern day. The problem there becomes, Charlie Kirk would then also use these talking points right afterwards when you would talk about the Civil Rights Act. He would say they committed less crimes before the Civil Rights Act. And then what he would say is there were less single mother households. Now, all of this is true, but there's something called like leading a

horse to water where you give a bunch of, you give a bunch of descriptions of something. You give a bunch of facts, but you don't actually give the prescription. So then people are wondering, oh, what's the prescription there? And I think Charlie Kirk, every single time he said this, was leading people to the conclusion that the Civil Rights Act shouldn't have been passed and that black people were better off before, which I just don't think is true. The Civil Rights Act gave black people the right to vote to vote and everything. No, it did not. See, and I knew you were going to go there. Black people had the right to vote in the 1800s. You do realize that right. That's the 15th Amendment. What's the 15th Amendment? It's literally the 15th

amendment. They had the right to vote in the 1800s. You do realize that, right? It was against discrimination of black people at voting boots, at restaurants, at everything. That's what it was. You can't discriminate. But the silver rights act, it was signed by Linda B. Johnson. Wait, I said it was true. It was about non-discrimination. No, no. You write about the discrimination part. No, you're right about the discrimination part. So you think that's good or or bad? I mean, as far as discrimination against black people, yes, is bad. But my thing is this. Nowadays, he said that it's being used as a Trojan horse to let in other ideologies, which I would have to 1,000% agree with. But I think that he was doing this thing.

And my, I'm sorry, I hate to cut you off, but black people already had the right to vote in the 1800s. A lot of people are trying to basically mix it up and like black people just got the right to vote. That was a mistake. Yeah. The Civil Rights Act enacted a lot of protections, equal rights protections around how you can get a job around how you're treated in society. And some of that kind of fed into voting rights because this is a fact, black people's votes have been suppressed throughout American history. Now, I will give you this. It did take three black.

people to equivalent to one vote. So I will give you that. Yeah, there was, so the thing is, so the Civil Rights Act was obviously good. I feel like Charlie Kirk does this thing where he doesn't outright say it, but it's like if I said this, if I said, man, when I used to work in the 80s, it was all men in my workplace and we were so productive. But then in the 2000s, this is an example, in the 2000s women were in the workplace. And then when women were in the workplace, it was way less productive. We weren't able to get anything done. I can probably believe it. No, if I just stopped right there, what's your prescription there?

That women shouldn't be, women shouldn't be in the workforce, probably. They probably shouldn't. I mean, nowadays, they should not. I mean, you got to think about it, man. Our kids, our kids, bro, our kids are dying. There isn't about to be in America in a minute if we allow people to continue to get abortions, allow women to not be in the home and allow the system to raise their kids. And then that child grow up to be a degenerate.

And now they're a part of the statistic. You don't believe, you don't think, oh, no, hold on, wait. Do you, wait, let me just ask you this. Do you honestly believe that a child is better off in a single parent house home, preferably the mom than a two-parent house home? Of course not. Wait, I never claim that. Okay, so my thing is this, and this goes back to rhetoric, like we were just talking about

with Charlie Kirk. They push this dangerous rhetoric that's going to basically burn America to the ground. Oh, yeah, girl, you can do it all by yourself. Wait a minute. But hold on, here's the thing. You have to admit to this, bro. You have to admit to this. Even when it comes to the LGBT, the women's, not the women's right moves, but I'll call it the

boss bay movement nowadays, this stuff is dangerous to women. You do realize that. The majority of women want to be married. So you just said, majority of women want kids. You just said this type of stuff will burn America down to the ground. Wait, no, let me say, I know what you're saying. I know what you're saying. I know what you're saying.

