The Adam Mockler Show - Jasmine Crockett Exposes INSANE Charlie Kirk Clip

Episode Date: September 21, 2025

Shop Adam's new merch collection ➡️ https://shop.adammockler.com/ Click below for premium Adam Mockler content 👉 https://www.youtube.com/@adammockler/join 👉 https://adammockler.com Adam Mockler with MeidasTouch Network breaks down JOIN THE COMMUNITY: Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/AdamMockler/ Discord: https://discord.gg/y9yzMU3Gff Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/adammockler/ Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/adammockler.com/ Twitter: https://x.com/adammocklerr/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@adammockler Contact: [e-mail] Business inquiries: [e-mail] Adam Mockler - Mockler Media LLC Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

All right, Republicans are not happy after Representative Jasmine Crockett just told the truth about Charlie Kirk live on TV. Now, Representative Crockett is the person we should listen to on this because she seems visibly disturbed by the way both sides are reacting to this issue. Hear me out. Republicans are turning Charlie Kirk into the saint, somebody who would never heard a fly, an amazing human being, when that's not true. We can disprove that using Charlie Kirk's own words. Now, Democrats in Congress are kind of being drug along and play in this game because they're too worried to escalate or hurt the feelings of Republicans. Well, spoiler alert, Republicans have already escalated. Republicans' feelings are going to be hurt whether we say nothing at all or whether we're entirely cordial, which we have been.

Every single Democrat came out and condemned the shooting, said that it was a terrible act of violence, and that just because we disagree with Charlie Kirk doesn't mean he deserves to die. I'm very clear on that, by the way, just because we disagree with someone, just because I think someone's a dumbass or has annoying, awful views, doesn't mean they should be publicly executed. Now, Representative Jasmine Crockett has been watching as Republicans sanitized Charlie Kirk and as Democrats are kind of just too scared to stand up for anything right now. And she called them out on TV. She said it actually hurt her that only two white Democrats voted against the national.

Day of Remembrance. So that means basically every single Democrat, every single white Democrat voted in favor of that. Yet a lot of the black Democrats, a lot of African American Democrats, actually understand the stakes, understand what happens when you sanitize somebody who has been directly attacking their community. So it's interesting. You saw almost this racial split based on who voted for the Charlie Kirk National Day of Remembrance. And Jasmine Crockett makes the argument, which I totally believe, she makes the argument that the reason why you see this split is because black Americans or black Congress members are more aware of the long-term threat of this type of Charlie Kirk rhetoric, which is absolutely true. Democrats need to stop

being weak, need to stop sanitizing Charlie Kirk, and need to stop being dragged along by Republicans. Like, Republicans are like dragging us over their shoulder, and we're barely putting up a fight, at least the Democrats in Congress. So before I play this clip, let me just show you a few Charlie Kirk clips to really lay the groundwork. Here's him talking about the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We note in our piece that Kirk describes King as, quote, a bad guy. It's true. And Kirk self-described very, very radical. View that the country made a mistake when it passed the Civil Rights Act. Also true. As we note in the piece, Kirk has previously described Kirk as a hero and a civil rights icon. It's true. I used to be wrong. What inspired Kirk to shift his view on

MLK? Why does Kirk think that MLK is a bad guy? When Kirk says that MLK says, quote, one good thing he didn't believe, what does he mean by that? Why does Kirk believe passing the Civil Rights Act was a mistake? Now, again, apparently they don't listen to the show because we do that at least once a week, right? Once a week we talk about why the Civil Rights Act was a mistake. They're just gleefully, almost gloating. Yeah, we talk about this every single week. Of course, every single week we talk about stripping rights away from tens of millions of Americans,

every single black person in America. I'm thinking of doing an actual writing and debunk of this. civil rights talking point because it's fun to sit here and dunk on it and call him a dumbass, which he is, but a lot of people in the country actually believe this. So it might be worth having a thorough write-up as to why the Civil Rights Act was not only beneficial for black Americans, but for white Americans, for the entire country, for the entire globe. This is just such a short-sighted way of thinking from Charlie Kirk, but that describes his entire

philosophy. Now let me play you one more clip that hasn't been seen as widely of Charlie Kirk. saying that he wouldn't really be comfortable with a black lesbian woman flying his plane or giving surgery on him. This is an argument the conservatives have been making for a few years about DEI. I'll debunk it after this clip. Surgeon. Surgeon and flight are the top two where it's like no one really cares when it's HR managers. No one cared when it was, you know, just kind of paper shufflers or even engineers. But now when it's like, wait, wait, hold on a second, you're going to remove my appendix and you're

a black lesbian well you bring these did you have to go okay this argument is rooted in a few things ignorance obviously racism slash prejudice obviously but also just a fundamental misunderstanding of how