You said that this will burn America to the ground. You want to know what would burn America to the ground is removing half of the workforce from the working. Our GDP would half, our output to other countries. would drop if we removed all women from the workforce, the country would go to fucking hell. It would be like Middle East, do you want to be like a Middle Eastern country where women are, do you want to be like a Middle Eastern country? No, I would not want to be like a Middle Eastern country. So dude, women should have rights ideally to be able to. Are there

any women in your family that have jobs that you respect? Yeah, yeah. My mom has a job. Everybody and my family not have a job. But they would, but they admit it that it's hard to work and try to have, you know, kids at the same time. But this is why we can incentivize some sort of laws where women have time off or when they are pregnant, they can do the idea that we should do you really think we should remove women from the workforce that is not a viable position look i think we should cut back on like hours and stuff for women because they don't want to work as hard as men anyways what if some do that okay if some do then that's an exception to the rule and my thing is this you do realize that women contribute 80% of the consumer debt in america right 80% of the consumer debt is

from you realize that 50% of the jobs in america are right women but it's not you want to remove half of the workforce and wait what's the consumer debt and what are you trying to get to so my thing is this my thing is this if i got so listen you you argued about removing 50% of the women right you said you wanted to do that no well i wouldn't have i wouldn't have a problem of that happen i wouldn't you know mind happening that would burn america to the ground but not necessarily you want to destroy america my thing is this though not really because here's the thing you are saving a lot of money for people who's there that's doing absolutely nothing now let's be honest let's be honest if i got three efficient men that are working, but I have eight people that are working three men, five women,

and those five women aren't really doing nothing. What the hell am I paying them for? This analogy is just awful. What if I, wait, what if I had five women who are hyperproductive and then three men who did nothing? What am I paying these men for? They're not going to be as hyperproductive as the men because men work harder. This is statistically true. They work more hours. They definitely work more. Come on, Adam. That's definitely disingenuous, dude. Men work more hours, they work way more hard, laborious jobs. You're really confused. 90% of pilots are men. 90% of, well, over 80% of police forces in our country are men. Over 90% of military are men. Hold on. You said that that's false, but I'm giving you numbers here. I didn't say it was false.

I said that you were tripping right now. You were hardcore tripping. But it's factual. Can I tell you how you're tripping? Go ahead. The reason why women are just now breaking into the worst workforce at this rate is because America disincentivized women from going to college. I want to finish this point right here. For hundreds of years, for the first 200 years of America, women were told not to go to work. Women were told they should stay home in the 50s and take care of children. Women were told exactly what you're telling women right now. Because of this, women had an inherent disadvantage when it comes to college. There is something called the Scully effect. There was a show called the X-Files back in the 90s. And there was this lady named Dana Scholarly. After this Dana

Scholar character popped on TV with a science degree and she had like a law degree or some shit, the amount of women who went to college to STEM degrees almost doubled. So basically, women were told in society, don't go to work, don't go to college, stay at home. No, they didn't want to work and didn't want to go to college. They were told not to. A lot of women were critical of the women were allowed to vote until 1920s. Well, okay, but here's the thing, a lot of women did not want to vote. Okay, wait, let's take this back. For sure. That was a good one. My claim is that Donald Trump's invasion of Chicago is authoritarian.

So do you think that Trump has the same ideologies as Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler? When you say that somebody is authoritarian, you're not directly comparing them with somebody like Hitler. Like just when I say that somebody is communist, I'm not comparing them to every communist. But Donald Trump uses the same strain of authoritarianism that could have been seen with Hitler. So who was he trying to control exactly? When Donald Trump took office, the first thing that he did was try to silence dissent. He sued multiple media companies. Did Biden sue any media companies?

No, he didn't. Donald Trump then told James Comey, or said James Comey, Letitia James, and shift. How was this being an authoritarian, though? If I was an actual authoritarian, then you do know they wouldn't even have the right to do those things or say those things. Let's start off you. They protest. They protest in Chicago. They protest in Chicago.

All that they're protesting. And what is Trump doing? How are you silent? Wait, wait. What is Trump doing in response to the protests? He's mobilizing the military in the city. To get rid of the illegal migrants. That's not for the citizens.

ICE gets rid of the illegal migrants. Ice does. Right. Not the military. First of all, nobody said that the National Guard was there for illegal migrants. You just did. No, no, no, no, no, no. You're trying to twist my words.

You said that, I said that how is Trump trying to be an authoritarian? And you said that he's, can you repeat that? Let me go through this. Let me lay out in the case. First of all, what do you think authoritarianism is? I think it's someone who's trying to basically silence someone for, you know, their political beliefs or their beliefs or anything like that. people who are attacking a specific group like and and I don't know if you're trying if that's where you're going like when it comes to the illegal migrants I'll for no no I'm not going there

authoritarianism means somebody in power is consolidating all of the checks and balances around him so nobody can check him he's unable to use that unchecked power to go after opposition but that's why we have three branches of government and let me explain this we have three branches of government and what Donald Trump did right when he got into office is not only install loyalists in the different agencies around him, like the DOJ, we have Pam Bondi, who he's directly asking to do things. Can you point to me Biden doing that? No. Wait, wait, let me ask you. Let me get, but now, let me ask you really quickly. But now, but now I got you in the hot seat now, because you do know that the Republicans, we have the executive chair, we have the House, and we have the Senate. So why isn't

everything that Trump wants is happening right now? It is. Okay, listen. Okay. Donald Trump right when he got into office. No one is not, by the way, but okay. Donald Trump, right when he got into office, made sure that every institution around him had somebody who could literally do his bidding. So we have Pam Bondi. We have Cash Patel at the FBI. Who is, in my opinion, doing a terrible job? Listen, we have Cash Patel at the FBI, who's probably covering up the Epstein files for Trump at this point. So look at this. So just think about this. He has people in positions of power who will cover things up for him. Pam Bondi, you think is not doing a great job. She's been asked by him.

Cash Patel, maybe not doing a great job. At the FCC, we have Brendan Carr, who is a Trump loyalist. We can go across the board, and he appoints people in chairs to silence opposition. When James Comey's name was brought up online, and then he was indicted three days later, that's authoritarianism. That means the president's... But how do you know that, though? Like, my thing is that you can say that that's authoritarianism, excuse me, but you have to have proof of that. Like, how does that connect with what your definition of authoritarianness? My definition is somebody who's in power is using their power to silence opposition.

And when James Comey is speaking out against Trump and Letitia James and Shifty Schiff, I don't know why I use his nickname. Letisha James. So you mean to tell me that Latisha James wasn't calling Trump a Nazi and calling Trump here? Should she be indicted and targeted for this? I mean, that's her right to free speech. But my thing is that she should be held accountable and responsible for the things that she

say. You kind of just made my point. So I said that Latisha James is getting targeted and is for mortgage fraud. And what you said is, oh, you think Latisha James should be able to have free speech and call him a Nazi? And you're essentially leading to, wait, she should be prosecuted. I never disputed someone having their first amendment. and taken away from them. I said she can say whatever she wants. But my thing is you have to be

held accountable with what you say. She can't say whatever she wants. But no. She's trying to and she got indicted. She tried to and she got indicted for it. Okay. And that's what I'm saying. You have to be responsible with what you say. No, she got indicted for more. You do realize when I say, you can say whatever you want like literally low. Like you can say whatever you want. Now, I'm not saying that, um, and particularly when it comes to in America that you, like you can't, like you can just say anything, but physically you can say whatever you want. But you just have to be held accountable and responsible for the things that come with it. Let's loop back to Chicago, but I just want to ask you, do you think Trump directing his attorney general to prosecute people is

authoritarian? People do it all the time. Who has done it before? Well, I can't think of no attorney general at the top of my head right now. It's new. It's new. And what he's doing is openly, directly asking for that. But let's bring it back to Chicago. I'm going to give my argument that I want to hear what you have to say. From all the research I've done. J.B. Pritzker, back in 2020, mobilized the National Guard during the BLM protests and riots to protect black businesses and black communities. But how long did it take him to do that, though? I mean, I don't know exactly. I'm sure he mobilized the National Guard, protected black communities. A few years later, J.B. Pritzker was trying to coordinate with ATF, law enforcement

officials, FBI. He was even allowing ICE agents, but Donald Trump is escalating into such a degree where he wants not only the military, but he wants Black Hawk choppers, which did happen. And this got to a point where just yesterday, or it was a few days ago, 27 police officers were tear gassed in Chicago. I don't know if you saw this. The National Guard literally, or the military,

literally tear gassed our officers. That was on accident. That was on accident. They were caught inside of the tear gas. They didn't purposely do that. I don't think they did. Did you see the past? And that's kind of disingenuous on your end.