DEI works now the question is does he not understand DEI and use that for racist ends or what's more likely is that he understands what DEI is and he doesn't care he still wants to use that for racist ends, which is even worse. So what's going on here is Charlie Kirk is intentionally misrepresenting what DEI is to try

to achieve a racist prejudicial end point. DEI is not about elevating, let's use his example, elevating a black woman into a position with zero training whatsoever. It's about expanding the applicant pool so that a black woman who maybe would not have had the chance to even apply, but still has the same skill level, is able to be in the application pool. It does not mean that just because you are a woman or just because you are gay or lesbian

or just because you're a minority, you are automatically accepted into the higher level. No, no, no, no. Professional exams, regulatory bodies, standards are very, very strict. The FAA and medical boards and, you know, other boards, they are so incredibly strict about who gets let through. They're not just going to let somebody through based on race or based on their sexual identity.

So here's how I would summarize it. A black lesbian pilot must pass the same exact FAA tests as a white pilot. That pilot has to go through the same exact training, same exact qualifications, same exact standards. But DEI just make sure that this black female pilot is able to get into the application pool in the first place, especially if somebody has lived an underprivileged life. Do you know how many damn talented people there are who have, grown up in underprivileged environments. Therefore, they're not able to realize their full potential.

DEI essentially says, if you are smart, qualified, talented, then we want to make sure you are in the right places to meet your full potential. It doesn't just elevate people to the full potential level. It broadens the pool of applicants to make sure that systemic bias doesn't stop people. So, sorry, I didn't mean to like rant there, but Charlie Kirk is doing something very slippery here. Again, either he doesn't understand what DEI is, or he understands it, which I think he does, and he's misrepresenting it on purpose to achieve a racist, racist prejudicial end, which is disgusting. And that's why Jasmine Crockett said this on CNN this morning. Talking about a resolution that came before the House this past week honoring Charlie Kirk.

And there were 58 Democrats who voted against it. You were one. Yeah. Why? Absolutely. You know what? one of the things I do want to point out that's not been laid out that honestly hurts my heart is when I saw the no votes, there were only two Caucasians. For the most part, the only people

they voted know were people of color because the rhetoric that Charlie Kurtz continuously put out there was rhetoric that specifically targeted people of color. And so it is unfortunate that even our colleagues cannot see how harmful his rhetoric was specifically to us. And I can tell you that a month prior to him passing away, he had actually gotten out on his podcast. I wasn't aware of this at the time, but he got out there and he was talking negatively about me directly. So if there was any way that I was going to honor somebody who decided that they were just going to negatively talk about me and proclaim that I was somehow involved in a great white replacement, yeah, I'm not honoring that kind of stuff, especially as a civil rights attorney

and understanding how I got to Congress, knowing that there were people that died, people that were willing to die, that worked to make sure that voices like mine could exist in this place. So to me, just like we wanted to make sure that those Confederate relics were taken down, the idea of a new age relic being propped up

was something that I just could not subscribe to. And it is unfortunate that more of my colleagues, even on my side of the aisle, could not see the amount of harm that this man was attempting to inflict upon our communities. Very powerful from Representative Jasmine Crockett, as always. And there are a few key points that really stuck out to me there. I mean, everything she said stuck out to me. But first of all, when she said that only two white Democrats voted against this,

it's just a perfect example of what happens when you don't have the lived experience to be talking about these issues. I don't have the lived experience to be talking about these issues. That's why I let Representative Jasmine Crockett make the argument and explain how she feels for me. It's just a perfect example of those white representatives thinking that they can step into the shoes of the black Americans who were actually harmed by Charlie Kirk. But Representative Jasmine Crockett also makes this point at the end where she says, we've done so much work to, you know, get rid of these Confederate relics thus far. We've done so much work to get rid of that toxic ideology. Why would we want to create a new relic, a new remember,

and stay or statue or whatever the hell they're trying to do next for somebody who spread that exact same type of hatred, but in a more insidious way. Here's the thing with Charlie Kirk. There aren't going to be videos out there of him acting like a Confederate soldier, screaming racial slurs and yelling at black people. 2025 racism is coded in stuff like this, saying the Civil Rights Act should never have been passed. And he says it in a bit more palatable way.

for the mainstream audiences, but it still needs to be called out with the same level of vigor as the old type Confederate racism. I'm going to leave it there. If you appreciate these videos, drop a like, subscribe. I love you all, and peace out.