No, it's not. What they're doing is actually not, they're making the police. force less affected. Did you see the pastor who got shot in the head with a ball? These people are going crazy in Chicago. This is not stopping. But do you see what the people that, do you see what these people are doing to these federal agents? Even, even the superintendent said that you cannot attack these federal agents. You cannot attack law enforcement. So you agree with that. Yeah, but that's what they're doing. The priest wasn't. And the seven, the 27 cops weren't.

We're talking about the people who are protesting against ICE. You shouldn't do that. But here's a solution. You can coordinate with law enforcement. You can make sure that this is stopped or you can mobilize the effing military. Like here's a thing. Will mobilizing the military reduce crime? Yes, because we have an example of that and that will be Washington, D.C. We have another example and it's North Korea. You don't want to have North Korea. We don't know. We're not in North Korea. See, this is what they do. No. But what about other countries? Dude, we live in America. If we know that this works in Washington, D.C., yes. It didn't work. It did. We're only, okay. Let me ask you this. Only one homicide happened during

that National Guard. Of course, crime will drop when you have the effing military mobilized. That is not a- What's wrong with that? Because that is not a long-term solution. It is not a viable solution. It is not an American solution. You don't mobilize the fucking military to see. This is what you do. In North Korea, the way that they have stopped crime is by closing down the border so no one can get in. No one wants to go to North Korea. And now there's military on the streets. No shit, there's no crime in North Korea. But when you put

military on the streets of Chicago and there's no crime, yeah, you can point to that. Not that there's no crime. But when you have military, military walking to the streets how long is you're doing the you're using the extreme and that's what the left do that's what the left does all the time you guys always jump to the extreme oh kim jong on this doesn't work in our career how long my thing is this though we live in america right so my thing is is are you going to allow and i believe this is one of the topics that we were supposed to talk about but are you going to allow your city to be burned down like like minnesota like how tim waltz allowed with black lives matter protests and antifa rallies

and stuff like that. Will you actually allow that? That's why J.B. Pritzker mobilized the National Guard to prevent that. People already died. People already lost their businesses. People already didn't move. He didn't allow it to burn down. He mobilized a national guard. I said he took too long. I said you like to do that a lot, man. You like to switch

my words a little bit. When you watch us over, you just said that exactly. But I said he he allowed it to happen too long. Just to bring this back. I want to ask you a question. How long can we mobilize a national guard? Say, for example. I would say up to like 100 days. Okay, then what happens? Like a month to 100 days, excuse me.

So that is why it is inherently a short-term solution. What happens after- It works, though. Wait, after the military is gone, and people are actually able to, like, go out in the streets and do shit again, and the deterrence is gone. What's the solution from there? This is not a long-term solution at all. So that's actually a good question. I will give you that point. Now, I can't make promises as to safety will become better after the National Guard is gone.

But here's the thing, though. Are you not going to take those 100 days of safety and no murders, no. crimes. Yes, Chicago needs a hundred days of safety. I don't think people feel safe right now in Chicago. I mean, the people who aren't committing crimes feel safe. Now, the people who are committing crimes, they don't feel safe because there are more

police detail out there. There are more federal agents. There are National Guard out here. These people can't commit crimes. You think that if we pulled people from Chicago who voted Democrat at like an 85% rate, that they're okay right now with the military being deployed in here? First of all, that's bias because you know that

majority of Democrats don't like Trump's decisions when it comes to him being president. So when Trump is mobilizing the military against the will of the people in the city, the governor of the states. They're illegal migrants. No, no. Against the will of the people who are living in the city don't want this like we just talked about. I said 85%.

And that's my thing, though. Where are they getting this information? Because you do know Brandon Johnson have a 6% approval rating, right? He's really unpopular. My thing is this dude, whatever the hell Brandon Johnson is saying, whatever the hell Brandon Johnson is saying, the people think opposite. it okay i i have clips saying people that are thanking national guard agents that are thanking federal

agents thank you guys for being here i've seen those clips but that's the minority like like we just said not really i mean myself i've i've went on fox news and told tom homan to please come to chicago and deploy the national guard and deployed ice because we need help here dude you got to understand the crime that's going on in chicago yeah i get it people we're talking babies here kids do die every single day the majority of people in chicago don't want this though They don't want it. But what are your facts to prove that claim? Okay, so let's just think about this.

If 85% of people in Chicago voted blue, let's just say it's roughly that. You know it's like a really high rate. It's 90. So I'll give you that for sure. Yeah, yeah. So if like 90% of people, how many of these people, and you can say they're biased, but this actually feeds into my point. The people of Chicago, the governor of Illinois, the mayor, everyone from a top down, not everyone. I know there's people who want this. They're all saying that this is not how they want to do it.

Now, there are ways to increase police funding. You want to know what I would do? I would increase police funding more police training I don't think we should defund the police that is really fucking dumb I think we need to increase police funding And so you're a Republican now

That's not what no Democrats yeah What we could do is increase police funding And a lot of liberals think this Increase police funding Better training And you know what actually is a study This is for real

Communities tend to be policed better When they know the police In their community If they know this person is a friendly face Then that person tends to blend in with the community well But when we're mobilizing them National Guard That's what you just said though

why don't majority of the top leaders like AOC, Jasmine Crockett, and Chuck Schumer, why don't these leaders say that the same exact thing that you say? Pritzker has been saying that. Braden has not been saying that, dude. His obsession with Donald Trump is honestly ridiculous. Well, Trump is the one that's posting like AI memes of him shoving food down his throat. See, that's the thing, man. You guys always go back to Donald Trump.

This is honestly the only thing you people can talk about. And my thing is this, Donald Trump isn't the only Republican that's doing stuff, okay? Now, if you guys weren't just being so biased and so fixated on Donald Trump, you could actually see that. He thinks I'm the enemy from within. I don't know. You specifically, are you taking that personal? He says Democrats. I'd consider myself a Democrat.

Okay, so you're taking that personal or? Yeah, sure. I mean, he says the enemy from within. Okay, so my thing is this. Do you think that democratic policy have worked over the past 12 years? In blue cities? No, anywhere when it comes to the economy, when it comes to. Sure.

You want to know, what's the biggest GDP state in the country? What state is carrying all the other states? I believe California? Yeah, is that a blue or a red state? It's, dude, oh my God. This is so disingenuous. Okay, let's talk about this. You know California has a high production system.

You know all of the movies are filmed there. You know all the rich people are there. This sounds like a good liberal policy then. Wait, so you're saying... But that's capitalism, though. Wait, wait, you're saying... So you're saying that California has great universities and that's why rich people are there.

But people are leaving California too... You're saying the California has a film industry, universities, rich people, but it's a democratic shift. You can't have both of these things at once. California is carrying the country on its back. You're making yourself look bad, because you know these actors and these lawyers and these top earners, probably like yourself, these people don't stay in the inner cities in L.A. Like, you know, like Los Angeles.

These rich people aren't staying there, Adam, and you know that. So let's talk about how democratic policies have failed then, because I see Chicago, for example. Let's take Chicago, and we could talk about a few different aspects, but Chicago has multiple colleges that are leading in the country. Chicago's outputs is bigger than any red state right now. And a lot of it is due to certain ports, not in Chicago, but in New York, in California. The ports and the imports that we have coming into these make them so dominant. So we're talking about blue states that have, you know, a lot of problems with some crime

and infrastructure. Some. Like nothing's perfect. No city's going to be perfect. And due to the high population density of cities, there's going to be more crime naturally. That I could agree with it. Yeah, but I think that democratic lawmakers should do better. I think so.

And I think they should do better, but I don't think that blue cities are failing or anything. I think there's problems within them. So when I mean by failing, do you know what mastery is? That's 80%. So 80% in my opinion. Well, honestly, I'll take that back. Anything over 50% I will include the majority. So my thing is this.

If it's under 50% or if it's so low to where, okay, this is an issue, then I would consider that a failing grade. Would you consider a 40% failing? 40% of what? Okay, 40% out of 100. Would you consider that failing? Yeah, but like, that's a 40%. 40% of, I don't get what you're talking about. Okay, so let's say.

I got a grade on a test, yeah. Okay, okay, so now let's equivalent that to crime, right? Crime is up by 80%. And wait, where? No, no, I'm just, example, Adam, listen to them. Sorry, sorry, sorry. So crime is up 80%, right? Would you consider that good or bad?

be awful. Holy shit. So my thing is this, right? Where is that happening? Okay, so when it comes to averages in crime and the economy, when it comes to businesses, staying in those cities, California, New York, excuse me, Illinois, they're all failing in these categories, Adam. Do you think the economy, we are in a $1.2 billion deficit?

Do you think crime went up or down during Biden's term across blue cities? Hey, what? Adam, is that a serious question? I mean, look it up. Did crime go up or down? I believe that crime went up, and you do realize that some crimes don't get reported. Now, a lot of people say that, oh, crime isn't up because the statistics doesn't say. Because, and Brandon Johnson says this a lot as well, that crime isn't up and isn't that third? No, the reports of crime are down, and that's what people are failing to realize.

I can see a person getting his ass whooped or getting his car broken into two. I'm not going to report it. We want to know why? Because it's Chicago. He's going to get away with the crime. the police are going to show up like what six minutes after the damn fact i'm already dead you know so my thing is this people find it to be useless to depend on uh our police nowadays and i'm just talking about the democratic cities this really doesn't happen in you know red republicans say stuff like that

because they actually they back their police now in blue cities you have to admit they especially in the black community they say that the police i'm not snitching they're not they're not cooperating or applying with the police at all. Like when they get pulled over first thing they're going to say, oh, I'm black, so I'm going to give this person a hard time because he's a white cop. Now, you can argue that, you know, some

police are going to, you know, be biased towards black folks, but in my personal opinion, I've never had a problem with the police only than one time when they mistaken me for someone else. But, I mean, mistakes are going to happen. Like, show me the perfect person. So that's just my take

on that. I will leave it there. And I just want to say, man, I really do appreciate this conversation. I know that like, I know that everything in America right now is really heated. I know that, especially after Charlie Kirk, there were a few days where I was quite shaken. Like when I saw that video, genuinely I was shaken by it. I was supposed to debate him like 10 days after that on Jubilee. Oh my God. Yeah, so I was prepping for that.

When I saw that video, I was like, that's fucked up. That's terrible. And from there, it did kind of motivate me to, I mean, we've planned this show for a while. But I was like, listen, now was the time that we need conversation more than ever. I think that all the online chaos can kind of lose the fact that we're both Americans who can look each other in the eye and yeah, we like get a little bit heated or whatever

but at the end of the day, we're both Americans who want a better country. So thank you for coming on and would you have any final statements? You are amazing, Adam. Thank you for bringing me on your show. I really enjoyed this conversation. It wasn't really as heated as I thought it would be

because you're a very, you know, you're a common sense person, I can tell. Some things I can, you know, critique when it comes to Trump and stuff like that and your opinions and stuff, but I mean, nobody's going to agree on everything and that's, in my opinion, where I believe that America has forgotten

that even though that we're going to disagree on things, we still can sit down and have a dialogue and come to a common ground. At the end of the day, that is what differentiates us from countries where you're not allowed to have free conversation or free dialogue. We're able to sit here and I think at the bare minimum, we're both

going to go back tonight to our places and just think about the conversation and think about some of the points. And I think that's really good for America. When we're kind of going through things that we disagree with, like, okay, let's do some more. I think that's going to be good. So I'm excited to talk more. Check out the Chicago Conservative on YouTube. And thank you, man. Yeah, thank you, Adam. I appreciate that. Thank you guys for watching. If you want exclusive content from these shoots, you can become a channel member below. Thank you all and have a great day.